∗

Ethiopia: Political Regime and Development Policies∗
Kenichi Ohno (GRIPS)
June 30, 2009

1. Introduction
Agricultural Development Led Industrialization (ADLI) is the policy principle adopted by Ethiopia, a
low-income country, to promote its national development. The initial idea of ADLI was formulated with theestablishment of the Interim Government in the early 1990s, which was subsequently elaborated in stages
and put into serious implementation in the early 2000s. On the other hand, Democratic Developmentalism(DD) is a political regime which supports the execution of this development strategy. DD and ADLI
constitute a complementary set which stipulates the political and the economic aspect of development
respectively1.
By adopting DD and ADLI, Ethiopia intends to radically transform the state management paradigm,
politically and economically, from the system in which rent seeking is the dominant behavioral pattern tothe system in which value creation is dominant. This reflects Ethiopia’s deep disappointment with thepreviously ruling paradigms: the paradigm of predatory state which was the root cause of rent seeking in
Africa, as well as the neo-liberal paradigm introduced from outside in the 1980s and the 1990s with thestated purpose of eradicating such rent seeking but, according to the Ethiopian leaders, failed miserably inthat attempt. Based on the rejection of both paradigms, an alternative development paradigm is proposed.
The purpose of this paper is to describe and assess DD and ADLI as the models of political regime andpolicy principle for development; our intention is not to offer a comprehensive review of the current
developmental situation of Ethiopia, of which DD and ADLI constitute only one component2.
Before analyzing the details of DD and ADLI, let us first list four general features of DD and ADLI.
First, Ethiopia has a grand plan of removing the existing development paradigms and building a new one. It∗

This paper, which summarizes the main features of DD and ADLI, was prepared for the purpose of setting the theoreticalbackground and securing common understanding for the subsequent policy dialogue with the Ethiopian Government. The
author alone bears the full responsibility for analyses and assessments contained in this paper. The author is grateful to thecomments by the policy makers and researchers in Japan and Ethiopia. No part of the arguments in this paper expresses theofficial view of the Japanese Government or the Japan International Cooperation Agency.
1
The basic documents on Ethiopia’s DD are Meles (2006) and Meles (2008, preliminary draft not for quotation?), while
general research on DD, including for other countries, is found in Edigheji (2005, derived from joint research initiated inSouth Africa) and Robinson and White (1998). For ADLI, the key literature are the internal document of the Ethiopian
Government in 1994 and the PASDEP 2005/06-2009/10 which embodies the principles of ADLI.
2
To review the political and economic situation of Ethiopia, the analytical scope should be enlarged, from DD and ADLI as
the model regime and policy principle, to the concept of Revolutionary Democracy, ethinic balance, federalism, opposition
parties and anti-government groups, NGOs and CSOs, the Diaspora, foreign relations, international organizations, and donors(including emerging donors such as China, India, and Turkey).

1

is only natural that it wants to discard the paradigm of predatory state, but it also refuses to accept any
partial modification or re-trial of the neo-liberal paradigm for the stated reason that its fault is deep andfundamental. This is an intellectual challenge that carries a potentially significant bearing, but its rhetoric
often inclines to be polemical because of the need to differentiate itself from the past. In other words, wemust be well guarded against prejudice and emotion in analyzing and assessing the proposed paradigm.
Second, DD and ADLI go beyond theoretical hypotheses or thought experiments to become very pragmaticand action-oriented guidelines to inform the legitimacy and the policy formulation and implementation of
the present Ethiopian Government. In particular, ADLI is not merely an academic concept but a crucial
principle upheld by strong leadership and shared by every official of the Government, which regulates thedrafting processes of PASDEP, master plans and other policy documents as well as Ethiopia’s relationshipwith donors and foreign businesses.
Third, the proposed development strategy is initially for Ethiopia but also meant for the application in other
African countries in the medium to long run provided that necessary adjustments are made to reflect theuniqueness of each country. However, for DD and ADLI to be accepted by other developing countries andinternational organizations, they must be implemented effectively in Ethiopia with good initial results.
Initial results, in turn, will depend not only on policy quality but also on other factors such as weather,regional stability and global booms and busts which are beyond the control of the Ethiopian Government.
Fourth, as developmental concepts DD and ADLI do not seem to contain any fatal flaw in logics. Its
difficulties will probably arise not from the lack of formal consistency but from feasibility and operational
modality in the process of implementation. The quality of strategies and tactics will matter there. The jury
is still out and we are at this point unable to confirm the viability of DD and ADLI as the new development
paradigm. While the Ethiopian economy accelerated since 2003/04, it is too early to conclude that policy
innovation was the main cause. The proponents of DD and ADLI face the task of preparing thepreconditions for and removing the obstacles of their effective implementation one by one.

2

Table 1.

Ethiopia: Basic Statistics(Ethiopian year) 1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
(Western year) 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08
Real GDP growth (%)
5.2
6.1
8.3
1.5
-2.2
13.6
11.8
10.8
11.1
11.3
Nominal GDP (millions of Birrr)
58,78966,64868,02766,55773,432
86,661 106,473 131,641 171,834 245,585
Nominal GDP (millions of USD)
7,828
8,188
9,167
7,794
8,559
10,042
12,30615,164
19,53927,939GDP per capita (USD)
129
131
127
118
126
143
171
205
257
357
Sector share (% of GDP) 1/
Agrilculture
51.2
49.8
50.9
49.1
44.9
47.0
47.4
47.1
46.3
44.6
Industry
12.4
12.4
12.1
12.9
14.0
14.0
13.6
13.4
13.3
13.1
Service
37.2
38.7
38.0
38.6
41.7
39.7
39.7
40.4
41.4
43.4
External relations (% of GDP)
Export
11.6
12.0
12.0
12.6
13.3
14.9
15.1
13.8
12.7
11.8
Import
24.0
23.9
23.7
26.6
27.4
31.6
35.5
36.5
32.1
26.9
Trade deficit (export - import)
-12.4
-11.9
-11.7
-14.0
-14.1
-16.7
-20.4
-22.7
-19.4
-15.1
Total trade (export + import)
35.6
35.9
35.7
39.2
40.7
46.5
50.6
50.3
44.8
38.7
FDI (approval, millions of Birr)
1,080
1,627
2,923
1,474
3,369
7,205
15,40519,98046,94992,249(approval, % of GDP)
1.8
2.4
4.3
2.2
4.6
8.3
14.5
15.2
27.3
37.6
Population (million)
60.8
62.9
64.4
66.3
68.2
70.1
72.1
74.1
76.1
78.2
Population in rural area (%)
85.5
85.3
85.1
84.9
84.7
84.4
84.2
84.0
83.8
82.9
Population in poverty (%)
41.9
38.7
Exchange rate (Birr/USD, period average)
7.51
8.14
8.33
8.54
8.58
8.63
8.65
8.68
8.79
8.79

Sources: Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, National Bank of Ethiopia, and Ethiopian Investment Agency.
1/ Do not add up to 100% due to estimate errors of intermediary margins of financial institutions (service sector).

From the perspective of shifting paradigms, the success of DD and ADLI hinges critically on the balance
between the inertia of the old paradigm and the energy required for the emergence of the new paradigm.
The evolutionary theory of scientific paradigms tells us that any paradigm, once firmly established, will not
go away simply because the gap between its predictions and reality arises (Kuhn 1970, Lakatos 1970）. Thisis because each paradigm is equipped with self-defense mechanisms such as professional societies,
academic journals, and scholarly promotion systems and also guarded by vested interests. To overcome
these barriers and replace the old paradigm by a new one, certain conditions for breakthrough are needed
including (i) a sufficiently large accumulation of “failures” of the old paradigm; (ii) emergence of analternative paradigm equipped with theoretical formality; and (iii) good initial performance of the newparadigm. When these conditions are attained beyond certain limits, a paradigmatic shift will occur like anavalanche. In the Ethiopian context, a shift in the developmental paradigm will be confirmed whendomestic supporters and political coalitions emerge strongly, donors and international organizations start
recognizing and supporting it, and a number of other developing countries begin to approve and adopt it.
The international community should be seriously interested in the Ethiopian effort to spearhead the shift in
the development paradigm. Regardless of its final outcome, it will raise an important question not only forthe development of Ethiopia but also for the development strategies of the rest of Africa and even the entire
international community. We recognize that the simultaneous pursuit of DD and ADLI is a historically
unprecedented attempt, and that the implementation in Ethiopia is only several years old. Avoiding either
total negation or unconditional approval, we should take a balanced position, be patient enough to give it afair try, provide reasonable assistance as an interested observer and, when needed, offer constructive
criticism in an open policy forum.
3

