25 May 2009
African nations which expand their political freedoms also reduce poverty, according to a major new study published today.
In a survey of selected countries across the continent, the study also finds that between 2000 and 2008, poverty decreased in Cape Verde, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Zambia but grew in Benin, Botswana, Madagascar, Nigeria, Senegal and Zimbabwe.
The study was carried out by the Afrobarometer Network, a coalition of research institutions from Benin, Ghana and South Africa, working with partners in the countries surveyed.
In a briefing paper entitled "Poverty Reduction, Economic Growth and Democratization in Sub-Saharan Africa," the network released findings based on an index of what it calls "lived poverty" - poverty as judged by what basic necessities respondents to a survey have had to do without.
It found that in every country, survey respondents most commonly reported a shortage of cash income, followed by shortages of medical care, food, clean water and cooking fuel.
Calculating changes in 19 individual countries over time, it compared respondents' experiences in accessing water, food and medical treatment. Overall, poverty dropped, the study found, but there were wide variations between countries.
"Lived poverty remains extensive," the study concluded. "While most Afrobarometer countries have managed to reduce... [it], others have allowed it to increase."
Narrowing its calculations to a 10-country survey, the study said the largest reductions in poverty between 2000 and 2008 had occurred in Zambia, Namibia, South Africa, Ghana, Lesotho and Malawi.
And the study said although Africa's wealthiest countries tended to have lower levels of lived poverty, this did not always apply. Rural Africans experienced more poverty than did urban communities, while in South Africa blacks experienced poverty at three times the rate of whites.
While differences between countries in national wealth and economic growth helped explain the findings, it added, "lived poverty is strongly related to... measures of political freedom, and changes in poverty are related to changes in freedom...
"The more a country expanded political liberties and political rights in a given period, the more it reduced poverty during the same period.
"As political freedom has increased in Zambia and Ghana between 1999 and 2008, levels of poverty have come down steadily. On the other hand, as political freedom decreased in Zimbabwe, Senegal and Madagascar, lived poverty has steadily increased."
Read the full briefing paper [PDF]>>
Read the Afrobarometer press release>>
Read comments. Write your own.
Copyright © 2009 allAfrica.com. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
Allafrica.com may be up to something here, as usual, if it means "more wealth" for the few and perhaps larger gaps between the mega-rich and the mega-poor of the world. Unless Zuma does something about it pronto, to redeem the land issue, South Africans may end up like Zimbabweans of recent. Even the 4th US President - James Madison, also a primary framer of the US Constitution, wrote 'Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and conflict; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." The greatest hoax of the past few decades postulated by western politicians and media that tell Africans that oppressed people crave "democracy" and that only a democratic world would be free and peaceful, was primarily designed to counter communism and socialism of the cold-war era. Alas, are freedom and democracy the same thing? Does democracy imposed by force guarantee peace (a la Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan) or by deceit (a la "Nigeria will break up by 2015 unless "power' goes back to the North" - US Ambassador to the UN, Negroponte)? The word "democracy" does not appear in either the Declaration of Independence or the US Constitution. Instead, Article IV, Section 4 of the US Constitution guarantees, "to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government” yet it allow the enslavement of fellow human beings by another while the Declaration of Independence states that “We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Well, tell that to the locals of Niger Delta and see what democracy has done to them in the hands of Shell and Chevron using its slave drivers (Nigerian govt.) to whip (kill in the hundreds) the slaves into ship-shape lines. A more recent form of slavery that we see today is in the form of economic enslavement of Africans by other multinational enterprises like Firestone, Halliburton, and white-owned large-scale farmlands of Southern Africa that pretend to operate under the guise of capitalists democracy and obedience to the master while they tout the ‘achievement” of their house Slave – Ghana - as role model of an obedient slave. The Master is coming, you better behave or else you get 10 lashes. Ride On, Shamocrazy!
It makes sense that political freedom does mean or brings more wealth to the country that has attained that position. Freedom must be cherished by all and it has to come from within. Countries like Zimbabwe that have had authoritarian rule under mugabe scared local investors and there was flight of capital and foreign currency. But, just because a country is liberating it's markets does not mean that money should not be spent on education, helping native farmers and selling fertilizer at below market values to local native farmers. Malawi ignored market forces and gave fertilizers and other inputs to native farmers and the results were far better than what a market economy could produce.
I think it is also very important we do not define "Political Freedom" as a gov't that agrees always with the western world. It certainly should not mean that African countries should have agreed to the foolish bastard war in Iraq or USA stand on Isreal. Political freedom also means the ability to disagree with western countries.
" It makes sense that political freedom does mean or brings more wealth to the country that has attained that position. .."
Tell us about that "sense". [One may propose that the USA and UK - and indeed the countries of Europe - "bring more wealth" into their countries through worldwide age-old network of plunder of resources. 'Political freedoms' bringing wealth? (Threaten to) Cut off the west's access to Africa's resources and there will be war - immediate, bloody, desperate, vicious, sustained. Pretext? As in the case of Iraq, perhaps imagined WMDs will exist in all of Africa.]
