|
The
so-called economic tigers of South-east Asia - the newly-industrialized
economies, or NIEs - hold lessons for developing countries the world
over. Mersie Ejigu examines the rising tide of South-South exchanges
between Asia and Africa and the implications for future development
emerging from these initiatives. He is currently Regional Director
for Eastern Africa of International Union for Conservation of Natural
Resources and is former Minister of Planning and Development of
Ethiopia.
The
past two and half decades have witnessed phenomenal economic and
social development in the South. These successes, although often
unevenly distributed, have created immense opportunities for revamped
cooperation among countries of the South, particularly between Africa
and Asia. Indeed, the vast literature on Africa and Asia suggests
that Africa has a lot to learn from the Asian development experience
in such areas as economic management, private sector development,
human capability expansion, export diversification, industrialization,
agricultural policies and the role of governments. Furthermore,
differences in endowments between the two regions and variations
in stages of technological and economic development offer ample
opportunities for cooperation. There are at least six modalities
that exemplify this cooperation: exchange of information and experiences;
transfer of technology and know-how; twinning arrangements; financial
and technical cooperation (bilateral, South-South, triangular);
trade promotion; and the encouragement of direct Asian investment
in Africa.
The
substance and modalities of development cooperation between Africa
and Asia have been influenced by several global developments.
First,
the challenges and opportunities brought home by the new international
division of labour of the post-Cold War era. The globalization of
markets and finance, advances in computing, information processing
and telecommunications have created an increasingly interdependent
world, expanding the volume of business and heightening international
competition. Africa entered the 1990s facing the daunting task of
recouping the losses of the past decade and returning to the path
of sustained social and economic development. Yet the region remains
far behind other regions in the level and growth rate of major economic
and social indicators. Despite efforts at adjustment and democratization,
Africa as a whole appears delinked from global political, commercial
and technological advances and decision making. Africa can not take
advantage of and participate in the globalized, international financial
system as its own domestic financial system remains underdeveloped.
Reversing such trends requires rethinking of the traditional North-South
cooperation patterns and setting in motion new approaches.
Second,
South Africa has emerged as a dynamizing factor for intra-Africa
cooperation. There are still too many imponderables regarding the
ultimate impact of South Africa's participation in the African economy,
but there is an emerging consensus that the breadth and depth of
intra-Africa cooperation, in particular that of Southern and Eastern
Africa, will be positively influenced by developments in South Africa.
The South African economy is expected to move into a period of revival
and growth. Given the size of South Africa's economy and its technological
base, its growth means improved trade and an increased flow of capital
and labour circulating to countries in southern Africa and beyond.
At Kenya's trade fair in July 19921, for example, 200 South African
exporters were reported to have been represented. Equally important
is the fact that the image of Africa has already evolved as a result
of the positive changes taking place in South Africa. South Africa
could provide the technological leadership to the continent, having
the potential to model growth and civil society through accommodation
and peaceful coexistence.
Third,
official development assistance (ODA) - excluding relief assistance
- flows to Africa are on the decline and patterns of financial and
technical cooperation are also changing. There is a noticeable erosion
in the resource base of multilateral agencies, in particular the
United Nations system and lately the African Development Fund (ADF);
resources for development in Africa may increasingly be crowded
out in favour of other regions. The outlook for bilateral ODA is
also not bright, as many OECD countries start to look either inward
or towards Eastern Europe and at the same time political opposition
in the developed world hardens towards increased aid. According
to the Annual Report of the Global Coalition for Africa of 1992,
ODA in 1992 in nominal dollars (to Africa) declined by 23% for Germany
and by 28% for the United States. Nominal ODA from Japan fell by
9%, from Canada and the United Kingdom by 6%, and from Sweden by
4%.
Indeed
the new international system of the post-Cold War era has visibly
failed to evolve a collective system for dealing equitably with
increasing globalization and integration. Africa will have to look
more to internal sources of growth and non-traditional sources of
capital and technology to finance its development. Given the high
and sustained growth of output achieved by East, South and South-east
Asia, ber cooperation between Asia and Africa contains tremendous
opportunities. The Tokyo International Conference on African Development
(TICAD) and its Declaration are intended to give impetus to these
opportunities. In an effort to avoid the difficulties experienced
by the series of initiatives on African development taken in the
1980s - the Lagos Plan of Action, the Maastrich Conference - all
efforts should work to put in place mechanisms that would facilitate
the implementation of the United Nations New Agenda for the Development
of Africa in the 1990s.