The paradigmatic shift which Ethiopia envisages is largely inconsistent with the traditional political andeconomic conditionalities of the Western donors. By contrast, it shares more commonalities with thetraditional development strategies in East Asia although they are not the same. Japan and other donors from
East Asia should play appropriate roles in assisting the development of Ethiopia. Specifically, the following
should be seriously considered: (i) formulation and dissemination of the “East Asian experiences” which
are both pragmatic and consistent with the policy context of Ethiopia; (ii) introduction of concrete
components of Japanese industrial assistance such as 5S and kaizen, (iii) assessment of Ethiopia’s
development policies from the perspective of East Asia; and (iv) suggestions for improving implementation
mechanisms such as master plans, action plans and monitoring mechanisms. With proper preparation anddue deliberation, there is much that East Asia can offer to the development of Africa.
2. Democratic Developmentalism
Democratic Developmentalism (DD) is defined to be “a political regime in which a developmental party
remains in power for a long time by consecutively winning free elections which permit multiple parties,
under which policies that punish rent seeking and encourage productive investment are implemented with astrong state guidance.” This should be construed as a model which Ethiopia is trying to attain rather than an
already-established and well-functioning political regime.
The transformation of development strategy must begin with politics because, in the recognition of theEthiopian leaders, the developmental failure of Africa comes not only from the theoretical and technicalshortcomings of economic policy but also, more fundamentally, from political factors such as the existenceor absence of the will, the regime, and the leaders that are determined to resist private profiteering andpromote national development. For this reason, a political regime consistent with national development
must be installed in parallel with or even before the formulation of concrete policy measures. Here, thedevelopmental state is a regime that mobilizes available resources to build institutions, policies, andincentive systems to stimulate domestic value creation (i.e., productive investment). Moreover, thisendeavor must be undertaken under the rules of democracy rather than authoritarianism. Under DD, thefruits of successful development are expected to win popular support, which is confirmed through a seriesof elections. Thus, the developmental state earns legitimacy and keeps its power for a long time throughboth economic performance and democratic procedure.
Let us look at the three important components of the DD model: the introduction of democracy, the activerole of the government, and the political support base.

4(1) Introduction of democracy
The DD model aims at building a political regime unique to Ethiopia, which is different from the East
Asian Authoritarian Developmentalism (AD) which postpones democracy for the sake of development, or
the Western style “good governance” that requires an early adoption of highly advanced governing
principles in latecomer developing countries. Needless to say, the kind of democracy that can bemeaningfully adopted in a very poor country is not its ideal type equipped with full conditions. Democracy
is not an all-or-nothing choice; it comes with a large number of variations that reflect the history andstructure of each society. Its development stage ranges from elementary democracy equipped withminimum formality to full democracy that realizes popular participation, political competition, and policy
debate in the true sense. In this light, DD can be construed as a variation of democracy which is realistic,
manageable and consistent with the national goal of a poor country that faces many constraints andproblems.
Why should a country in an early stage of development adopt democracy instead of authoritarianism? One
reason is the inherent and universal importance of democracy itself such as freedom, human rights andparticipation. Another reason would be to expect democracy to provide the procedure to secure legitimacy
and maintain unity of a multi-ethnic nation and the means to gain popular support to developmentalism anddevelopment projects. Moreover, in the world of the 21st century in which we live, it must be noted that nocountry, regardless of its development stage, could be admitted as a valid member of the international
community and receive aid and cooperation unless it embraces a democratic form of government. This is aninternational environment sharply different from the one in which Taiwan or Korea faced during the Cold
War era. In summary, the combined adoption of developmentalism and democracy is required not only forthe inherent value of democracy but also from strong pressures from within and without.
The kind of democracy envisaged under DD is the basic one that holds free elections with multiple parties
and guarantees the minimum level of basic freedom and basic human rights. This also overlaps with thecore elements of the democracy required of developing countries by the West and the international
community. In a more advanced democracy, many additional elements are required besides the coreelements, and free and open policy debates and political choices in the true sense must be ensured. For
example, the “good governance” indicators of the World Bank--voice and accountability, political stability,
government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law, control of corruption--must be fully in place. All
disputes must be solved peacefully in the spirit of mutual respect, tolerance, and compromise. In a highly
developed democracy, the two-party system may exist in which different political parties with sufficient
governing capability compete and the people can actually exercise their right to choose by voting. The
democracy that Ethiopia can introduce today is not an ideal type such as this.
Under DD, a legal procedure for political transition is installed, while the ruling party is determined to stay5

in power for a long time for an effective execution of developmental policies. It may be argued that theserequirements are in conflict with each other, at least formally. If the possibility of power change is a real
one, it is highly unthinkable that one party will consistently keep winning elections for a number of decades.
Every time a new government comes into power, previous policies will be abandoned and the long-term
consistency of developmental policies will be lost. By contrast, if DD has a hidden mechanism which
effectively prevents the opposition from winning, there is no real democracy and the opposition andanti-government groups will certainly cry foul. Does this discredit the notion of DD? We should take noteof the fact that, in many developing countries, long-term stability of government is realized under formal
democracy by the use of various tools available to the ruling party such as the distribution of benefits,social and economic organizations which support the incumbent government, regulation of activities by
opposition parties and anti-government organizations, and so on.
How can the developmental party of Ethiopia stay in power for a long time despite free elections in which
multiple parties compete? The answer probably is by persuading the people on the need to launch a new
developmental paradigm and by achieving initial successes in its implementation. This will lead to theformation of domestic political coalition supportive of developmentalism and allow the government toexecute more developmental policies. This virtuous circle will ensure victory in coming elections. In this
scenario the main political base of the ruling party is smallholder farmers which account for 80% of the
population. Small producers in urban areas are also considered to be part of the support base although their
number is not very large at this moment (for the political base of DD see below).
This is a political regime called “dominant party democracy” or, alternatively, “dominant coalition
democracy” if political coalition with domestic groups is underscored. In one sense, this is akin to Japan’s
regime under the dominance of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) since 1955. Equipped with near-perfectdemocratic institutions (at least formally) and through a series of free elections, LDP has stayed in poweralone or by forming a coalition with other parties for over a half century (except for a short interruption).
Its power base is rural. However, the political regime aspired by DD has one crucial difference from the
LDP regime in Japan. That is the fact that LDP has miserably failed to improve the productivity ofagriculture and has managed to stay in power by continuous re-distribution of benefits to farmers and rural
residents through subsidies, protection, and prioritization of public works. Japan, with high income andadvanced industries, may have the luxury of pampering farmers. However, being one of the poorest
countries in the world, Ethiopia cannot follow such a model. The combined DD and ADLI will neversucceed unless there is a significant breakthrough in the productivity of agriculture. This is a very important
point to which we will later return.
Although DD has a connotation that the ruling party will stay in power for a long time, a poor country that
adopts democracy rather than authoritarianism still can expect certain benefits for its people as well as for
its political development. In addition to being able to enjoy freedom, human rights and participation which6are inherent in democracy, the holding of national election every five years will make even the long-term
government sensitive to and accountable for popular demand, criticism from the opposition, the quality ofpolicies, corruption, and foreign pressure. At the same time, DD also faces a number of difficulties arisingfrom the primitive nature of democracy in a developing country—a topic to be discussed in the following
section.
(2) Government as a dynamic leader
According to Comparative Institutional Analysis which studies the diversity and dynamics of institution, it
is not easy to transform a “system” (i.e. a collection of institutions) which has been installed and alreadysolidified (Aoki 1995a, Aoki 2001). Different types of inertia works to defend the existing system such as:
institutional complementarity (mutual dependence of institutions in which the removal of only one
institution hardly changes the system), strategic complementarity (the fact that individuals have incentives
to play the existing game), and path dependency (the difficulty of deviating from the system which waschosen first). At the same time, there are also patterns in which transformation can occur even under suchinertia (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Patterns of Systemic Transformation

