Rethinking African
Economic Policy
Growth and Development Paradigms

Main Author:
Arsène KOUADIO
Ph.D, Sciences Economiques
Université d’Abidjan-Cocody et CIRES
E-mail: arsene.k@ipd-ci.org / arsenekk@yahoo.fr
Tél bureau: (225) 22 44 60 99, Fax: (225) 22 48 82 84, Cell: (225) 07 98 46 80 / 05 95 97 91

In Association with :Gbongué MAMADOU, Adama COULIBALY, Nicole ADJE, Yao KOUASSI (Côted’Ivoire), Samuel FAMBON (Cameroun), Leonard NKOUKA (Congo
Brazzaville)
July 2009

Papers published under the ATPS Special paper Series are thosecommissioned as concept papers, think pieces, leading conference
papers and keynote addresses. In keeping with our knowledge
brokerage function, ATPS publishes, with permission of the author(s)or journal editors, papers (published or unpublished) produced by
distinguished academics/researchers for a different purpose but
judged by ATPS to be of excellent quality. These papers addresssignificant policy questions relevant to the work of ATPS and/or
support the Southern voice or an African perspective. We also
consider theoretical papers that advance our knowledge of scienceand technology policy issues.
Published by the African Technology Policy Studies Network
P O Box 10081, 00100 GPO Nairobi Kenya
2009

Published by the African Technology Policy Studies Network

ISBN: 978 9966-7434-2-1

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION

4

1. BACKGROUND & PROBLEM

6

2. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

9

3. LITERATURE REVIEW

10

4. STUDY METHODOLOGY

13

5. RESULTS AWAITED

16

REFERENCES

17

ANNEX

19

Rethinking African Economic Policy | 3

INTRODUCTION
The question of the effective intervention of the State in favor of sustained economic growth within the
African States is at the heart current debate.
This has as a result of the recent developments in the world economic environment, marked by the market’s
failures to regulate the principal economic mechanisms. The food and financial crises that resulted from this
therefore highlight the real insufficiencies of the neoclassical economic models.
An analysis of the incentive measures and the different direct interventions, currently undertaken by theState in the economic and financial spheres, are obvious proofs of the insufficiency of market regulation
alone.
The different economic rescue plans adopted by most of the developed nations (United States, majority of
the European Union states, China, Japan, etc.) to offset the effects of the recession from the financial crisis
generated by the collapse of the financial markets, are equally eloquent illustrations.
This current economic context invites us to question ourselves on the relevance of the neoclassic models,
namely more liberalisation, to support the economic growth. This debate is all the more useful since it
involves understanding the underlying factors, determining economic growth in the African countries.
These preoccupations are of course current today, but they have always been at the heart of theoreticalcontroversies that regularly recur in mainstream thinking on economic growth

These can be distinguished in two main themes as the espoused by Malinvaud (1993): the initial theories ofgrowth and new theories on the growth. According to this author, the initial theories have the merit ofexplaining notable differences in growth rhythms, which help in planning and understanding the functioning
linkages of the economic market.
As for the latter, the new theories, they qualify theories of endogenous growth, bringing a renewed interest to
the neoclassical growth theory in the late fifties through the endogénéisation of technical progress in themodels that support ladite’s theory (Arrous, 1999).

4 | Rethinking African Economic Policy

All these theories strive to explain economic phenomena in the context of the time and space. Does the
choice vocabulary coincide with a more questioning attitude, in respect to the salient question: should we
judge a theory of growth solely by its capacity to clarify what is happening without taking into account its ability
to determine the economic cycles of evolving global factors of productivity?
Only a negative response is reasonable, according to Malinvaud (cited above), to the extent that the factual
evidence is still weak on the one hand and that the entire model is a simplification of reality with a view tohighlight certain aspects of the phenomena on the other hand.

This simplification may well push to the omission of some of the many determinants of productivity definedby Romer’s theory (1986) and Lucas (1988), spearheading the theory of endogenous growth. Their work
reconsiders the role of the state through productive public expenditure for growth, the role of human capital,
education as well as technological capital and research and development (Hénin and Rall, 1993).

The real question then is to ask whether a theory, based for example on the role of research anddevelopment or that of productive public spending, includes this role properly. In other words, when wereflect on the relevance of the proposed models, one wonders if attention should be paid to the laws theyhold and the question of whether they are good approximations for the study of factors that they claim tocover, then how we should implement them.

