Archives
-
The Serendipitous Practice of Neoclassical Economics-Modern Neoclassical Technologies
ISBN 978-93-90768-77-6 (Print)
ISBN 978-93-90768-81-3 (eBook)
DOI: 10.9734/bpi/mono/978-93-90768-77-6In 2000, the United Nations set eight Millennium Development Goals (SDGs), which are supposed to be met by 2015. These goals are to halve between 1990 and 2015 the proportion of the population whose income is less than $ 1 and who suffers from hunger; Primary School for all; Elimination of gender disparities; The two-thirds reduction between 1990 and 2015 in the mortality rate for children under five; The reduction of three quarters between 1990 and 2015 in the maternal mortality rate; Stopping the spread of AIDS, tuberculosis and other diseases; The development of a multidimensional environment allowing access to drinking water, respect for the environment and the disappearance of slums and the establishment of an international partnership for development.
To achieve these objectives, countries must develop programs defining policies to fight poverty. The development of these finalized programs in documents called "Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers" (PRSP) is the necessary prerequisite for the granting of aid. These documents should indeed make it possible to coordinate the action of the various donors and national authorities within the framework of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). PRSPs thus constitute the reference documents for concessional lending and debt relief operations under the Heavily Indebted Countries Initiative (HIPC).
Today, around forty SSA countries have drawn up PRSPs which must be governed by three main principles: They must be led by the countries with the broad involvement of civil society; they must be comprehensive, recognizing the multidimensional character of poverty; they must be carried out on the basis of partnership by bringing together national administrations, civil society and external donors.
However, a development policy based on PRSPs raises a fundamental question asked by Mr Kcodgoh Edgeweblime: who should ultimately decide on the Program to be implemented and its funding?
Currently, PRSPs must be endorsed by IMF and World Bank boards and accepted by national governments following consultation with civil society. In this process it is obvious that the multilateral organizations have the last word since it is they who provide the funding. However, their objective remains to a large extent to ensure the major macroeconomic equilibrium(isotonic state or the real state of all things)s, the reduction of poverty remaining subordinate to this priority objective. On the other hand, there is the question of who speaks on behalf of the poorest Africans. Different administrations, unions and associations often have different views on the priority objectives to be achieved and are not always informed of the macroeconomic constraints and the opportunity costs of the different programs. The rare surveys conducted among the poorest households often show large differences between what they ask for and what is retained by the administration. For example, the poorest may ask that land be allocated to them, particularly in urban areas, that the State directly create jobs or that the corruption of small officials be attacked, all objectives that are generally not retained by the authorities in the definition of PRSPs. On the other hand, the objective of price stability which is always mentioned in the PRSPs rarely remains a demand of the poorest. In addition, there are very divergent demands between the different categories of the population, for example between urban populations who demand a drop in food prices, including through recourse to imports, and rural people who demand that the prices of food products be reassessed. Looking at most PRSPs does not provide a clear answer on such a fundamental point.
Go further. No one can dispute the urgent need to meet the Millennium Development Goals, to make creation reach the poorest, and to mobilize resources for SSA. But these goals are only goals. They cannot define a development policy, let alone a strategy, since their implementation relies on aid from the international community. They tell us nothing about how African countries should fit into international trade, what priorities should be given to agriculture or industrialization, and the national coordination of different policies. In this regard, the PRSPs to which multilateral organizations constantly refer cannot be considered as the development of strategies but as the way in which the financial flows granted by the international community will be spent.
In these conditions, the fundamental question should be how to move from an economy that is very dependent on the outside to an economy capable of generating a process of autonomous creation. However, by considering only the problems of combating poverty, the new international consensus based on the SDGs remains silent on this fundamental question. Even if the financial flows promised by the international community are effectively devoted to the fight against poverty, even if the Millennium Development Goals are achieved, there is a great risk that African economies will remain tossed around in line with the price of raw materials once financial flows withdrawn. We can even consider that the diversion of financial flows to the social sector risks weakening the development of other sectors (such as infrastructure) calling into question the foundations of long-term development.
Gerard GRELLET
Professor, University of Paris I Panthéon Sorbonne