The first is collective mutation. This occurs when a sufficiently large number of members of the societychange their behavior in the absence of external coercion or directives. In the context of developing
countries, this may happen when a resistance movement arises against extreme suppression or deprivation,or when a sustained increase in income changes the values and wants of the majority of the population. The
second is policy launched by the government. The government is one of the insiders of a society but canbecome a dynamic actor (or deus ex machina, a god who appears suddenly and out of context to solve all
confusion in an ancient Greek play) to force a change on other members of the society with its authority.
7

The third is foreign pressure. For better or worse, foreign individuals, firms and organizations are notbound by domestic rules and can become an agent for systemic change in that society. Finally, effective
cooperation between the government and foreigners can produce a systemic change. This does not meanthat the government and foreigners are always in good terms. But in cases where the government as aleader initiates a clear direction for change and the foreigner as a follower supports and assists it, theprobability of systemic transformation will rise significantly.
Using this framework, it can be said that the Ethiopian Government is mobilizing its policies as a dynamic
driver to establish developmentalism (i.e., to transform the rent seeking system to the value creation
system), and additionally inviting the assistance of donors and international organizations for that purpose.
This endeavor has the two aspects of destroying selfish motives, patronage, zero-sum games, anddependency culture associated with the old system, and building institutions, human resources,
technologies, and incentive structures to support the new system. Both will require enormous social energy
to break the political resistance.
The critical element of government-led systemic transformation is leadership. This includes both thequality and capability of the leader himself or herself, and the appropriateness of visions and principles thatguide the transformation. Their importance can hardly be overstated. Even in the high performing
economies of East Asia, the value creation system was not in place when they initiated the period of highgrowth. Before 1960, South Korea was a basket case with rampant corruption, administrative inefficiency,
and high dependency on US aid for survival (World Bank 1993). Similarly, in 1959, the World Bank reporton Thailand lamented the absence of public investment management and the severe shortage of trained orexperienced bureaucrats (World Bank 1959). These situations were later turned around by President Park
Chung-hee (in power 1961-79) in South Korea and the governments of Prime Minister Sarit (in power
1958-63) and Prime Minister Prem (in power 1980-88) in Thailand. Similar transformation was observed in
Taiwan (by President Chiang Kai-shek), Singapore (by Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew), and Malaysia (byPrime Minister Dr. Mahathir) as a government led by a strong and economically literate leader emerged.
According to the Ethiopian leaders, the neo-liberal paradigm failed to uproot the rent seeking systembecause it denied the role of government as a dynamic driver for systemic change. The naïve view of“market is good, government is bad” which promoted a minimalist government could not generate an agent
powerful enough to launch a systemic change in a latecomer developing country, it is argued. The policy
package of liberalization, privatization and open markets generated, in the implementation process, a hordeof new domestic and foreign rent seekers such as NGOs, voluntary organizations, mining companies, andODA contractors who rallied for preferences and subsides, which collectively foiled the effort for systemicchange. The so-called “Trickle Up Democracy” which tried to eliminate rent seeking from bottom up did
not succeed in installing developmentalism in Africa.

8

There are many existing studies that confirm that economic liberalism does not necessarily cause
development in low-income countries. For instance, Ishikawa (1990) presented evidence from China on the
failure of liberalization policies in an economy with underdeveloped markets; Nishimura (1994) and Aoki
(1995b) showed that the rapid privatization in Russia created new gigantic rents and their seekers; Khan
(2008) argued that capability to direct rents to productive purposes such as investment and technology
absorption, rather than to eliminate rents, was needed in a country that lacked market supporting
institutions; and Ohno (2009) contended the Washington Consensus policies could take a country to lower
middle income but climbing further would require a combination of more pro-active policies and private
dynamism.
In Ethiopia, a strong state is set to guide other members of the society for the purpose of development.
Specifically, a government led by a strong top leader is to give incentives (carrots) and disincentives(sticks) to the actors of economic growth such as farmers, workers, merchants, entrepreneurs, and foreign
firms so they are forced to change behavioral patterns from rent seeking to value creation. Even donor
assistance must align closely to the development strategy of the Ethiopian Government or it is not needed.
Small farmers are the most important partner in political coalition, but even with them the government
offers top-down guidance for productivity improvement through various “carrots” for agricultural and ruraldevelopment, rather than responding to their voices in policy formulation in a bottom-up fashion. In thissense, the role of small farmers in political coalition with the incumbent government remains a passive one.
The strategy in which a strong state mobilizes incentives and disincentives to induce economic agents tocreate value is observed most vividly in the leather and leather product industry. The goal of this industry as
set by the Ethiopian Government is to supply finished leather or finished leather products to export anddomestic markets by acquiring management and technology capabilities to process what has hitherto beensold as raw or semi-finished leather. For “sticks,” the ban on raw material export and the high tax on
semi-finished leather have been introduced. For “carrots,” a series of policies have been offered to theindustry including (i) establishment of the Leather and Leather Product Technology Institute (LLPTI) to
provide training, quality tests, and some production processes; (ii) donor assistance, foreign advisors, andtwinning with a British institute for LLPTI; (iii) preferences in finance and foreign currency allocation; (iv)business matching between domestic shoe producers and European firms; and (v) monthly governmentbusiness meetings to promote the industry and remove its barriers.
What guarantees that DD will avoid the mistake of the neo-liberal paradigm—that it will not become a new
playground for rent seekers? The answer must perhaps come from the quality and determination of the top
leader himself or herself. From the experiences of many developing countries, we can safely say that there
is no magic mechanism to ensure that a strong state will generate long-term growth; on the contrary, it will
easily fall pray to patronage and collusion among politicians, bureaucrats and business people. In otherwords, the success of DD depends not only on the perfection of its institutional arrangements but, more
9

importantly, also on the integrity and effectiveness of the leader who manages it.
(3) Political support base
It is natural that a developmental party intending to win an election every five years chooses small farmers,
which occupy 80% of the Ethiopian population, as its support base. In addition, small and medium size
entrepreneurs in the urban areas are also counted as its future support base although their number is still
small. However, at present, the ruling party has not established itself firmly in urban constituencies.
Small farmers and small and medium size entrepreneurs are regarded as the victims, not the perpetrators, ofrent seeking. To release them from this harm and let them concentrate on their productive activities, thegovernment thinks it necessary to first remove past suppressions such as exploitation and state monopoly(rather than promoting further land reform or privatization of land titles). When this is done, under thegovernment’s “Rural Strategy,” a series of measures are to be implemented in the areas of technology
diffusion, fertilizers, seeds, irrigation, and so on, in order to raise the productivity of small farmers andtransform them into commercial producers.
In East Asia, governments with developmental orientation often formed political coalition with capitalists
instead of farmers or workers (see subsection (4) below). Capitalists included domestic zaibatsu or
chaebols (large business groups), large to medium size producers, banks, and trading companies. Since they
were relatively small in number, the government wanting to stay in power for long could not adopt
democracy from the beginning. In Ethiopia, by contrast, capitalists (which include local as well as foreign
enterprises) are not considered to be in political coalition with the government. Although they are very
important strategic partners of development, the government does not intend to rely on them for votes orfunding. Rather, it will regard capitalists as the object of policy making, supporting their value creation
while punishing their rent seeking. That is to say, the relationship between the government and capitalists
will not be coalition or cohabitation but conditional cooperation at arms’ length.
In Ethiopia, the urban mass has not yet formed. The intellectual class such as students and professionals arestill small in number. Meanwhile, rich farmers and landlords were wiped out by the previous government.
For these reasons, it is unlikely that these segments of the population will become a strong partner inpolitical coalition in the near future. Furthermore, the Ethiopian Diaspora usually takes a negative attitude
toward the present government.
(4) A comparison with East Asia
How does DD of Ethiopia compare with Authoritarian Developmentalism (AD) which was popular in East
Asia in the late 20th century? Before answering this question, let us first note that developmental regimes10