Obviously, from the experience of several centuries of implementation of economic theory and theobserved differences in growth trajectories, both in time and space, we are convinced in the idea of theneed for deeper research on the nature of policies to drive economic development across states,
particularly in Africa.

African countries, having experimented with various development strategies, still lag behind in developmentwith growth rates which are almost unstable and largely below those of most emerging markets (South East
Asia).They nevertheless had almost the same level of development as most African countries at the dawn of
independence.

Rethinking African Economic Policy | 5

I. BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM
Observation of Ivory coast’s, Cameroon’s, republic of Congo’s development path, highlights a number ofcommon characteristics. It is, among other things, their history, the different phases of their economic
development strategies and their actual endowments.
From a historical perspective, these countries were all colonized by France, which has imposed the same
principle of management of colonies based on the exploitation of natural resources for the industry of themetropolis. This ensured the political, administrative and economic organization of the colonies. The
political and administrative organization was based on the European colonial administrator led style. The
economic organization was the result of concessionary companies who engaged in abusive exploitation of
resources of the territories for the benefit of parent companies located in the city. We can therefore assume
that almost identical colonial patterns and post-independence development strategies in these three
countries will explain the near similarity of their growth patterns.
Indeed, the Ivory Coast, Cameroon and Congo have had the same phases of economic growth since
independence in 1960. These are articulated in three major phases. The first, described as "glorious
period", from independence until the early 1980s. During this period, Ivory Coast experienced strong
growth which was driven by export agriculture. But from the late 70s, public spending played an importantrole in the Ivorian growth, in particular, investment spending which rose from 10% of GDP for the period
1965-1970 to 15% in 1975 and 23% in 1978 (Bamba 2001). Meanwhile, Cameroon, recorded strong GDP
growth from 1960 to 1985 driven by development in the agricultural sector and mainly by oil revenues
between 1978 and 1985 (USAID / Cameroon, 1989). This helped raise the level of public investment and it
remained at a tolerable level in relation to the country’s external debt. Similarly, the Congo experienced,
sustained remarkable growth in the export of agricultural products from 1960 to 1984, mining and theintensification of oil export between 1975 and 1984.
This growth led by exports has been accompanied by significant public investment through the adoption of
three development plans that are the Interim Plan 1964-1968, the Triennial Plan 1975-1977 and the last Five
Year Plan 1982-1986 . We suspect that behind these policies lie the application of classical theories ofcomparative advantage developed by David Ricardo and Adam Smith. The second period, characterized
by an economic recession in the three countries marks the beginning of economic stabilization andstructural adjustment programs inflated by the Breton Wood institutions through the "Washington
Consensus" of neoclassical Kaldorienne (Boyer, 2001). Finally, the third phase, that of economic
6 | Rethinking African Economic Policyliberalization is simply an extension of the Washington Consensus,. This table would therefore indicate thatthe different determining phases of economic growth in these countries are exogenous.
The development strategies of these countries are also exogenous. In fact, whatever the industrialization
strategies (inherited from colonization) or structural adjustment programs (designed by multilateral donors)
or even economic liberalism, these strategies do not bear any endogenous fingerprint.
In addition, these countries, present unsatisfactory socio-economic indicators compared to countries withwhich they initially had the same levels of development during the mid 20th century, and this is also despite
their enormous potential in natural resources (Table 1)
Table 1: Comparative analysis of some macroeconomic aggregates from six
countries (average data over the period 1990-2007)
Value
added inagriculture(% of GDP)

Export ofgoods andservices(% of GDP)

Rate ofGDP
growth(annual%)

Export of hightechnology(% ofmanufactured
exports)

Import ofgoods andservices
(% of
GDP)

Value
added inindustry(% of GDP

Rate ofpopulation
growth(annual%)BRAZIL
INDIA
CHINA

The data in Table 1 reveals two key observations that illustrate different growth rate levels among groups ofcountries called emerging East Asia (China and India) and developing Sub-Saharan Africa (Ivory Coast,
Cameroon and Republic of Congo). Indeed, while the first citations have relatively higher GDP growth rates
during the period 1990-2007 characterized by high added values to the industrial sector in relation to theagricultural one, increased exportation rate of high technological products and low population growth rates,
the second offers a totally different picture.
These countries have low exportation levels of products with high technological intensity, a dominantagricultural sector over the industrial one (excluding the Republic of Congo) and a high rate of population
growth. Data on the Republic of Congo seems paradoxical, in that, despite having a mean added value inthe industrial sector and exports in GDP, GDP growth is relatively low compared with those of Brazil, China
and India over the period 1990-2007. This result may indicate the extroverted character of this country’s
economy. An in-depth analysis of its growth profile can better indicate the factors that explain thiscontradiction.
The analysis of the evolution of some key macroeconomic aggregates in Ivory Coast (see Figure 1 in annex)
show contrasting strengths. Not only are the rates of domestic savings, investment and growth low, butthese quantities are almost opposite trends. Indeed, the chart attached shows that the growth rate evolution
trends of the country seem to follow a trend opposite to that of the savings and investment rate. In the
Rethinking African Economic Policy | 7