The
term "Africa," as used in this paper, refers to a diverse group
of countries (small and big, island and landlocked, resource poor
and resource rich). Similarly, Asian countries range from city states
like Hong Kong and Singapore, to giants like China. The focus of
this paper is on East and South-east Asian countries. The matters
to be discussed entail treatment of cooperation issues at the regional
rather than at the national level.
While
the motivations of African countries toward cooperation emanate
from the requirements of recovery and economic transformation, the
question arises as to what would motivate Asia to cooperate with
Africa? For Asia too, economic and commercial interests are the
driving force. Specifically, these interests may be given by such
factors as: the long standing Asian solidarity with Africa; the
need to expand markets; Africa's rich natural resources; improving
access to raw material resources. At present, Asian investment is
mostly in North America and Europe, as it aims at capturing and
maintaining the market in these regions. Whether or not Africa will
be in a competitive position with regard to other regions in attracting
Asian funds, will depend on the capacity and commitment of African
countries to creating an enabling environment for foreign investment
- developing the private sector, removing investment constraints,
and so forth. Some countries like Japan, however, will find motivation
enough in the desire to promote Africa's economic and social development.
The initiative taken to convene the Tokyo Conference is a good example.
Programmes and projects put in place by the Bretton Woods institutions
could be the other motivating factor. According to Japan's ODA Annual
Report 1993, Japan's policy is to support the African countries'
democratization process and structural adjustment efforts as articulated
by the Bretton Woods institutions.
The
bottom line in expanding development cooperation between Africa
and Asia is, however, that needs and capacities have to be matched
in a mutually beneficial manner. In doing so, the following points
need to be considered as the guiding principles.
First,
cooperation between two countries has to be mutually beneficial
to be durable, sustainable and long lasting. Asia should benefit
from the cooperation as much as Africa, although the gains need
not have equal monetary value. Given the different stages of technological
development that countries in the two regions have reached, interests
could be diverse. For Asia, it could be the opening of markets in
Africa and disposal of surplus funds in investments with a high
rate of return. On the other hand, Africa might be interested in
the transfer of technology and know-how. Therefore, the scope of
development cooperation should be sufficiently broad to enable each
participant to maximize benefits.
Second,
Asia-Africa development cooperation should not attempt to reinvent
a North-South type of cooperation, or a donor and recipient relationship.
It is important not to give the impression to African countries
that there is a changing of the guard from Europe to Asia. Cooperation
needs to be pursued based on equality and mutual respect, guided
by the desire to learn from each other. It should also promote a
two-way flow of experience. For example, UNDP experts argue that
in such areas as HIV pandemic control and health management, Asia
has a lot to learn from some African countries that have succeeded
in developing effective health care delivery systems and infrastructure.
Third,
cooperation should be genuinely demand-driven. Programs must be
initiated, prepared and implemented by Africans or Asians themselves.
The task of the United Nations system, or of a third party, is to
facilitate exchange of ideas and information in the most cost-effective
way and to provide financial support when the need arises.
Fourth,
cooperation ought to be carried out at all levels with broad participation
by different actors. Government agencies, private individuals, academicians
and non-governmental organizations need to participate. Cooperation
should be encouraged at regional, subregional, national and organizational
levels, and needs to be firmly grounded in grassroots level interaction.
As the history of development cooperation testifies, it is when
there is private sector interest that governments tend to push for
ber public-private cooperation.
Fifth,
cooperation should recognize the cultural and geographic diversity
of participating countries. Neither this report nor such initiatives
as the TICAD should be understood as attempts to trumpet the Asian
success under a "follow Asia" slogan. Various mechanisms created
to facilitate this cooperation should not signal that the Asian
miracle can be reproduced in Africa. As the Asian experience shows,
no two countries have identical patterns of development. Nor can
there be a mechanistic view of development. The call has gone out
for closer interaction and the setting up of mechanisms and networks
to create an enabling environment for each economic agent to make
informed decisions. Capital moves to areas where it has the highest
rate of return and this high rate of return could result from a
better quality of labour, easily exploitable natural resources,
etc.
The
message that emerges from the vast literature on Africa and Asia
is that Africa's knowledge and information on Asian development
has to be broadened and deepened. It will be advantageous to both
sides to heighten the interaction on several fronts: economic management;
private sector development; trade; investment; human resource development;
agricultural development, and science and technology.
