Uganda and its collegiate African states are in a trap, a cyclical trap of development theories and economic models of growth. These theories have largely been transposed from the developed states and imposed on the African states. Worse, the Development Economists in Uganda and other African states have been schooled, financed and have their bread buttered by some of these mainstream development theories. The popular one is that of the neo-liberal economists that permeates through the major Bretton Woods institutions (World Bank, World Trade Organization and International Monetary Fund).
Now, this article is not to deny that there’s merit in the free market thinking or the sustainable models of growth. It’s to make a case for the endogenous factors that are unique to different African countries. Uganda cannot be compared Apple for Apple for Kenya, and the case applies to all other African countries. They exist in unique contexts, with unique circumstances and challenges.
This calls for customized growth models for the different African countries. It’s here that Uganda and its compatriots are stuck. How to think themselves out of this poverty traps, now debt traps? For example, how should development be financed in these African economies? Should development be private sector led or majorly hinged on Government intervention? What should be the approach to domestic capital mobilization? Which sectors of the economy, which industries should be funded? Should Africa carry out land reforms in favour of industrialization, and risk the future of the majority peasants? These questions need proper interpretation by these modern nation-states of Africa.
We thus advocate for a change in discourse, one that approaches every African country as a unique phenomenon. That should be the starting point. It requires thought, it requires abandoning everything we know and have learned about growth and development. And getting to answer two questions:
What does growth and development mean for Uganda?
How should Uganda go about achieving this growth and development?
That conversation requires a full citizen contribution, especially on the definition of growth and development.
Uganda and Other African States Must Figure Out Their Unique Models of Growth
Uganda and its collegiate African states are in a trap, a cyclical trap of development theories and economic models of growth. These theories have largely been transposed from the developed states and imposed on the African states. Worse, the Development Economists in Uganda and other African states have been schooled, financed and have their bread buttered by some of these mainstream development theories. The popular one is that of the neo-liberal economists that permeates through the major Bretton Woods institutions (World Bank, World Trade Organization and International Monetary Fund).
Now, this article is not to deny that there’s merit in the free market thinking or the sustainable models of growth. It’s to make a case for the endogenous factors that are unique to different African countries. Uganda cannot be compared Apple for Apple for Kenya, and the case applies to all other African countries. They exist in unique contexts, with unique circumstances and challenges.
This calls for customized growth models for the different African countries. It’s here that Uganda and its compatriots are stuck. How to think themselves out of this poverty traps, now debt traps? For example, how should development be financed in these African economies? Should development be private sector led or majorly hinged on Government intervention? What should be the approach to domestic capital mobilization? Which sectors of the economy, which industries should be funded? Should Africa carry out land reforms in favour of industrialization, and risk the future of the majority peasants? These questions need proper interpretation by these modern nation-states of Africa.
We thus advocate for a change in discourse, one that approaches every African country as a unique phenomenon. That should be the starting point. It requires thought, it requires abandoning everything we know and have learned about growth and development. And getting to answer two questions:
That conversation requires a full citizen contribution, especially on the definition of growth and development.
Photo by Tolu Olubode on Unsplash
Archives
Categories
Archives
Recent Post
Categories