Republic of Congo, the growth rate is mainly driven by the oil sector. Despite relatively high rates of domestic
savings and investment compared to Ivory Coast, the rate of real GDP growth was very low throughout theperiod 1994 - 2005 with an average of 2.6% (see Chart 1 attached).

This contextual framework emphasizes the need to analyze the sources of economic growth in these three
countries and especially to provide some answers to the following questions:- Does economic growth in these countries follow economic logic? If yes, what are the assumptions anddeterminants?
- What alternatives are there for sustained and continued growth in these countries?
These questions form the frame of analysis for this study.

8 | Rethinking African Economic Policy

II. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
In general, this study aims to examine the conditions for sustainable economic growth and its sustainability
through the role of the state and technological policy in Côte d'Ivoire, Cameroon and Republic of Congo.
More specifically, it is aimed at:- Carrying out a comparative analysis of the trajectory and growth determinants in these three countries- Carrying out a critical analysis of the assumptions supporting the economic growth pattern of thesecountries-Showing conditions of application of a pro-economic technological growth policy in these countries.

Rethinking African Economic Policy | 9

III. LITERATURE REVIEWThe work carried out, both theoretical and empirical explaining the determinants of economic growthprovides fairly extensive literature review. To this end, the analysis explaining the gap in economic
performance between states raises at least three questions: why are there so many differences in growth
rates over time and between nations? Why do some countries with natural factors of production
considerably lag behind in development while others, not as endowed have high growth levels? Can thesecountries catch up and at what price?
Many authors, through the construction of basic macroeconomic data and analysis through the applicationof reading grids, have tried to provide some answers. Such as Lucas (2002) and Gordon (2003). In his book
"Lectures on Economic Growth" published in 2002 in Harvard University Press, Robert Lucas explains thesources of the economic miracle of South Korea by comparing the evolution of certain macroeconomic
aggregates in that country with those of the Philippines.
Indeed, while in 1960, the Philippines and South Korea had roughly the same standards of living in terms
GDP per capita over the period 1960 to 1988, the data changed. Over this period, GDP per capita grew by
about 1.8% per year in the Philippines, against 6.2% in Korea. Over the same period, the majority ofcountries in East Asia, like South Korea, underwent profound changes, which were different from those of
the Philippines. Most of these countries became major exporters of manufactured goods with increasing
degrees of sophistification. They reached high levels of urbanization, education and high savings rates.
They had business minded regimes that combined « laissez-faire » policies and the authoritarianism. Lucasconsiders therefore that these dramatic changes in East Asian countries explain the improvement of
productivity factors, notably human capital and the incorporation of research - development in the growth
process. Unfortunately, his work does not really explain the role played by the state as concerns
incorporation of technology in the growth process. Did the economic mechanisms at the root of highgrowth in East Asian countries result merely from the market?
Although starting from a similar level of productivity and GDP per capita in the mid-nineteenth century,
Gordon (cited above) shows in his work, that Europe steadily moved away from the U.S. border until
productivity and GDP per capita grew to just more than half of the U.S. level in 1950. The strong
commitment to catch up taken up a result certainly led to a near convergence of European productivity butthat of GDP per capita remains incomplete, the European living standards only corresponds to threequarters of the U.S. level. The comparative analysis he does of economic growth during the two centuries of
10 | Rethinking African Economic Policy