in East Asia have been quite diverse. The typical AD regimes included Taiwan and South Korea in the past.
China after Deng Xiaoping, Singapore, and Malaysia were also very close to it. On the other hand,Indonesia and the Philippines failed to solve structural problems in politics or economics (or both) to be
counted as AD despite certain achievements in income and growth. Thailand is perhaps located between
these two groups. Vietnam has sustained high growth under one-party rule since the early 1990s but there is
not much to be said about its policy formulation capability. Beside these, East Asia also contains very poor
countries such as Laos and Cambodia and dictatorship unrelated to development such as Myanmar andNorth Korea. Therefore, AD to be analyzed here for the purpose of comparison with DD is an ideal typewhich is most closely represented by Taiwan and South Korea before their transition to democracy.
With these caveats, let us enumerate the outstanding features of East Asian AD as follows: (i) emergence in
response to a crisis (domestic or regional); (ii) strong leadership (one strong leader or a strong ruling groupor party); (iii) a loyal and capable technocrat group supporting strong leadership; (iv) prioritization ofdevelopmental ideology (i.e., postponement of political reform); (v) legitimacy through economic
performance rather than democratic procedure; (vi) the continuation of the same regime for two to three
decades and the social transformation that it generates (Watanabe 1995, Ohno and Sakurai 1997, Banno andOhno 2009). This AD regime has the following sharp differences from the DD model which Ethiopia
aspires to adopt (Figures 2 and 3).
First, East Asian AD is a proven model which was adopted in many countries with remarkableachievements in income generation and structural transformation in at least some of them. In this sense, thevalidity of AD (under certain circumstances) is indisputable. By contrast, Ethiopian DD remains a plan to
be fully implemented in the future. Its advocates ought to convince the skeptics of the feasibility of DD in
the social context of latecomer developing countries.
Second, as noted above, most East Asian developmental states from the outset formed political coalition
with capitalists—business groups, banks, and so on—who were the main executers of development while
effectively refusing to adopt the multi-party system with free election. By contrast, the DD model aspiredby Ethiopia adopts it as one of the key rules of the game at the starting point. The legitimacy of AD
depended solely on its economic performance whereas that of DD will depend on both economic
performance and democratic procedure. This is a vital difference between the two.
Third, in East Asian high performing economies, a dynamic transition pattern was observed in which AD,
which was established through the denial of democracy, achieved positive economic results over a few
decades which in turn transformed the social structure, mindsets and demands of the people. This socialchange led to a rise of the middle mass, who demanded democratization, to the position of voter majority
which eventually toppled the AD regime. This pattern has already run its course in Taiwan and South Korea
while it is in progress in a number of other countries in East Asia. Watanabe (1995) calls this phenomenon a11

“successful dissolution” of the authoritarian regime through the very success in its development strategy.
Meanwhile, what dynamic course the DD regime will trace if it is successful remains uncertain. The
Ethiopian document states that Rural Democracy will eventually transform itself into Urban Democracy,
but its concrete content or mechanism is unclear.

Figure 2. Democratic Developmentalism

Source: the author.

Figure 3. Dynamic Transition of East Asian Authoritarian Developmentalism

Source: the author.

12

3. Issues in DD
It was argued above that DD remains a model to be tested whose validity will critically depend on actual
performance. Let us briefly present two issues which may arise in the implementation process of DD.
(1) Stability of political coalition
Generally speaking, poor farmers are characterized by conservatism, obstinacy, low levels of education andknowledge, and submissiveness to authority and coercion. Historically, while disgruntled farmers may
resort to uprising and violence, it was rich farmers, village leaders or landlords equipped with high levels of
judgment and material wealth who became constructive political partners in the early days of
democracy—as in Meiji Japan in the late 19th century. Even if small farmers are elevated to the position ofprincipal political partners, it is often difficult to mobilize them on a national scale unless they are given
orders from above—as seen in Mao Tse-tung’s mass mobilization of Chinese peasants for the Great Leap
Forward in the late 1950s. In this sense, small farmers should be regarded as passive followers of thegovernment rather than mature and independent partners of national politics (this is a point which isentirely different from the validity of autonomy, participation, empowerment, and other grass-roots
activities within a village). The question therefore is what motive or incentive keeps small farmers to accept
such a position.
The minimum condition for small farmers to accept the government’s lead is the perception that the latter
will not suppress them or drive them into despair. A greater incentive would be the receipt of official aid forthe improvement of their livelihood such as famine relief, food aid, and education and health services.
Better still, they will more willingly follow if the government provides productive assistance such astechnology, fertilizer, seeds, irrigation and finance. And ultimately, it would be ideal if farmers raise
productivity and income thanks to such productive assistance and shift to the production of commercial
crops, thereby putting agriculture on a path of sustainable growth. In Ethiopia, at least some of the above“benefits” are provided to the majority of small farmers through many assistance programs. However, on
the question of whether such assistance has led to productivity increase, evidence is still scarce.
It should be noted that the security of farmers’ livelihood cannot be ensured by policy alone. Droughts,
pests and resulting crop failure are part of rural life. While these calamities are not caused by thegovernment, it is uncertain whether small farmers continue to faithfully support the developmental regime
when an economic downturn is severe and official rescue packages are considered insufficient.
(2) Instability of developing country politics

13

In developing countries, politics is often characterized by radicalism and instability even if democracy isformally in place. This occurs because the act of governing is yet to be institutionalized and authority has
not been firmly established. There is no consensus regarding how democratic rules should be applied indetail. Under such circumstances, the incumbent government can exercise much discretion in protecting
human rights, hosting elections, or dealing with the parliament. In return, the opposition can easily criticize
and challenge any action by the government. This situation is fairly universal in developing countries. In
Ethiopia, these features of developing country politics may also pose serious threats to the implementationof DD and ADLI.
As a result, politics becomes radical and extreme. True, this may partly reflect a serious schism in social
structure of that country associated with ethnicity, religion, region, income gaps, or urban-rural disparity.
Nevertheless, political instability often goes far beyond what these social problems can explain. Potential
areas of agreement are flatly rejected, conflicts become entrenched and severe, and policies swing too much.
Vendetta politics is repeated as previous leaders are prosecuted and their policies are denied and reversed
by every new government. Each time the government and those who oppose it exchange emotional volleys,
radicalism is amplified.
Under such circumstances, “free elections” may not be conducted so peacefully. Whether by a landslide ora slim margin, the announced victory of the ruling party may easily be challenged by the opposition.
Meanwhile, those in power never intend to lose the next election and go all lengths to ensure a favorable
outcome by mobilizing methods which are unsuitable in a more advanced democracy. The election
becomes a complicated political game, and winning it can hardly confer full legitimacy. If the angered
opposition resorts to violence and the government responds in kind, the election may even further
destabilize politics.
To reduce such instability, it is necessary to install a mechanism to find areas of possible agreement in
concrete policy issues between the government and the (modrate) opposition. Even if the two parties totallydisagree on some issues, there may be other issues on which they may be able to come to partial or fullagreement. In that case, the government should invite the opposition to jointly debate the latter, accept what
can be taken in the opposition’s proposal, and build national development strategies for effective
implementation. In Ethiopia, for example, fruitful discussions may be held on such topics as the revampingof assistance to small farmers, concretizing industrial action plans, training industrial human resources, andmacroeconomic analysis. Establishment of a public-private sector forum to debate these issues for joint
formulation of policies would greatly reduce the emotional tension and policy gaps between the two parties
and may help to avoid extreme policy swings even when governments change3. The stakeholder meetings
3

Japan in the early Meiji period (late 19th century) had four policy goals of industrialization, foreign campaign, drafting of
the constitution, and the establishment of parliament. Political leaders formed groups to pursue one of these goals as toppriority. Since no one group dominated, each had to continuously form coalition with one or two other groups to promote its
favored policy. Coalitions were flexible and reversible, the victory or defeat of one group did not last long, and ill emotion

14

for drafting the next PASDEP can be used for this purpose. Alternatively, other forums may be set up
outside the government. Such effort will surely contribute to the steady development of democracy in
Ethiopia.

4.