Differences
in the level of economic and technological development, and also
in resource endowments, provide ample opportunities for broader
and deeper development cooperation, and also determine the modalities
of development cooperation. Consequently, the key factors that determine
the modalities are:
The
nature and relevance of lessons learned from the Asian development
experience.
Differences
in factor endowments between the two regions.
Variations
in the stage of technological and economic development.
The
far-reaching lessons drawn from Asian development make exchange
of experience and know-how an important modality of development
cooperation between Africa and Asia. What then are the lessons of
the Asian development experience and to what extent are they relevant
to Africa? Forging a new and robust relationship between Africa
and Asia requires an understanding of Africa's post-independence
developments in juxtaposition with Asia. The task here has been
made easy by the extensive studies carried out by renowned institutions
and scholars, and in papers presented in various workshops (see
references).
The
logical starting point would perhaps be a discussion of factors
identified as major determinants of growth in Asian countries. These
are: sound macroeconomic management; agricultural productivity;
long term investments in education and human resources development;
market friendly and export-led trade policies; savings and capital
formation; policy emphasis on private sector investment as the engine
of growth, and land reform in the early period. Even then, it is
necessary to make four observations that would be the building blocks
for evolving workable modalities of development cooperation between
Africa and Asia.
First,
there is no single Asian model. The group of Asian countries referred
to here vary from resource poor countries such as Korea to resource
rich countries like Malaysia and Indonesia; from countries with
homogenous ethnic groups such as Korea to countries with high levels
of ethnic difference like Malaysia. Economic policies are also different;
while Hong Kong followed laissez-faire policies, most have policies
characterized by extensive state intervention. In some, agriculture
was the source of capital accumulation, in others food was cheap,
still in others, it generated export earnings. There were, however,
similarities: many passed growth-oriented policies, and initiated
long-term plans with 5-, 10-, and 25-year horizons. Asia had no
development magic. Development success entails considerable sacrifice,
hard work, vision, a pragmatic approach to the realization of that
vision and reliance on internal sources of growth. Africa, on the
other hand, despite promising starts in the immediate post independence
period, had an economic environment typified by "crisis management,"
focused on handling day-to-day survival issues rather than on medium
to long term development strategies.
Second,
although many Asian countries were uniquely successful in maintaining
macroeconomic stability and sustained economic growth with equity,
it is important to avoid generalizations such as: all Asia has been
doing well and that Africa has been doing badly. Both the positive
and negative aspects of development have to be chronicled. Indeed
the objective conditions in Africa are no worse than some countries
in Asia today (e.g. Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia or Nepal). Moreover,
there are convincing historical explanations (endogenous and exogenous
factors) for the economic malaise that Africa finds itself in today.
Third,
given the dynamics of international cooperation today, many economists
argue that the Asian experience appears more relevant than other
models to the conditions that Africa finds itself in today. While
several developed countries amassed capital from ownership of their
colonies, Asian countries succeeded in accumulating capital at high
rates in a relatively short period through reliance on internal
processes of accumulation - although one should not lose sight of
the massive and generous Western assistance and privileged access
to European and American markets that have laid the foundation for
this success.
Fourth,
there is striking difference in factor endowments between the two
regions. Sub-Saharan Africa is among the least-densely populated
regions and has 5.5 hectares per worker, while Asia has only 1.0
hectare per agricultural worker. Parts of Africa are rich in mineral
resources: copper, diamonds, gold, oil and gas, while countries
such as Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have limited exportable minerals.
Human resource endowments are also different in every case.
As
Africa's development issues and constraints have been discussed
in various fora, Table 1 juxtaposes these constraints against Asian
development successes.
Table
1: African Constraints and Asian Successes [available only in the
hard-copy issue]
The
above is a graphic illustration of the importance of exchange of
experience as a modality of development cooperation. The Asian development
model can hardly be branded "geographically specific" or "culturally
determined." It should rather be seen as a source of inspiration
and a reservoir of experience that needs to be tapped. Exchange
of experience and know-how can be realized through organizing seminars,
workshops, study tours, professional exchange programs and twinning
arrangements, some of which are discussed below.
Africa's
experience in twinning arrangements with other regions has been
modest. As the Special Unit for TCDC (SU/TCDC) reports show, while
some of the problems faced were finance related, others had to do
with the lack of commitment and seriousness on the part of participating
institutions. TICAD and subsequent Africa/Asia seminars offer new
opportunities for reactivation and launching new twinning arrangement
initiatives at the regional/subregional and national levels. Sustainable
twinning arrangements require:
That
the parties involved have b mutual interest;
That
capacities of the twinning institutions be complementary.