economic growth between Europe and the United States can be summarized in one question: how canEurope be so productive today all the while having a level of living below the U.S., even when we think interms of well-being? We now understand therefore that catching up is not easy since with it comes anundesired result: a productivity gain against loss of welfare, for example. Does economic analysis,
promoting the application of catch-up models indicate its limitations?
The problem is not therefore to focus on the conditions of catching up but on what is necessary for durable
growth in the different countries. From that standpoint, we think that the role of the State, through thedefinition and implementation of a technological policy constitutes the essential factor for durable growth.
Here we consider the technological policy under two forms: the explicit form and the implicit form. The
technological policy explains the definitions of three primary objectives. These are: the management oftechnology transfer on an international level, the execution and management of technical change and theacquisition of managerial and technological capacity. As for the implicit technological policy, this aims to
induce development in general on an economic, cultural, ecological and demographic level with residual
effects on the process of technological transfer, the management of technical change and the creation of
local technological capacity. From this standpoint, very few studies emphasize the link between
technological policy and growth. The works on growth theories remain very limited to this extent and focus
more on the analysis of growth determinants.
The critical analysis by Malinvaud (1993) on this subject shows that the then conceived models to reply tothe concern of evaluating the growth factors were not considered as capable of furnishing a complete
theory.
Theoretical representations of growth, that appeared in the fifties and developed in the sixties, consideredthat growth rate in the long term corresponds to increased demographic growth tendencies of work output
induced by exogenous technical progress (Henin and Ralle, 1993). For these authors, there has apparently
been a paradox: the investment rate, that is to say, the effort realized by a corporation, does not appear
among the factors that have an influence on growth rhythm in the long term. The measure of contributions ofvarious factors to the observed growth depended then on uncertainties of the extent of substitutability andon the laws that could govern them. These models therefore considered the role of the State through thepolicies that it elaborates as exogenous in growth mechanisms.
Even though they supplied theses in favor of structural adjustment policies in the early eighties, the corollary
was the devastation of the economy. It is necessary to recognize limitations of certain authors (Campbell,2000) who recommend a radical transformation of the role of the State in the economic growth models.
This thesis is, besides, supported by the question of the founding principles of the "Consensus of
Washington" having supported the structural adjustment programs. In fact, liberal precepts at the heart ofstructural adjustment plans of the 1980s and the programs to fight poverty in 1990, conducted jointly by the
IMF and the World Bank were summarized by John Williamson (2003) in ten points that are the foundationsof the Consensus of Washington. Its objectives translate themselves by a promotion of restictive
macroeconomic policies, opening up growing economies and free competition. They can be arranged
into two categories: the first ones concern the measures of stabilization, while the second treats structural
measures. Eric and Combarnous (2004), in their works on the impact of the Washington Consensus on thedeveloping countries, show that the train of proposed measures applied by these countries resulted in a
failure. In fact, they show that the countries who faithfully applied the recommendations of the Washington
Rethinking African Economic Policy | 11

Consensus did not on the whole obtain better economic results than the others, while they bore the brunt of
the social consequences of adjustment.
On the whole, these recent models, notably in the works of R. Lucas (1988), P. Romer (1990), Aghion andHowitt (1992), Guellec and Ralle (1991), accumulation of knowledge and technical competences, as wellas its influence on productivity and growth, occupy a good place. This accumulation, subject to important
external effects would the result of growing ladders of yields.
Of course, even if through these factors developed by the new growth theories, we rediscover the questionof the reconceptualisation of the role of the State questioned by the structural adjustment programs of theeighties and the Washington Consensus, it is advisable to be prudent in their use in developing countries,
notably Africa, of which the planners have a tendency to apply these models as a panacea fordevelopment. In our opinion, the variable combination "State" (public capital), "private" (physical capital) as
well as "technology" and "knowledge accumulation" are a necessity but not sufficient condition foreconomic take-off of African States. Africa can be self-sufficient provided that a combination of thesefactors unfolds following a well thought out plan with clear objectives and well elaborated content. In otherwords, the technological policy of the State constitutes the catalytic element in the theoritical instruments ofendogenous growth.

12 | Rethinking African Economic Policy

IV. STUDY METHODOLOGY
4.1. Analytical Framework
The new growth theories are constructed around the idea that yields do not depreciate when we take into
account all the factors that can be accumulated (Hénin and Ralle, 1993). Growth can therefore to be seen
as a self maintained process developing at a constant rate if the yields of the cumilative factors arethemselves constant. The yields in comparison with the body of factors are therefore appreciative, which
can correspond to two different mechanisms: ladder economies of the traditional direction or external
economies. The new growth theories confer an important role to various externalities: first, productive
externalities, that is to say, the effectiveness of a business grows, if it inserts itself in an environment of better
equipped businesses or more active ones, but also and especially technological or knowledge
externalities.
Nevertheless, we consider that all which precedes is only true, if and only if the institutional environment
favoring growth by the technical progress exists. More precisely, it will involve seeing if the accompanying
device has, on the one hand, the capacity to implement former precendants on the rules and theprocedures of technology development and on the other hand, if the necessary instruments exist to returnto these former operational rules, (Ménard, 2003). In other terms, we suppose that technological policy
plays a role in the differentiation of growth trajectories.
What do we understand by technological policy? We understand that it is the management of technologicaltransfer, the management of the technological changes and local development of technological capacity.
(1) The management of technological transfer:
The technological transfer policies aim to define the criteria for importation of foreign technologies. These
criteria must take into account the country’s industrialization needs and therefore understand the conditionsof negotiation of all technical transfer systems and of relocation of the foreign businesses.
From this definition, we can therefore suppose that, institutionally there exists such a device able toimplement former precedents of the rules and the procedures of endogenous growth and to render them
operational afterwards.
To test this hypothesis, we use the comparative approach developed by the new institutionalists. We
distinguish in this direction, the works of Greif A. (1998) comparing the political devices set up at theRethinking African Economic Policy | 13