Agricultural Development Led Industrialization: its concept and early application

Agricultural Development Led Industrialization (ADLI) is defined to be the “development strategy whichaims to achieve initial industrialization through robust agricultural growth and close linkage between the
agricultural and industrial sector.” This is the strategy which was formulated in the early 1990s and has
been implemented in stages in Ethiopia, especially from the early 2000s. ADLI is considered to be an
evolving development strategy subject to pragmatic experimentation and adjustment rather than an
immutable principle. The development from SDPRP to PASDEP in the past as well as the currently
proposed revisions and broadening of policy space, as discussed below, should be regarded as an evolving
policy package that takes into account changing circumstances, shifting opportunities and challenges, andactual performance of individual measures. Without abandoning its core framework, alternative approaches
can be incorporated and implementation details can be added.
With the coming of the Interim Government in July 1991, Ethiopia abandoned economic planning andadopted a market-oriented economic system. The national economy at that time was on the verge ofcollapse. The radical shift in policy orientation was necessary because of: (i) the failure of the previous
socialist government to realize economic growth and improvement in the living standard; (ii) the necessityof securing finance from donors and international financial institutions; and (iii) the urgency of addressing
pressing economic issues during the transition from civil war to peace. The shift in economic policy opened
the door for the private sector to play an important role as opposed to the previous hostile policy
environment that kept the private sector and market forces at bay and in a very rudimentary state.
During the transition from 1991 to 1995, important policies were adopted and later incorporated into key
policy documents. As an expression of the policy thrust of the Interim Government, Economic Policy for
the Transitional Period in 1992 proclaimed a shift toward market orientation, removal of most restrictions
on private sector activities, and liberalization and reforms in sectoral, investment, and public enterpriselaws. The policy also retained some features of the previous regime such as the state ownership of land anddevelopment centered on agriculture and rural areas. The idea of Agricultural Development Led
Industrialization took its concrete shape as an overarching economic strategy between 1992 and 1994, andAn Economic Development Strategy for Ethiopia in February 1994 introduced the term ADLI to define its
strategic direction. These policy features were also manifested in the new constitution which established thehardly remained among changing rival groups (Banno and Ohno 2009). It can be argued that the stability and consistency ofdevelopment policies can better be ensured by the simultaneous pursuit of multiple goals under the flexible structure ofpolitics such as this rather than the pursuit of a single goal under the rigidly confrontational political structure.

15

Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia in August 19954.
The main motivation behind ADLI is the recognition that Ethiopia is predominantly an agrarian society inwhich the bulk of the population, about 86 percent, resides in rural areas earning a livelihood from land.
Agriculture has long dominated the economy in terms of output, employment, and export earnings. The
government emphasizes that economic development and structural transformation should be initiatedthrough robust agricultural growth, and that peasant farmers and pastoralists should constitute the main
agents of economic growth. Labor and land are the main—and abundant—factors of production in thenation and their effective use should generate rapid and sustainable development.
Initially and primarily, ADLI targeted smallholder farms, especially crop producers, so as to achieve rapid
growth in agricultural production, raise income for rural households, attain national food self-sufficiency,
and produce surpluses which could be marketed to the urban or industrial sectors. More specifically, thegovernment was to provide smallholder farmers with technologies and better farming practices, improved
seeds, fertilizers, irrigation, rural roads, and marketing services. A rise in agricultural output was expected
to stimulate industrial production, including the production of consumer goods, thus establishing a supply
link between the rural and urban sector. The industrial sector, in turn, could produce inputs to agriculture
such as fertilizers and farming tools and equipment as well as consumption goods for rural households.
Such dynamic linkage was supposed to ignite the first stage of industrialization before the economy moved
into a higher level of development. Let us call this input-output dependency between the two sectors CoreADLI (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Linkages in Core ADLI

4

During the transition, the first phase of the structural adjustment program was also put in place. On the political front, themulti-party system was introduced to replace the dictatorial military regime of the Derg.

16

What is aimed here is simultaneous increases in output and productivity of both agriculture and industry
under the condition that they are achieved through close input-output interdependence between the two
sectors. In this domestically closed input-output interdependence, the featured industries were agro
processing (including leather products) that uses domestic agricultural inputs as well as agricultural
machinery, chemical fertilizers and pesticides, construction materials, and basic consumer goods such asprocessed food and beverages, clothes, and household goods demanded by rural population.
The Industrial Development Strategy (2002) additionally lists the following conditions under which
industrialization must proceed:(i) The leading role of the private sector(ii) Parallel development of agriculture and industry through mutual dependence (ADLI)(iii) Export orientation(iv) Focus on labor-intensive industries(v) Proper roles of local and FDI enterprises(vi) Strong state guidance(vii) Mobilization of all social groups including government-capitalists, capitalists-small farmers, andlabor-management
We should take special note of the requirements of export orientation and labor-intensiveness. Moreover,the second (ADLI itself) can be re-interpreted as the requirement for the maximum use of domestic
resources. These three are the main requirements for establishment of the linkage between agriculture andindustry. It should also be confirmed that this sectoral linkage is not a permanent one but something thatcan evolve into a new pattern in which industry will take the main lead once the initial stage ofindustrialization is realized. The Industrial Development Strategy clearly states that “[w]hen we say that wefollow agriculture development led industrialization this does not mean that it will be so forever... if
agricultural development led industrialization strategy is successfully applied it will be changed to industry
led development strategy.” (Eng. p.8).
The first expression of ADLI in the form of a medium-term economic program was made in 2002 when thegovernment incorporated the main ideas of ADLI into the poverty reduction strategy paper, or the
Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program (SDPRP) 2002/03-2004/05. This programsought to promote agricultural development and poverty reduction in rural areas by: (i) strengthening
agricultural extension services; (ii) the training of extension agents in Technical Vocational Education andTraining (TVET) and the training of farmers in Farmers Training Centers (FTC); (iii) water harvesting andirrigation; (iv) improved marketing opportunities; (v) restructuring peasant cooperatives; and (vi)supporting micro-finance institutions.

17However, the policymakers came to realize the limitations of the first phase of implementation of ADLI
through SDPRP. By the time the second phase of the program (SDPRP II), more commonly known as A
Plan for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty (PASDEP) 2005/06-2009/10, wasprepared there was sufficient recognition of the problems associated with the agricultural development
strategy which was exclusively rural centered. The productivity in the agricultural sector did not show
significant improvement and output remained volatile because of heavy dependency on the amount andtiming of rainfall. During the 2002/03 season, the output of the crop sub-sector contracted by 16.5 percent
following the decline of 3.7 percent in 2001/02. It was only in 2003/04 that growth in the agricultural sector
and especially the crop sub-sector started to recover significantly. However, from a long-term perspective,
the labor productivity of agriculture has been on a declining trend (World Bank, 2007). Although
agriculture has shown strong performance in recent years thanks to favorable weather, this does notnecessarily reflect a significant structural change in the sector such as crop diversification or productivity
improvement.
PASDEP 2005/06-2009/10 made important adjustments over SDPRP 2002/03-2004/05 as it broadened thepolicy scope from smallholder agriculture to other sectors, especially the industry sector and the urban
sector. In what may be called Enhanced ADLI, strong emphasis was placed on growth acceleration which
was to be attained through the two main thrusts of commercialization of agriculture and private sector
development (PASDEP, Eng. p.46).

5. Issues in ADLIThe greatest question concerning ADLI is whether the proposed strategy is powerful enough to propelindustrialization in Ethiopia to the extent that the policy makers desire. This fundamental question is
discussed in the two subsections below.
(1) Can the ADLI Strategy generate accelrated industrialization?
Following Core ADLI in Figure 4 above, if the ADLI Strategy is interpreted strictly and narrowly as the“strategy to achieve initial industrialization through close input-output linkage between agriculture andindustry as the main engine of growth,” it is difficult to find such an example of economic take-off in East
Asia. Such cases are probably also very rare in the rest of the world.
We do have historical examples in which agriculture grew relatively strongly prior to the period offull-scale industrialization and provided resources for industrialization through taxation and foreignexchange earnings (for example, silk and tea exports in late 19th century Japan, rice and sugar productionin Taiwan up to the 1960s, and the rice export tax of Thailand up to the 1980s). There are also cases inwhich robust agro and fishery exports ameliorated the immiserization of rural communities often associated18