A
series of far reaching initiatives taken to promote intra-African
cooperation have led to the creation of several regional and subregional
institutions designed to facilitate trade and development cooperation,
provide for the joint exploitation of natural resources, and to
combat natural calamities, among others.
The
treaty to establish the African Economic Community (AEC) signed
in May 1991 in Abuja, Nigeria by Heads of State and Governments
of the Organization of African Unity represents a renewed effort
at revamping cooperation and integration. The AEC is to be anchored
upon existing subregional organizations: the Economic Community
of West African States (ECOWAS), the Common Market for Eastern and
Southern African States (COMESA) formerly PTA, Southern Africa Development
Cooperation Council (SADCC), the Economic Community of Central African
States (CEEAU), the Economic Community of the Great Lakes Countries
and the Maghreb Union. However, given the experiences of economic
integration both in Africa and other regions -- some bitter, as
for example in the East African community -- the process of establishing
durable and sustainable development cooperation is clearly a daunting
task.
Various
studies suggest that progress in intra-Africa cooperation and integration
was hampered by a host of institutional and policy factors: the
macroeconomic environment; exchange rate mechanisms; trade; fiscal
and monetary policies; lack of common understanding of global developments;
differing competitive advantages and challenges; uncertainties regarding
the gains to be derived from regional cooperation; limited infrastructure
to facilitate trade and exchange; the limited role played by the
private sector.
The
1980s also witnessed the establishment of several inter-governmental
organizations designed to address natural disasters or to undertake
development on a regional basis. The Inter-Governmental Authority
on Drought and Development (IGADD) was established in the aftermath
of the severe 1984 drought that wrought havoc on countries in eastern
Africa. Based in Djibouti, members of IGADD are: Kenya, Ethiopia,
Somalia, Sudan and Uganda. In the Sahel countries, the permanent
Interstate Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel was created
with Burkina Faso, Senegal, Mali, Niger, Chad and Mauritania as
members. In the area of joint management of natural resources, the
Kagera Basin Organization, the Niger Basin Authority and recently
the Nile River Conference have been established.
The
Asian experience in regional cooperation has not been as extensive
as that of Africa. There are basically two regional groups: the
Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the South Asian
Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). Nevertheless, twinning
arrangements can be initiated between African and Asian regional
institutions in areas of river basin development, equitable sharing
of river water resources, combating drought and desertification
and other regional cooperation endeavours. These twinning arrangements
would involve exchanges of experience in areas of legislation, institutional
development, and management of natural resources. Specifically they
could take the form of the exchange of professionals, joint studies
of projects and the evolution of common positions for international
negotiations. A list of African institutions and possible counterparts
on the Asian side is provided below.
Table
2: Intra-regional cooperative efforts [available only in the hard-copy
issue]
At
the national level, twinning arrangements between African and Asian
universities, research organizations and training institutions involving
private and public sectors can be initiated. The possibility of
developing common curricula and, in particular, the inclusion of
a course in African universities on the Asian development experience
could be worth exploring.
Twinning
can also be made operational through an exchange of professors and
students, and through joint curriculum development, enabling students
to pursue certain programs in the twinned university setting. For
example, funding arrangements could be made for African graduate
students to write their theses in Asian countries after completing
their course work in Africa, and Asian students could do the reverse.
The success of any twinning arrangement requires commitment from
both sides and adequate budgetary provisions. One possible solution
might be to make twinning arrangements part of financial and technical
cooperation arrangements.
This
modality of cooperation involves the transfer of technology and
know-how from Asia to Africa or within each region through the provision
of advisory services, training and equipment. Seminars, study tours,
skill transfer workshops, sensitization and orientation programmes,
trade fairs and training and information exchanges are all important
elements of such programs. In addition, handbooks, manuals, programming
exercises, public information campaigns and networking are reported
to have been used extensively.
Data
on such activities between Asia and Africa is limited, and attempts
made to contact Asian missions based in New York regarding such
data has not yet borne fruit. The only source of information at
UNDP is SU/TCDC. in UNDP. SU/TCDC utilizes current data, based on
submission of governments and TCDC focal points; however it is incomplete
and does not show the direction of flow of TCDC by country or region.