beginning and end of the 12th and 13th centuries and drivers for organisational choices and trajectories ofstrongly differentiated developments; the works of Engerman et al. (2001) on comparative growth of the
USAand Latin America and those of Alston et al. (1996) on the role of land property rights in America (and its
failures).
4.2. Methodological Approach
We use in our exercise comparative diagnostic approaches. It is important to appreciate the interrelationship between the choice, the orientation and the manipulation of the instruments and the evolutionof the dynamics of the economy by the growth of GDP. It is important in this approach to analyze therelationship between the instruments of technological policy and economic growth.
The instruments of the technological policy include:- The criteria of importation of foreign technology;- The capacities of assimilation and of adoption of technical change;- The reassurance of property rights;- The structure of the financial sector;- The investment volume in public infrastructures, in the sciences and technical and in the humanresources;
These variables reinforce the effectiveness of the economic mechanisms defined by the theory.
In our exercise, it is important to appreciate in comparative dynamics (in the time and in the space) how
good the implementation and operationalisation of the instruments of technology policy conditions are, andthe effectiveness of economic mechanisms for an endogenous growth. To this effect, we follow growthtrajectories and the instruments of technological policy of three countries at the time, namely, Ivory Coast,
Cameroon and Congo Brazzaville. One can therefore suppose that no divergence exists between thesecountries in the way they handled these instruments.
The mehodological approach consists of:- Parallel Concepts: it entails agreeing on the common points relating to the object of analysis. In ourcase, we are assured that there is minimum consensus on the notions of technological policy and offollowing growth context of each of the biases;- The mobilization Instruments: the teams identify in accordance with the theory, the growth variables
while establishing the divergence or convergence, the reference period, etc;
- To the parallel between instruments of technology policy, their manipulation and the economic growth:
Historic analysis of combined trajectory growth to the correlation analysis is used to appreciate, all things
being equal, the role of the instruments of technological policy in endogenous growth.

14 | Rethinking African Economic Policy

The diagram below gives an illustration of the outline of comparative proposed analysis.

Approche diagnostique comparative

Harmonisation
conceptuelle

Identification desinstruments

Rapprochement entre
instruments de politiqueet paramètres de croissanceéconomiqueAnalyse historique et de corrélation

4.3. Data sources
Two types of data were used for this study. The first one relating to the instruments of technological policy
defined below. To this effect, we essentially reviewed documentary evidence and literature by country
regarding the establishment of the position of these variables. As for the second type of data, which relates
to the understanding of the policy, we used variables generally in the growth models. The written and oral
sources were therefore used.
For the written sources, we used:- The documents frameworks of political economy; Five-year plans, Document of Strategy of Poverty
Reduction, Economic and Financial reports accompanying the finance laws, the economic programmes
etc;- the budget documents: finance laws, TOFE, the county’s principal macroeconomics accounts of
Direction, Situation and Economic Anticipation, the economic reports of the central banks, etc.
For the oral sources, facilitated discussions with a discussion guide were constructed with resource
persons in order to understand the functioning and the mechanisms set up in elaboration and driving forceof the different political economies of the countries of the study.

Rethinking African Economic Policy | 15

V. RESULTS AWAITED
At the end of this study, the results are among others will be:- Identification of economic growth of these three countries;- Characterization of growth outline of the countries;- Summarization of economic growth problems in these countries.
- Examination of conditions of good use of endogenous growth instruments;
Through this study we will endeavour to validate a comparative analysis of the sources of applicable growthin the definition, elaboration and the implemention of political economies in our African States.