with globalization (for example, fish and shrimp exports of Southeast Asia). Even more positively, some
agro and fishery products may become leading exports and raise income substantially (for example,
Chilean wine and salmon). Agriculture can also serve as an income and employment buffer at the time of
economic crisis (for example, Japan immediately after the WW2 defeat, and absorption of laid-off workers
caused by SOE privatization in Vietnam in the early 1990s). Despite all this, a historical example in which
an industry which predominantly used domestic material inputs has expanded dramatically to become themajor industry of that nation and contributed greatly to the structural transformation and high income isdifficult to find.
Let us be more precise. We are not arguing that industrialization based on the Core ADLI linkage is
impossible. Depending on the choice of sectors and products, the strategy may work well. In fact, theEthiopian leather industry which uses domestic animal hides and skins as inputs to produce finished leather
and leather products has grown rapidly in recent years with the support of the government and donors, andwe expect its growth to continue in the future. What we doubt is not the physical feasibility of Core ADLI
but whether that linkage is strong enough to serve as the main engine to pull the entire economy into
growth acceleration. In our opinion, it may become too difficult to find a sufficient number of economic
locomotives if Ethiopia self-imposes too many restrictions on prospective industries. We would rather
advise that the government examine all options in search for potential industries in its industrialization
strategy.
Let us review the typical industrialization patterns of East Asia in the post WW2 era. In the early post
WW2 period, especially in the 1960s and part of the 1970s, Japan and Korea adopted temporary protection
and promotion of domestic “infant industries” in automobiles, electronics, machinery, metals, andchemicals without relying on FDI. For these industries, direct linkage with domestic agriculture in terms of
input procurement was virtually non-existent. On the other hand, the industrialization strategy adopted by
ASEAN4 (Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, and Indonesia) since the late 1980s consisted of absorbing alarge amount of FDI, mainly in electronics and machinery, to build the industrial base of each economy
while trying to bolster the capability of local firms to create linkages between local firms and FDI firms,
with the former becoming part and component suppliers for the latter. This was FDI-led industrialization inwhich, again, the role of agriculture was minuscule. To put it differently, although agro exports generated
foreign exchange in Taiwan, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, and so on, prior to industrialization,these economies did not rely very much on agriculture as the source of inputs, savings or foreign exchange
once the period of full-scale industrialization began. The only visible linkage with agriculture was theprovision of surplus labor from rural to urban areas. In either case of infant industry protection or FDI-led
industrialization, the industry expanded greatly by active participation in the global production network
spanned by trade and investment, while domestic agriculture followed declining trends in terms of both
output and employment.

19Under such industrialization patterns, agriculture in rural areas tends to lag behind industry in urban areas,
and an income gap between the two emerges as a serious social problem. The main task of policy makers
therefore is to introduce various measures to narrow this gap so that farmers will not be cut off from thefruits of economic development. For this purpose, the following channels can be mobilized: (i)market-driven labor migration from rural to urban areas; (ii) social policies providing housing, education,
traffic order and environmental protection to ameliorate difficulties associated with such migration; (iii)
agricultural subsidies and price controls; (iv) agricultural protection; (v) productive support for inputs, sales,finance, etc. through agricultural cooperatives, extension services, and other organizations; (vi) rural life
improvement movement (discussed in detail below); (vii) fiscal transfer from central to local governments;and (viii) prioritization of public investment in rural areas. Agriculture, as a declining sector, maysometimes even strengthen its political influence. In such a case, the government often continues to offer
agricultural protection--redistribution of benefits from urban industry to rural agriculture--beyond what canbe justified from the principle of economic efficiency (for example, the Liberal Democratic Party
government in Japan since 1955 and the support and protection of agriculture in Korea since the 1960s).

Figure 5. Resource Transfers between Agriculture and Industry(Other than Linkages in Core ADLI)

Note: These transfers may be carried out directly, through fiscal mechanisms, or through the financial sector.

For landlocked countries in Africa, including Ethiopia, the industrialization strategies adopted by East
Asian countries--both infant industry protection and FDI-led industrialization--are infeasible. For one thing,
there are few domestic enterprises or industries that can become strong enough in the near future tocompete effectively in the global market without protection. For another, it is also unthinkable that asufficiently large amount of manufacturing FDI will come to form a solid industrial base for thesecountries.

20

The development strategy of Ethiopia, while maintaining Core ADLI at its center, should also encompass
sectors and products which do not necessarily fulfill all of the requirements and links that are considereddesirable. Industrialization is a hard task for any landlocked latecomer country. The policy space ofEthiopia is already circumscribed by a number of historical, natural and international constraints. There isno need to self-impose additional restrictions which further narrows the policy space for development. The
framework of Core ADLI should be interpreted as the statement that agriculture and industry are given
equal importance in development and the urban and rural areas are both targeted; that the development of
one sector will not be pursued at the cost of the other; and that the state will continue to have strong interestin the improvement of income and livelihood of small farmers. What must be guarded with resolve is thegoal and not the means to achieve that goal.
If this is agreeable, the following implementation rules may be added to the ADLI Strategy without
re-drafting its key documents5.
(i) The two-track approach: close input-output relationship between agriculture and industry is ideal,
but that should not be demanded for each concrete sector or product to be targeted. In principle, theagricultural development strategy and the industrialization strategy should be separable. Agriculturaland rural development strategies may be formulated without direct linkage with industry, and thepolicy menu for industrialization can include strategies without strong agricultural impact such as FDI
absorption, the use of imported inputs for manufacturing, and the creation of industrial zones andclusters in the vicinity of Addis Ababa.
(ii) Flexible application of policy requirements: as noted above, the implementation of ADLI calls forexport orientation, maximum use of domestic resources, and labor-intensiveness. These conditions
should be applied flexibly and case by case. It is highly desirable to meet all these conditions, but the
search for target industries may include sectors and products which only partially satisfy them.
(iii) Resource mobilization based on selectivity and concentration: considering the limited financial
and human resources, the strategy to simultaneously improve a large number of sectors and products
should be avoided. While the net must be cast widely to catch as many good fish as possible,
assistance should be given to narrowly focused target areas selected from a broad menu. The selectionof targets must be backed by appropriate information and analysis. For selected industries, sufficientfinancial and human resources should be provided, international cooperation should be mobilized, andmanagement and technical assistance should be made available for a reasonable amount of time. The
leather industry is already promoted in this way, but the approach should be applied to other sectors.
5

These recommendations were made by the GRIPS researchers at the first JICA-GRIPS policy dialogue with the Ethiopian
Government organized in Addis Ababa on June 2, 2009. However, as reported in section 6 below, it was discovered that the
movement toward broadening the policy scope for industrialization was already underway in the Ethiopian Government andthe donor community, and that its general direction was roughly in line with our proposal.

21

(2) Feasibility of productivity breakthrough by small farmers
Whether smallholder subsistence farmers, who are the dominant majority as well as the chosen coalition
partner of the developmental state, can be commercialized and improve productivity and income is themost fundamental question to both DD and ADLI. From the experiences of East Asia, we must conclude
that such a strategy is extremely difficult to realize in the short run.
As seen in Section 3, to secure political support of small farmers what is needed is to engender a perceptionthat the government is a positive factor--or at least not a negative one--in their livelihood. But DD and
ADLI can not succeed with that alone. The grand objective of DD and ADLI is to transform the principle ofthe national economy from a zero-sum game to a sustained increase of the pie (GDP) for which thelong-term stability of the developmental state is only the means. If the productivity of agriculture does not
improve, the state will eventually face fiscal crisis and aid dependency. If developmentalism only results inthe buying of rural votes through redistribution of benefits, it must be considered a failure.
The first question we must ask, therefore, is whether it is possible at all for small farmers in Ethiopia to
become commercialized and improve productivity significantly. If that is feasible, then we must ask thedetails as to what should be targeted in terms of players, regions, crops, technologies and markets, whatroadmaps should be designed, and what policies and institutions are needed. The Ethiopian policy
document states that agriculture should be the growth engine in the early stage of development, and thatpoor farmers must be supported to become independent commercialized farmers. But is this really possible
within the time frame envisaged by the Ethiopian leaders? We must scrutinize and debate, with concrete
details, the appropriateness and performance of the existing policy package that includes PASDEP, masterplans, and donor assistance programs.
In Northern and Central Highlands where the majority of the Ethiopians reside, small farmers are scatteredacross vast mountainous terrains with often very difficult road access. They live on what they produce withlittle external sale or purchase. The supply of electricity, drinking water, and hygiene is absent or severely
limited. Agriculture basically depends on the whims of rainfall, the use of fertilizer is inadequate, and thearable plot of each family is very small which is being further subdivided under population pressure. In
Southeastern Dry Land, pastoralists lead nomadic lives. The productivity breakthrough from such initialconditions is a very long-term endeavor.
For these reasons, it becomes necessary to review the practicability of maintaining the development
strategy that centers on the transformation of small farmers into independent commercialized farmers withexpected productivity improvement. The present Ethiopian agricultural strategy features both smallholder
agriculture as future suppliers of commercialized crops and industrial materials as well as capitalist
22