Table
3. Transfer of technology and know-how activities of selected Asian
developing countries (1992-1993) [available only in the hard-copy
issue]
The
Table above is the best of the data available at UNDP SU-TCDC as
of May 1994. The Unit's officials note that although much of the
TCDC effort in Asia was intra-regional, there had been several activities
that involved Africa.
Financed
by UNDP SU/TCDC, economic and technical cooperation activities included
organizing skill transfer workshops and training programmes, mainly
in China and India in such areas as: mini hydropower, solar energy,
rice research, drought management and food security. In Singapore,
reports show that bilateral consultations were held with 17 developing
countries. Fourteen management training programmes were offered
in 200 places in 1992-1993 in which several African countries participated.
Study tours were also organized. In South Korea, a workshop in the
electronic industry was convened, and several agreements subsequently
signed. South Korea also was reported to have participated in 57
joint investment studies with other developing countries.
As
for China, an earlier UNDP SU/TCDC report shows that many countries
in Africa were beneficiaries of expert services in such areas as
agriculture, fish farming, acupuncture, biogas, hydrofoil operations
and agricultural machinery. Related workshops attracted hundreds
of trainees. The Philippines is reported to have concluded agreements
in areas of food and agriculture, coconut production, and cooperatives
development that involved technology exchange, provision of consultants,
training programmes and study tours.
Major
constraints to expanding and deepening the cooperation between African
and Asian developing countries, were reported to be the lack of
financing and of timely information on available capacity. In fact,
several countries participating in TCDC project activities had to
mount needs assessment missions to determine the nature and magnitude
of cooperation. For example, during 1992-1993, the Philippines conducted
nine needs assessment missions and Thailand conducted five.
The
term "triangular arrangements" refers to a situation whereby projects
and programmes initiated by two or more countries are financed by
a third party. In this case it is Japan, in the TICAD framework,
that is expected to finance the transfer of technology and know-how
from an Asian developing country to an African country. A multilateral
agency such as UNDP, or any country with the capacity to do so,
can also play the role of a third party. Similarly, triangular cooperation
could be initiated between two African countries (for example, Egypt
and Kenya), and supported by a bilateral or a multilateral agency.
The
experience in triangular arrangements is very limited. UNDP SU/TCDC
reports indicate that several countries in Latin America (e.g.,
Chile) have initiated projects under this modality, with Luxembourg
providing the financial resources. The overall results have been
encouraging. As reported by the SU/TCDC, two important lessons learned
from the limited experience with the triangular cooperation modality
are that: (a) for such arrangements to succeed requires mutual understanding
and trust among participants, often achieved only after protracted
negotiation, and; (b) the financing provided by the third party
has to be completely untied - projects or programmes should be initiated
and formulated by the participating countries.
The
triangular cooperation modality between Asia and Africa has tremendous
potential. For the third party (e.g., Japan), such an arrangement
helps to relieve the strain that technical assistance poses for
the limited foreign language-speaking, skilled personnel; it also
broadens the pool of highly skilled personnel for technical assistance,
and facilitates contact between Asian developing countries and Africa.
Differences
in natural resource endowments and stages of industrialization between
many countries in Africa and Asia, make trade and investment important
modalities of cooperation. This would include promoting trade (exports
and imports) between the two regions and encouraging Asian investment
in Africa.
In
recent years the volume of trade between Africa and Asia has increased
substantially. Detailed discussion of trade opportunities between
the two regions is beyond the scope of the paper; however, listed
below are a few of the salient features of trade between the two
regions.
The
current volume of trade between Asia and Africa is dominated by
Japan.
Japan's
trade with Africa, however, has remained unchanged over the past
10 years with Japan having a surplus of about US $3 billion per
annum. Beyond Japan, of the ten countries cited, eight enjoy substantial
trade surpluses in their trade with Africa.
Over
the past few years, exports from Hong Kong, Singapore and Thailand
to Africa registered exponential growth, reflecting the restructuring
of Africa's position toward importing Asian goods and services.
Notable efforts are currently being made in the above-mentioned,
and in other East and South-east Asian countries, to further expand
trade and possibly capture the emerging market in Africa, however
with no matching efforts on the African side.
because
similarities exist between African countries like Cameroon, Cote
d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda,
as well as the South-east Asian countries, Indonesia, Malaysia,
Philippines and Thailand, falling as they all do into the same ecological
zone. All are cultivating export crops such as coffee, tea, cocoa,
rice, cassava, palm oil, rubber, spices and tropical hardwoods.