Expérience de Dr. Arsène Kouadio
Dr. Arsène KOUADIO Konan, (Ph.D, Université de Montréal), est Professeur Associé à l’UFR de Sciences
Economiques et de Gestion, Université d’Abidjan-Cocody, Chercheur au Centre Ivoirien de Recherches
Economiques et Sociales (CIRES), au Consortium pour la Recherche Economique en Afrique (AERC), au
Réseau Poverty Economic Policy (PEP), Directeur Exécutif de l’Institut pour le Développement (IPD),
Coordonnateur pour la Côte d’Ivoire du Réseau d’Etudes des Politiques Africaines de Technologie (ATPS),
Coordonnateur pour la Côte d’Ivoire de ResearchICTafrica.net (RIA).. Il est consultant auprès de la BanqueAfricaine de Développement (BAD-ADB), PNUD-UNDP, UNICEF, OIT-ILO et de la Banque Mondiale.
16 | Rethinking African Economic Policy

REFERENCES
Aghon P., Howitt P. (1992), “A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction”, Econometrica, mars.
Alston, L.J., Libecap, G.D., Schneider, R. (1996), 'The Determinants and Impact of Property Rights; Land
Titles on the Brazilian Frontier', Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 12 (1), 25-61
Arrous J. (1999), Les théories de la croissance : la pensée économique contemporaine. Ed. Du SEUIL,
Paris, France.
Bamba N’Galadjo L. (2001), Répartition des revenus, pauvreté et croissance économique en Côte d’Ivoire,
CDESRIA, Afrique et Développement, vol 16, 3 et 4, pp. 117-147
Boyer, R. (2001) l’Après-consensus de Washington : institutionaliste et systémique ? l’Année de laRégulation, N° 5
Campbell B. (2000), Débats actuels sur la reconceptualisation de l’Etat par les organismes de financement
multilatéraux et l’USAID, Département Science Politique, Université du Québec, Montréal.
Engerman, S., Haber, S., Sokoloff, K. (2001), "Inequality, Institutions and Differential Paths of Growth among
New World Economies", in Ménard C. (ed), Institutions, Contracts and Organizations, Edward Elgar Pub.,
pp. 108-35.
Eric B. et Combarnous F. (2004), « L’impact du consensus de Washington sur les pays en développement :une évaluation empirique », Centre d’Economie du Développement, IFReDE – GRES – Université BordeauxIV, DT/100.
Greif, A. (1998), "Historical and Comparative Institutional Analysis" American Economic Review, 88 (May),no. 2: 80-4.
Gordon R. (2003), « Deux siècles de croissance économique : l’Europe à la poursuite des Etats Unis »,Revue de l’OFCE, n°84, pp. 9-45.
Guellec D., Ralle P. (1991), « Product Innovation and Endogenous Growth », Document de travail 9103,
INSEE.
Hénin P. et Ralle P. (1993), « Les nouvelles théories de la croissance: Quelques apports pour la politiqueéconomique », Revue économique, Vol. 44, Numéro Hors série: Perspectives et réflexions stratégiques àmoyen terme, pp. 75-100.
Lucas R. (2002), « Lectures On Economic Growth », Harvard U. Press.
Lucas R. (1988), “On the Mechanics of Economic Development”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, p. 342.

Rethinking African Economic Policy | 17

Malinvaud E. (1993), « Regard d'un ancien sur les nouvelles théories de la croissance », Revueéconomique, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 171-188.
Ménard C. (2003), « L’approche néo-institutionnelle : des concepts, une méthode, des résultats », Cahiersd’économie politique n° 44, p. 103-118.
Romer P. (1990), “Endogenous Technological Change”, Journal of Political Economy, 98, pp. S71-S102.
Romer P. (1986), “Increasing Returns and Long Run Growth”, Journal of Political Economy, 94, pp. 10021037.
Williamson, J. (2003), Un train de réformes, consensus de Washington : bref historique et quelquessuggestions, Finances et développement, septembre
World Bank, (2008), World Development Indicator, Washington

18 | Rethinking African Economic Policy

ANNEX
Graph 1 : Compared analysis of some macroeconomic agregates of the threecase studies in the 1994-2005 period

Source : BCEA0 et BEAC, 2006
PIB- GDP ; Taux d’épargne intérieur – Internal Saving Rate ; Taux d’investissement- Investment rate ; Dépenses en Capital- Capital
Expenditure ; Part sect. petrol. Dans PIB- oil sector share in GDP ; Part sect. non petrol. Dans PIB – Other sector share in GDP

Rethinking African Economic Policy | 19