agriculture with sufficient technology and large investments (for example, flowers) 6. For DD and ADLI,
the success of the former is particularly important. But that may be too difficult to realize in a relatively
short period as the policy makers hope. Even if productivity gains may be made, linking small farmers
immediately and directly to urban or international markets or the industrial sector may be unrealistic. It
may be too demanding to ask them to strictly abide by the stable quality, high hygienic standards, mass
production, and on-time delivery required by urban or global industries.
The problem of small farmers is not only a supply-side problem concerning agricultural production but alsoa quality-of-life problem that must be solved through poverty reduction through empowerment. The policy
package for small farmers must therefore cover a wide range of measures including: (i) support forpurchases, sales, finance, commodity exchanges, etc. for commercialization of agriculture; (ii) supply-side
assistance in technology, irrigation, seeds, fertilizer, farming practices, etc; (iii) rural infrastructure such as
roads and electricity; (iv) rural industrialization and rural service promotion for generating non-farmincome and employment; (v) the “rural life improvement movement” targeted to the daily life of farmers;(vi) service delivery in education, health, potable water, etc. for achieving MDGs; and (vii) provision offood security and social safety nets in times of drought and famine.
A large number of assistance programs are already available to Ethiopian farmers and rural communities.
However, the rural life improvement movement ((v) above) is not introduced yet. This overlaps partly with
globally common MDGs-related support ((vi) above) but is distinct from it as it emphasizes the role ofmundane activities at the grass-root level. Mizuno (2008) warns that the mainstream strategy for ruraldevelopment is inclined too much toward supply-side agricultural support through improved technology
and inputs while underestimating the importance of multi-faceted improvements of rural life quality such as
meals, clothing, housing, hygiene, social relations, and the like. Rural development from a very low levelmust embrace both the productive aspect and the life quality aspect as the two indispensable wheels ofdevelopment. The works of extension experts must be supplemented by those of rural life improvement
experts. Mizuno cites the experience of Japan immediately after the WW2 as one of the most successful
cases of rural life improvement movement.
After the war defeat, Japan was occupied by the Allied Forces. In 1848, under the direction of the General
Head Quarters of the Allied Forces, the Ministry of Agriculture launched the “Life Improvement andDissemination Movement.” In parallel with the policy of the central government, many local governments
such as Yamaguchi Prefecture and Kagoshima Prefecture introduced similar programs with great
enthusiasm. This movement, though originally started by top-down order from above, encouraged
grass-root activities with strong participation at the village level. Life improvement dissemination staff

6
An Economic Development Strategy for Ethiopia of 1994, drafted in the formation period of ADLI, clearly distinguishedsubsistence farming and capitalist commercial agriculture, and discussed separate supporting measures for each. SDPRP
2002/03 mainly focussed on the former but PASDEP 2005/06 resurrected the interest in both sectors.

23

consisting of rural women were organized. They took the lead in conducting a broad range of activities toimprove cooking, nutrition and meals; clothing, bedding and footwear; cleaning, washing, water carrying,and other domestic chores; child raising and training; wedding, funeral and other ceremonies; public
morals; and elimination of superstition and feudal habits. Regular meetings were held with the participationof all village households where issues were debated and consensus were formed. Life improvement
dissemination staff were sent to Tokyo and other cities for training. Universities and research institutions
offered technology and information for this movement. Government officials and village staff also try tosolve problems arising from complex social relations in rural communities such as the increase of absentees
in planting and harvesting seasons, the feudal concept of family, and the lack of cooperation from husbands
and mothers-in-law. In addition, during the 1950s and 60s, similar programs, such as the “New Life
Movement” to improve both production and life quality aspects, the “Life without Mosquitoes and Flies
Movement” initiated by the Ministry of Welfare, were implemented nationwide with close cooperation
between government officials and village staff (Ikeno, 2008).
In view of these considerations, we propose the following restructuring of the agriculture and ruraldevelopment strategy. Multiple goals and corresponding measures should be re-arranged more strategicallyinstead of listing a large number of supply-side measures for simultaneous implementation.
(i) There should be two pillars consisting of supply-side measures regarding productivity andcommercialization and quality-of-life measures regarding MDGs and improvements in daily life. For
the latter, the concrete content of “rural life improvement movement” explained above may serve as a
useful reference.
(ii) Concerning the time dimension, there is no need to constrain the scope of each strategy to the
PASDEP cycle of five years. There should be multiple roadmaps appropriate for individual goals. The
challenging task of enhancing productivity, commercialization, and input-output linkage with industry
should be pursued in realistic steps with a long-term perspective. Other goals, such as building rural
infrastructure and promoting rural industrialization, which may also take long and are subjected tofinancial and technical constraints, may have different time scopes. For quality-of-life improvements,
some measures may be front-loaded and the deadline of MDGs (the year 2015) must be also taken into
account.
(iii) Regarding the strategy of commercializing and improving the productivity of smallholder
agriculture, for which immediate linkage with the industry sector and urban and global markets isdifficult, the policy menu should be broadened to include “closer” targets. For example, the following
directions should be seriously considered: (i) expansion and diversification of agro and livestock
products for local markets (nearby cities, towns, and villages); (ii) promotion of tourism; (iii)
production of local specialties (raw or processed agro and livestock products or handicrafts unique to24the locality); (iv) introduction of the “one-village-one-product” approach or the “michi-no-eki”(roadside stores to sell local products and serve local food) approach; and (v) improvement oftechnology, management, and the use of agricultural inputs through the network of extension experts
which was strongly enhanced in recent years.

6. The broadening of policy scope for industrialization
Our argument that Ethiopia’s industrialization strategy should be more diverse and flexible, as presented in
section 5-(1) above, has in fact been already studied by the Ethiopian Government and also recommended
by the World Bank and a number of American economists. If this policy direction is realized, that will meanan even greater revision of industrialization strategy than Enhanced ADLI adopted in 2005/06 when thecurrent PASDEP was drafted. Such a policy shift should certainly be written into the next PASDEP.
(1) The directional change of development policy
As noted above, ADLI, which is the basic framework for Ethiopia’s development strategy, has been revisedand expanded in steps. The SDPRP, implemented from 2002/03, provided production support measures forsmall farmers as Core ADLI dictated. Starting from 2005/06, PASDEP recognized the limits of policies thattargeted small farmers only and therefore expanded the policy space from agriculture and export-oriented
industries to private sector development and commercialization of agriculture as well. The Industrial
Development Strategy in 2002 selected food processing, leather, and garment as the priority sectors (it also
selected construction and micro and small enterprises as targeted areas).
More recently, a further enlargement of the scope of development policy is being discussed. Specifically,
there is an emerging interest in promoting import substitution industries such as construction materials(steel, cement, glass, and so on), metal processing and engineering, chemicals, and pharmaceuticals. This
movement is recognizable in discussions within the Government as well as among development partners.
The Ethiopian Government regards this as a “shift in emphasis within the same fundamental policy”
whereas the World Bank calls this a directional change in development policy. At this moment, however,this movement points only to a general direction without concrete principles, roadmaps, or action plans.
Specifying these will be the task of the drafting and implementation processes of the next PASDEP.
One minister of the Ethiopian Government stated that this “shift in emphasis” (the introduction of importsubstitution policy) had been discussed within the Government for about two years. Others say that thischange was suggested by Prof. Joseph Stiglitz of Columbia University who often advises Prime Minister
Meles, Prof. Dani Rodrik of Harvard University who visited Ethiopia at the invitation of the World Bank,or Dr. Justin Lin the chief economist of the World Bank. Still others speculate that this policy shift wasforced by the need to reduce imports under the severe foreign exchange shortage that Ethiopia has been25