This has resulted in an excessive competition for markets, at times
leading to large price collapses. Improved relations would enable
the two regions to establish bargaining power in international commodities
markets through creation of joint markets, the exchange of research
information and coordination in marketing.
Another
lesson learned from the Asian experience is the vital role that
foreign investment has played in creating production capacity, introducing
technology and developing management skills and in improving access
to overseas markets.
Flows
of foreign direct investment are influenced by several factors,
the most important of which are: (a) the availability of natural
resources; (b) the size of the market, and; (c) relative differences
in the costs of production. Although many African countries are
potentially attractive in the light of these factors, flows of foreign
direct investment to Africa was $ 2.2 billion in 1990, slightly
less than what Thailand received in that year (World Investment
Report, 1992)2. The data further shows that the volume of foreign
direct investment that non-oil producing countries were able to
attract in 1990 was only one-fourth of the flow to Thailand. Even
in this case, most of the foreign direct investment to Africa seems
to concentrate in the natural resource sectors while, for example,
63 percent of foreign direct investment flows to China went into
manufacturing.
Data
on current Asian investment in Africa is not readily available.
However, the table below shows the relative importance of Japanese
investment in Africa. Today, capital investment outflows from Asia
are reported at $8 billion, growing by 75% during 1986-1990 (World
Investment Report, 1992). In fact, for the Republic of Korea and
Taiwan, outflows have exceeded inflows. China's investment outflow
has been estimated at $830 million in 1990. Nonetheless, most of
the investment from Asian newly-industrialized countries seems to
concentrate in North American and European markets (64% of Taiwan's
overseas investment, for example). This investment is primarily
market seeking - driven by the need to secure market access and
maintain a visible presence in main export markets as protectionism
hardens (see World Investment Report, 1992 for detailed discussions).
Recent
investment patterns for export manufacturing in South-east Asia
are dramatically changing. Wells (1994, in Lindauer and Roemer)
argues that Taiwan, Hong Kong and Korea have emerged as primary
sources of investment in export of manufactured goods. Wells further
argues that, "Korean firms have recently gone to Costa Rica and
are showing increasing interest in Colombia and Mexico. Taiwanese
firms have already located plants in Africa, although primarily
for the export market. And Hong Kong firms flocked to Mauritius
to gain textile quotas."
The
available evidence, however limited it may be, suggests that Africa
can attract Asian funds, providing that an enabling environment
is created, bureaucratic obstacles are removed and aggressive efforts
are made to promote investment through Asia-Africa networks and
other channels.
Networking
of institutions can be an important modality of development cooperation
between Africa and Asia. Given the significance of the exchange
of experiences and know-how, networks can serve as important follow-up
mechanisms and vital tools for facilitating collaborative activity
in various fields. Networks are also useful for operationalizing
interests generated in seminars and symposia in a cost-effective
way. Developments in communications, technology and computerization
have substantially increased the role played by networks. Indeed,
Asia-Africa Networks ought to be seen as the acme of cooperation
between the two regions. Networks are not designed to provide advisory
services nor to make suggestions to either side on particular policies
to be pursued and development paths to be followed. Rather, their
primary function is to provide information and to suggest available
capacities and existing possibilities. As the political and policy
context within which government operates differs, it is the responsibility
of each country to decide on how to use the information made available.
Networking
of institutions is a widely-used mechanism for the exchange of information
and know-how throughout the world, but results have been mixed.
Networks initiated and financed by users have generally been successful
while others fared less well. An example of a highly-successful
network is the South Investment Trade and Technology Data Exchange
Centre (SITTDEC) located in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Initiated, created
and owned by what is known as the Group of 15 (comprising Algeria,
Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Malaysia, Mexico,
Nigeria, Peru, Senegal, Venezuela, Yugoslavia, and Zimbabwe), SITTDEC's
purpose is to collect and promote the exchange of relevant information
on investment, trade and technology opportunities available in developing
countries and to provide such services to countries requesting them.
Reports show that SITTDEC's performance has been encouraging.
Another
example of a successful global network is the International Centre
for Economic Growth (ICEG) located in San Francisco. ICEG's mission
is to develop the capacity of local policy research institutions
for policy analysis, and to influence the policy decisions in their
respective countries. The Centre has a network of 331 corresponding
institutions.
