A comparative study of governance and state development in post-colonial Botswana and Zaire/ DRC
Esterhuyse, Harrie Willie (2012-03)
ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The aim of this research was to explore the interaction between governance and development in post-colonial Africa. The departure point of the thesis was the understanding that the state remains a pre-eminent actor in the international system. Keeping this assumption in mind, the study made use of a comparative analysis; comparing governance and development in Botswana with governance and development in Zaire/the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), focusing on the post-colonial era. The importance of this research lies in its contribution to the debate on the role of the state in post-colonial Africa. It explores the influence of institution formation and policy implementation by governments (in other words, governance) on development. Understanding the effect of governance on development can have invaluable lessons for other African states in their efforts to develop further. The research question, which guided the thesis thus, was: in the era of the pre-eminence of the state, making use of a comparison between Botswana and Zaire/DRC, what is the influence and effect, of state institution formation and policy implementation (governance) by governments, on state development in terms of economical-, political- and social development?
The two main variables were governance and development. Development was sub-divided into three indicators: political, economic and social development. Governance was evaluated in terms of being seen as poor or good governance, as per the World Bank’s definition and understanding of governance. Zaire/DRC, as an example of a failed state, was analysed first, followed by Botswana, selected for its arguably “best practice” experience. For each country the analysis was subdivided into three phases as per the theoretical framework of Chazan, Lewis, Mortimer, Rothchild, and Stedman’s book, Politics and Society in Contemporary Africa (1999). Their book describes three stages of change in African state development in the post-colonial era (Chazan-framework). This framework uses the Chazan-framework and thus subdivides the post-colonial era into: the concentration (centralisation) phase, the elaboration phase, and finally the reconsideration of state power phase.
The research found that Zaire/DRC followed a process of state collapse in the post-colonial era, whereas in sharp contrast Botswana experienced positive state development. Since independence Zaire continuously practised poor governance whilst Botswana largely practiced good governance. This was true in all three phases of the Chazan-framework. At the same time, or perhaps due to poor governance, Zaire continuously experienced negative development in all three development categories whilst Botswana continuously experienced positive development in all three development categories, again perhaps due to good governance. The research concludes that even though Botswana is not necessarily an example of a perfect state, it is special in an African context, because of its good governance record. This study does not draw direct relationships between good governance and development, but finds that Botswana probably benefited greatly in development due to the implementation of good institutions, good government policies and general good governance. The research also found that states benefit when their governments practice and adopt policies that are anti-corruption, pro-democracy, pro-competition, pro public-private partnerships, and pro market-orientated economics. In addition, the following are also conducive to good governance: leadership with integrity, peaceful and regular leadership changes, clear distinction between government (party) and the state, and empowered government oversight institutions that act, even against the government itself when needed. The practice of good governance is thus shown to be supportive of long-term development.
AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van hierdie navorsing was om die interaksie tussen regering en ontwikkeling in post-koloniale Afrika te ondersoek. Die tesis gaan uit vanuit die oogpunt dat die staat steeds ‘n dominante akteur in die internasionale stelsel is. Die studie het gebruik gemaak van ‘n vergelykende ontleding. Regeringstyl en ontwikkeling in post-koloniale Afrika is met mekaar vergelyk. Die vergelyking is getrek tussen Botswana en Zaïre/Demokratiese Republiek van die Kongo (DRK). Die belangrikheid van die navorsing lê in die bydrae tot die debat oor die rol van die staat in Afrika in die post-koloniale era. Dit bekyk die belangrikheid van instellingskepping en beleids-implementering (met ander woorde, regeerstyl of regering) deur regerings in terme van invloed op die ontwikkeling van state in Afrika. Beter begrip van hierdie verhouding kan waardevolle lesse bevat vir ander Afrikastate in hul pogings om verder te ontwikkel. Die navorsingsvraag wat die tesis gelei het was dus: in die era van die voorrang van die staat, en deur gebruikmaking van ‘n vergelykende studie tussen Botswana en Zaïre/DRK, wat is die invloed en effek van staatsinstelling-vorming en van beleids-implementering (regering) deur regerings, op staatsontwikkeling in terme van ekonomiese-, politieke- en sosiale ontwikkeling?
In hierdie studie was regering en ontwikkeling die twee belangrikste veranderlikes gewees. Ontwikkeling is onderverdeel in drie aanwysers: politieke, ekonomiese en maatskaplike ontwikkeling. Regering is geëvalueer in terme van wat gesien word as swak of goeie regering, volgens die Wêreldbank se definisie en begrip van goeie regering. Zaïre/DRK is eerste as ‘n voorbeeld van 'n mislukte staat ontleed, gevolg deur Botswana, gekies vir sy veronderstelde "beste praktyk"-ervaring. Die analise vir elk van hierdie lande is onderverdeel in drie fases, soos gebaseer op die teoretiese raamwerk van Chazan, Lewis, Mortimer, Rothchild, en Stedman in, Politics and Society in Contemporary Africa (1999) (die Chazan-raamwerk). Hierdie raamwerk onderverdeel die post-koloniale era in: die konsentrasiefase (sentraliseringsfase), die uitbreidingsfase en uiteindelik die fase van die heroorweging van staatsmag.
Die navorsing bevind dat Zaïre 'n proses van ineenstorting van die staat in die post-koloniale era ervaar het, terwyl Botswana in skrille kontras positiewe staatsontwikkeling ervaar het. Hierdie tendens was aanwesig in al drie fases van die Chazan-raamwerk. Sedert onafhanklikheid het Botswana ook goeie regering toegepas terwyl Zaïre/DRK meestal swak regering toegepas het. Terselfdertyd, dalk ook weens swak regering, het Zaïre/DRK voortdurend negatiewe ontwikkeling ervaar in al drie van die ontwikkelings kategorieë, terwyl Botswana voortdurend, moontlik te danke goeie regering, positiewe ontwikkeling in al drie die ontwikkelingskategorieë ervaar het. Die navorsing kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat, selfs al is Botswana nie noodwendig ‘n voorbeeld van 'n perfekte staat nie, dit steeds weens ‘n goeie regeringstradisie, uniek is in Afrika-konteks. Alhoewel hierdie studie nie 'n direkte verhouding tussen goeie regering en ontwikkeling probeer bevestig het nie, bevind dit wel dat Botswana moontlik in terme van ontwikkeling, weens die implementering van goeie instellings, goeie regeringsbeleid en algemene goeie regering, baie voordeel getrek het. Die navorsing bevind ook dat state voordeel trek wanneer hul regerings beleid aanvaar en toepas wat teen korrupsie is, maar wat demokratiese ideale, markkompetisie, openbare-private vennootskappe en markgeoriënteerde ekonomiese aktiwiteite bevorder. Goeie regering word ook bevorder deur leierskap met integriteit, vreedsame en gereelde verandering van leierskap, duidelike onderskeid tussen die regering (party) en die staat, sowel as nie-regeringsinstellings met die mag om as oorsigliggame oor die regering te funksioneer. Die praktyk van goeie regering blyk dus langtermyn staatsontwikkeling te bevoordeel en te ondersteun.
Please refer to this item in SUNScholar by using the following persistent URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/20182
This item appears in the following collections: Masters Degrees (Political Science)286