facing since 2008. The truth is hard to pinpoint, but we can for the moment presume that the policy revisionpreviously contemplated by the Government has become more visible with the receipt of external policy
advice along the same line. At any rate, it is remarkable that import substitution strategy, whose validity
used to be summarily denied by Washington institutions, is now strongly recommended to Ethiopia by theWorld Bank and American economists7.
Let us look at the section entitled “Refining the industrial policy strategy” in Rodrik’s note prepared for his
visit to Ethiopia at the request of the World Bank in December 2008. It argues that, while Ethiopia’s
first-generation industrial policies had borne some fruit, especially in the floriculture sector, there is a needto move towards second-generation industrial policies that aim at both home market and exports. Simply
put, the existing industrial policy of Ethiopia consists of a short list of priority sectors which receive avariety of incentives. According to Rodrik, this narrow approach to industrialization has two limits:
One is that many potentially successful sectors are almost certainly not on the list. There arepotentially hundreds of different products in which Ethiopia can be competitive; yet it is hard to
think of all of them ex ante. The most successful sector to date, floriculture, is a case in point.
This is a sector that was brought to the government’s attention—and made the priority
list—only after private entrepreneurs had done the initial discovery and had come to thegovernment for assistance. It is easy to imagine that there are many such industries thatgovernment policy fails to target simply because they are not in its list. At present, there is no
mechanism in place to actively solicit “new” investment projects that may lie outside thepriority list.
Second, the assistance needed by investors may be highly specific to the needs of the project ina way that makes it impossible to specify ex ante. Cheap land and holidays on profits taxes may
suit some investors just fine; but others may have different needs. One firm may need relief on
payroll taxes, another from tariffs on inputs, and a third may want the relaxation of someregulation or legislation. In at least one instance, the prime minister has helped a large pioneer
investor by agreeing to change a regulation (on qualification for DBE loans). But problems
such as these are common at all levels, and it is unrealistic to expect that the PM himself canattend to them all. There is currently no mechanism in place to respond to such needs
systematically. (Rodrik, 2008, pp.5-6)
For these reasons, Rodrik proposes the following six revisions to Ethiopian industrialization strategy: (i)broadening policy scope to include more sectors; (ii) supporting “new” activities for Ethiopia rather thanexports; (iii) recognition that mistakes are both unavoidable and necessary; (iv) broadening the list ofpolicy instruments; (v) giving incentives and subsidies to “pioneers” only and not emulators; and (vi)enhancement of lines of communication and coordination with the private sector. Finally, he adds that
7
The World Bank Executive Board approved the Protection of Basic Services (PBS) II, a budget support type program, forEthiopia in May 2009 with the condition that the “directional change” mentioned above be monitored for implementation.
The PBS I (2006-08), the precursor to this program, was initiated by re-organizing existing general budget support. PBS II
will strengthen the delivery of basic services of local governments through budget support in the three year period of 2009-11.
IDA will provide a total of $540 million ($309.78 million of grants and $230.22 million of loans) and 12 other donors will
supplement it with an additional $737 million.

26

success depends on the change in mindset in which industrial policy is regarded as a process ofcollaboration and problem-solving with the private sector rather than increasing the number of incentives orthe volume of exports.
On the other hand, high level policy authorities of the Ethiopian Government at the GRIPS-JICA policy
dialogue explained that the expansion of policy scope from exports to import substitution was in tandemwith the accumulation of policy skill and knowledge on the part of the Government. Ethiopia overcame aseries of political and diplomatic problems and began to concentrate on the formulation of development
policies around 2002/03. At that time, the Government did not have sufficient knowledge or resources to
conduct full-fledged industrial policies. Under such circumstances, the authorities decided to direct limited
policy capabilities to supporting three export-oriented industries by providing incentives and monitoring
their monthly export performance. Admittedly, this is a very narrow definition of industrial policy. The
policy intention was to concentrate on the building of a few export industries as the leading sectors which
would have positive economic impact on other sectors as well as allow the Government to study theknowhow of private sector assistance. While the competitiveness of selected exports still falls short of the
expectation of the Government, many things have been achieved. In particular, the export growth of fresh
flowers and leather products has been remarkable although from a very low base.

27

References
Aoki, Masahiko (1995a), Keizai System no Shinka to Tagensei: Hikaku Seido Bunseki Josetsu [TheEvolution and Diversity of Economic Systems: An Introduction to Comparative Institutional Analysis],
Toyo Keizai, Tokyo (Japanese).
Aoki, Masahiko (1995b), “Controlling Insider Control: Issues of Corporate Governance in Transition
Economies,” chapter 1, M. Aoki and H.K. Kim (eds.), Corporate Governance in Transitional Economies:
Insider Control and the Role of Banks, World Bank Economic Development Institute.
Aoki, Masahiko (2001), Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis, MIT Press.
Banno, Junji, and Kenichi Ohno (2009), “The Flexible Structure of the Meiji Revolution,” manuscript for
the Leaders, Elites and Coalitions Project, York University and AusAid.
Edigheji, Omano (2005), “A Democratic Developmental State in Africa? A Concept Paper,” Research
Report 105, Centre for Policy Studies, Johannesburg, May.
GRIPS Development Forum (ed) (2008), Diversity and Complementarity in Development Aid: East Asian
Lessons for African Growth, GRIPS, Tokyo.
Ikeno, Masafumi (2008), “The Rural Sociological Perspective of Rural Development in Postwar Japan,”chapter 3, M. Mizuno and H. Sato eds, Kaitatsu to Noson: Noson-Kaihatsuron Saiko [Development in
Rural Society: Rethinking Rural Development], Institute of Developing Economies, JETRO.
Ishikawa, Shigeru (1990), “Underdevelopment of the Market Economy and the Limits of Economic
28

Liberalization,” chapter 7, S. Ishikawa, Kaihatsu Keizaigaku no Kihon Mondai [Basic Issues in
Development Economics], Iwanami Shoten, Tokyo. English translation in Ohno and Ohno (1998).
Khan, Mushtaq H. (2008), “Governance and Development: The Perspective of Growth-enhancing
Governance,” chapter 4, GRIPS Development Forum (2008).
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, second edition, University of Chicago
Press, Chicago.
Lakatos, I. (1970), “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes,” I. Lakatos andA. Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge University Press, London.
Leftwich, Adrian (2005), “Democracy and Development: Is There Institutional Incompatibility?”
Democratization, vol.12, no.5, pp.686-703.
Meles, Zenawi (2006), “Speech by HE Meles Zenawi,” First Meeting of the Africa ask Force, IPD,
Manchester University, UK, August. Quoable?
Meles, Zenawi (2008), “African Development: Dead Ends and New Beginnings,” Preliminary draft not for
quotation, IPD website?
Mizuno, Masami (2008), “Noson Kaihatsuron no Tenkai to Kadai” [Evolution and Issues in Rural
Development Theory], chapter 1, M. Mizuno and H. Sato eds, Kaitatsu to Noson: Noson-Kaihatsuron Saiko[Development in Rural Society: Rethinking Rural Development], Institute of Developing Economies,
JETRO.
Nishimura, Yoshiaki (1994), “Russian Privatization: Progress Report No.1,” Keizai Kenkyu [Economic
Review], Institute of Economic Research, vol.45, no.3, pp.203-217, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, July,.
English translation in Ohno and Ohno (1998)..
Ohno, Kenichi (2009), The Middle Income Trap: Implications for Industrialization Strategies in East Asia
and Africa, GRIPS Development Forum, Tokyo.
Ohno, Kenichi, and Izumi Ohno (eds.) (1998), Japanese Views on Economic Development: Diverse Paths
to the Market, Routledge, London.
Ohno, Kenichi, and Kojiro Sakurai (1997), Higashi Asia no Kaihatsu Keizaigaku [Development Economics
of East Asia], Yuhikaku, Tokyo (Japanese).
Robinson, M. and G. White (eds.) (1998), The Democratic Developmental State: Politics and Institutional
Design, Oxford University Press, New York.
Watanabe, Toshio (1995), Shinseiki Asia no Koso [Designing Asia for the Next Century], Chikuma Shinsho,
Tokyo (Japanese). Partial English translation in Ohno and Ohno (1998).
World Bank (1959), A Public Development Program for Thailand, Report of a Mission organized by the
IBRD at the request of the Government of Thailand, Johns Hopkins Press.

29

World Bank (1993), The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy, Oxford University
Press.
World Bank (2007), Ethiopia: Accelerating Equitable Growth, Country Economic Memorandum,
Washington, DC.

30