A
good example of a more narrowly focused network is AFRISTAT. With
the initiative of the Conference of Finance Ministers for the Zone
Franc, the AFRISTAT Foundation has been created by the African States
of the Zone Franc under the auspices of France. The functions of
AFRISTAT are to provide advisory services for the national statistical
organizations, to support their policies and to harmonize definitions,
concepts and norms.
While
the advantages of networking through institutions are clear, there
is a high risk that networking at the level of regional institutions
might marginalize contacts and networking at the national and individual
levels. Indeed, networking would be likely to be long lasting if
built on personal contacts between Africans and Asians through:
informal
contacts organizing
meetings and enabling Africans to participate in intra-Asia workshops,
and Asians in intra-Africa seminars
regular
Africa and Asia seminars/trade fairs
To
generate continuous interest among participants and ensure sustainability,
it is beneficial when the networks have the following features:
First,
participants of the network need to be individuals and institutions
from governments, the private sector and academia. Such an arrangement
would allow closer interaction between the private and public sectors.
As governments in Africa change frequently and institutions become
weaker, broadening the participation and favouring the private sector
would provide continuity to the network.
Second,
the network should take advantage of the latest developments in
communications technology, particularly the Internet and satellite
technology. Experience shows that the investment costs of moving
onto the Internet are negligible, but exchange of information can
be increased exponentially as a result. Third,
activities of the network need to be seen as supplementary activities
to already functioning and credible regional institutions. No attempts
should be made to create new organizations because of the networking.
At the national level, participating institution(s) should be designated
in each country. It would be helpful if national participants from
government are highly influential and well placed in the government's
hierarchy. A focal institution then has to be designated from the
participants at the subregional level. Fourth,
face to face interaction needs to be an important element of the
network. It is advisable for each network to organize meetings on
a regular basis, if the financial resource situation permits.
Lastly,
as development is multidimensional, there is a need for interaction
and a flow of information among the various networks.
Given
the broad range of areas of interest in the exchange of experiences,
several networks could be established. To initiate discussions and
follow-up activities, four areas can be considered.
(a)
Macroeconomic networks. There are several lessons to be learned
from the Asian development experience that are relevant to Africa
in areas of macroeconomic management, among others. In this regard,
this network will have three purposes:
Making
existing knowledge available to participants and providing a forum
for interaction;
Facilitating
the exchange of information and sharing of experiences, and assisting
in the organizing of seminars, workshops and study tours, and;
Assisting
in the harmonization of macroeconomic policies.
The
Asia-Africa Macroeconomic Network (AFASMN) will, therefore, be a
amalgam of networks that would link the Africa-based macroeconomic
networks (one for east and southern Africa and the other for west
and central Africa) with the Korea Development Institute (KDI) -
based Asian Macroeconomic Network. AFASMN can link itself with global
networks, particularly with the International Centre for Economic
Growth based in San Francisco.
(b)
Human resources development network. Human resources development
is one area where there could be more wide ranging cooperation and
networking between Africa and Asia. This would involve training
centres, research institutions and universities. This kind of networking
can be considered at two levels:
At
the level of training institutions in the fields of management and
related areas;
At
the level of institutions of higher learning.
In
management training sub-networks there are considerable opportunities
for short term training of Africans in Asian countries. A good example,
mentioned earlier, is the series of management training programmes
offered in Singapore to Africans and to others from developing countries.
As in the Macroeconomic Network there is a need for two focal institutions;
one for eastern and southern Africa and the other for west and central
Africa. The primary functions of these focal institutions would
be to provide information on available opportunities, training institutions
and facilitate exchanges of information. The Asian Institute of
Management (AIM) located in Manila, would be a natural counterpart,
for example, to the Eastern and Southern Africa Management Institute
(ESAMI) located in Arusha.
In
the second regard, above, experience in inter-university networking
is limited despite a number of initiatives launched over the past
several years. For example, with the support of UNDP SU/TCDC, an
Inter-University Network was established in 1993 in Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia. With the City University of New York (CUNY) as a participant,
the network focuses on research in areas of utilization of human
resources, mechanisms for conflict resolution, democratization,
environment and development. It also attempts to interact with universities
in Africa, Asia and Latin America. As no progress reports are available
at the time of writing this report, it is difficult to show the
extent of its successes or shortcomings.
(c)
Trade and investment (Private Sector Development) network. To facilitate
and expand trade between the two regions and encourage Asian entrepreneurs
to invest in Africa, another network to be established is the Trade
and Investment Network. This Network aims at linking the private
sector within Africa and then linking it with that of Asia, mainly
through regional and national chambers of commerce.
