IMPLEMENTING THE NEW PARTNERSHIP FOR AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT (NEPAD) BY PROMOTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SME SECTOR IN THE CONTEXT OF CAPITAL MARKETS IN AFRICA

by Chief Dennis O. ODIFE
(Article Reference: Document No.18, November 2002)

Assessment of the NEPAD
It is rather early in the day to make a thorough assessment of the NEPAD Programme and its implementation. At this stage a few comments only will suffice. First, a question that readily comes to mind is whether NEPAD is a new wine in old skins or an old wine in new skins. Regarding the apparent imperviousness of African leaders to correction the question may be asked: can the Leopard change its spots? Have African leaders become Leopards-without-spots such that the possible changing of spots would not arise? Are they all truly born again? It is perhaps too early to tell.

Secondly, regarding the monumental changes taking place in Africa, especially the transition from the OAU to AU, a question arises, whatever happened to the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA)? Is it dead and buried or just comatose? Why the reticence regarding the role and achievements of this body earlier on conceived and heralded as the harbinger of African economic salvation?

Thirdly, NEPAD recognizes that the visioning process adopted in its preparation is Top-Down rather than Bottom-Up, as is required especially in a democracy. This is a major weakness. Fourthly, the most unfortunate aspect of the NEPAD however is its assumption of the position of a moral minority for the African people, whereas African leaders had earlier on rejected calls for reparations as a solution to the African problem. This posture contradicts the bold programmes of the NEPAD, which appear to be attempting to transform Africans from a moral to an ideological minority in the world. As Hare, N and, Hare, J explain it in "An African Answer"[1],

"…Ideological minorities come with their own beliefs, values, goals, aspirations and agendas. They know what they want and set out to get it wherever they may find it. A moral minority, by contrast, rests its case on the request for a moral atonement or restitution, a moral obligation on the part of their oppressor to right their wrong…They are inclined to wait and wait and wait in vain…" [2]

This posture on the part of African leaders and the NEPAD just will not do. Africans under the AU ought to take responsibility for their destiny, especially in the context of the mindset of their development partners. African leaders ought to possess and to demonstrate in their planning, a more thorough understanding of the personality profiles of the leaders of the free world at this point in time. There is little doubt that George Bush II, the leader of the free world today shares the views of his father who said in 1991[3] that:

"…Destiny is not a matter of CHANCE, It is a matter of CHOICE,
It is not a thing to BE WAITED FOR, It is a thing to BE ACHIEVED…"

- Pres George W Bush, 1991

African nations should not continue to believe and to act on the basis that the destiny of the people of this continent should be a matter of chance. The challenge of NEPAD should be to make it a matter of choice. African nations having failed, refused or neglected to develop their financial markets, should not now be pleading for access on favourable terms to international capital markets! Nor should African nations continue to plead market inadequacy as an excuse for seeking the required funds outside Africa notwithstanding Africa's resource profile and continued poor macroeconomic performance. The integration of African capital markets should hardly take precedence over the establishment, deepening and widening of individual African national capital markets to bring on board as many Africans as possible before targeting the foreign investor. The proposed partnership is therefore hardly a true partnership. Africans should transform themselves into more of an ideological than a moral minority to make their quest for growth and development better assured.

There are also several unanswered questions and troubling facts. What do the non-African Partners think of the plan? What do the African owners think of the plan? At their recent meeting with some African Leaders, G-8 Leaders appeared skeptical, and perhaps unconvinced. On their own, several Africans also appear skeptical or at best they are hardly enthusiastic about the NEPAD. They seem to know little of the NEPAD. Moreover, the Top-Down visioning process has robbed them of participation in its design ab-initio, an essential condition for pride in ownership and success. Therefore, they probably also join in asking the questions: Will/Can African Leaders change their spending and investment records? Can Leopards change their spots? Can African ownership of NEPAD be achieved? At what cost/in what time frame?

The troubling facts are that:

• Africa has resources, and yet so many Africans are dying daily of hunger and disease in lands that could be very fertile,
  
• Africa provided and still provides substantial resources to the world,
  
• Africans export their resources to Europe/USA/Asia while their governments mismanage the rest,
  
• Africans in Diaspora have substantial resources they could invest in Africa, but are hardly doing so!
  
• Africans are still providing the world with cheap skilled labour that could build Africa.
  

---

[1] Edgar J Ridley, "An African Answer: The Key to Global Productivity", Africa World Press, P O Box 1892, Trenton NJ, 08607, 1992.

[2] D. O. Odife: "Changing Trends in Stock Exchange and Capital Market Development: Lessons for Africa" published by UNITAR, 'Capital Market Development: The Road Ahead - Document No. 13', Geneva, November 2000.
Federal Government Printer, Abuja. Report of the Panel on the Review of the Nigerian Capital Market,
Federal Ministry of Finance, Abuja, Nigeria, 1996.

[3] Dennis Odife, "New Perspectives on Nigerian Economic Reform" ALKESTIS BOOKS, Lagos 1994, p226.

---

>> Next: Implementing the NEPAD
>> Back to Table of Contents