(d)
Research network (RESNET). The main thrust of a research network
would be to facilitate exchange of information in areas of scientific
research and technological developments. Today, technology has grown
more complicated, operating against a backdrop of limited capacity
for the identification, selection, disassembling and absorption
of technology in Africa. Networking with science and technology
institutions in Asia would help to build the science and technology
database and assist in building capacity, among other things, for
appraising the implications of emerging technologies for the continent.
Existing
networks in Africa in areas of research and technology include:
the African Network of Science and Technology Institutes (ANSTI),
the African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS), the Council for
the Development of Economic and Social Research in Africa (CODESRIA),
the African Regional Centre for Technology (ARCT) and the Research
and Development Forum for Science-Led Development in Africa (RANDFORUM).
An Africa-Asia Research Network will also help in linking these
African institutions, coordinating activities and avoiding duplication
of research.
Development
cooperation between Africa and Asia portends tremendous opportunities
as well as challenges. It is an opportunity because there is potential
in areas of transfer of technology, know-how, and trade and investment
that could be harnessed to the advantage of Africa. Asian countries,
in turn, have the opportunity to know Africa, to understand its
potentials, and to expand markets and investment. Establishing robust
and sustainable development cooperation between the two regions
requires new attitudes, approaches and understanding. There is a
need for aggressive moves on all fronts: political, diplomatic,
economic; and for trade by all participants.
To
ensure that the cooperation remains durable, mutually-beneficial
and long lasting, technical and financial cooperation with Japan
and other Asian countries (capable of providing this) should support
South-South and triangular cooperation. At the same time, the cooperation
needs to be based on mutual respect, flexibility, predictability,
and to entertain programmes identified, initiated, formulated, and
implemented by African countries themselves. Bilateral cooperation
of the 1990s must avoid the pitfalls experienced during the post-independence
period. Triangular and twinning arrangements offer new mechanisms
that would enhance cooperation between the two regions. Bilateral
and multilateral agencies should be called upon to support such
arrangements as well as to facilitate the establishment of networks.
Africa
Investment Monitor, April 15-30, 1992.
Atkin,
Michael and Kalu I. Kalu, Encouraging Private Investment in Africa,
Document TICAD No.3.A.
Bobiash,
Donald, South-South Aid: How Developing Countries Help Each Other,
St. Martin's Press, 1992, New York. Brautigam,
Deborah, South-South Technology Transfer: The Case of China's Kpatawee
Rice Project in Liberia. World Development, vol. 21, No. 12, pp.
1989-2001, 1993. Global
Coalition for Africa, African Social and Economic Trends, 1993 Annual
Report.
Global
Coalition for Africa, Democracy, Governance, and Political and Economic
Reform in Africa, TICAD No. 1-B.
Husain,
Ishrat and Rashid Farquee, eds. Adjustment in Africa: Lessons from
Country Case Studies. World Bank Regional and Sectoral Studies,
1994.
Inukai,
Ichiro, African Development Perspectives with Special Reference
to Asian Development, TICAD 1993.
Lindauer,
David L. & Michael Roemer, eds. Asia and Africa: Legacies and Opportunities
in Development, Harvard Institute for International Development,
January 1994.
Ministry
of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Japan's ODA 1993: Annual Report.
Naya,
Seiji and Robert McCleery, The Asian Development Experience: Its
Relevance to African Development Problems. TICAD, No. 2-B.
South
Commission, The Challenge to the South: The Report of the South
Commission, Oxford University Press, 1990.
Secretariat
of the South Commission, South Letter, 1993.
South
Investment Trade and Technology Data Exchange Centre, Statue. Statue.
UNDP
and Berg, Elliot, Rethinking Technical Cooperation: Reforms for
Capacity Building in Africa. Regional Bureau for Africa, UNDP, 1993.
United
Nations, World Investment Report 1992: Transnational Corporations
as Engines of Growth. New York.
Winrock
International, African Development: Lessons from Asia, 1991.
World
Bank, Adjustment in Africa: Reforms, Results, and the Road Ahead,
World Bank policy research report, 1994.
The
East Asian Miracle, World Bank policy research report, 1993.
World
Debt Tables: External Finance for Developing Countries, 1993-1994.
Volume I, Analysis and Summary Tables.
Top
|