Again we don't know the full extent of what is meant by "political freedom(democratization) here. Was there "political freedom(democratization) in the former USSR? If not, were the people living in poverty then?And do we find it in the current Russia - and are people there now living in affluence?
So we may no know how it "brings more wealth". Economists may explain what they mean by "creating wealth" but how does "political freedom(democratization)" "bring more wealth"? Explain this with respect to one of the world's richest countries, resource-wise - NIGERIA.
[Note: The natives in the Niger delta of Nigeria want a democratic say in the plunder of their resource wealth and for that, eh, impertinence they are being killed like flies - by the foreign promoters of democracy and their local lackeys.]
In lieu of the rhodie "experts" at AllAfrica suggesting that Africans are different, the conclusion should hold everywhere. Can a reduction of poverty in a country occur in the absence of "political freedoms(democratization)" approved by, and advantageous to, the grabby west?
"Strong correlation"?
If it is true, as rhodies would have it, that the foreign invaders brought good things - including wealth and poverty reduction - to Africa, then can we assume that no "political freedoms(democratization)" and no wealth existed in Africa - in the kingdoms of the Baganda, Nubia, Zulu, Egyptians, and the Ashanti - before the white invasion?
.
The myopic experts of this "major study" crow that " .. we find that poverty reduction has occurred in an additional three countries: ... Kenya."
Last time I read about that country, there was over 65% unemployment rate - and reaching 95% in some parts of the country. In fact a report from the UN not long ago warned that over 50% of the population faced starvation - in a land where most are landless/unemployed and those elected in that "political freedom" promoted by the west do plunder the country dry. And the "political freedom(democratization)" process appears to be "strongly correlated", and indeed synonymous, with massive social dislocation and ethnic massacres every 5 years. And through it all, the foreign plunderers and the IMF/World Bank loot and prosper.
And that is what AllAfrica and their rhodie experts find salutary - as characterized by the primacy of the rhodie in Africa.
Ckokora, you are forgetting that black Zimbabweans are the ones who have left in high numbers than whites. This is mainly because of lack of Political Freedoms in Zimbabwe. Most Zimbabweans abroad wanted to retire to Zimbabwe, but the control policies of Mugabe has discouraged a whole generation that now will never set foot in Zimbabwe. That has meant no foreign currency in Zimbabwe.
Forced to hand over their foreign currency, most Zimbabweans hide it and then left the country. Look at Zambia or Mozambique and see what political freedoms have brought to those nations. Business in Zimbabwe has mainly been controlled by Zanu-pf. Mines in Zimbabwe closed, when gold prices were at an all time high. The lack of Political Freedoms is the cause of the problems in Zimbabwe.
" .. black Zimbabweans are the ones who have left in high numbers than whites. "
You may play the numbers game if you wish. If 100,000 travel out of Zimbabwe, we still have millions in Zimbabwe. Now if 10,000 rhodies are kicked out of the ancestral lands of maZimbabwe, how many are left?
[Hint: You may not find that many rhodies there, glory to the great Mbuya.]
.
" .. This is mainly because of lack of Political Freedoms in Zimbabwe .."
Talking of social migration: Most people emigrate - or move to other lands temporarily or permanently - for reasons other than political. Consider nurses from Philippines in USA. How about India and China? Do most Europeans and South Americans emigrate to USA as political refugees?
.
" .... the control policies of Mugabe has discouraged ..."
There we go with the rhodie refrain of "Cde Mugabe is bad". In Africa's diaspora we find those from the same countries praised in this rhodie study as having "political freedom(democratization)" - notably Kenya and Nigeria.
[A rhodie somewhere is probably blaming Cde Mugabe for the financial meltdown and economic recession in the western countries and the world in general. O, Great Cde Mugabe! One who holds the fate of the world in his hands!]
Phiri, if you are truly a blackman, I would say that you have been brainwashed, otherwise, I would assume that you must be a white farm-owner from Zimbabwe for whom the Western European countries, UK in particular, are supporting to teach Africans a lesson that they dare not disobey the master. As in everywhere, any black leader, (Mugabe for example) that dares to demand justice for his people must be tarnished with appelations like "dictator" even though his people keep voting him back into office, time and time again. Lest we forget the popularly elected PM Patrice Lumumba and his killing in the hands of the "democratic" West who favor a military strongman - Mobutu and the outcome of Congo that today is still raging on. Please save us this clap-trap ideas of yours.
Karpara, I have been called all kinds of things, but I'm as black as native Zimbabwean as any one can be. We should not shift the blame always on he western world. Mugabe of Zimbabwe has been a master of that. The result has been a Zimbabwe that is much poorer, cholera, politically unstable, fleeing of middle/upper class, educated Zimbabweans. Life span for an average Zimbabwe once in the 60's now in the late 3o's. Political freedoms allows artists, pan-africanist, entrepeneur etc to express themselves, than a rigid mugabe type of politics.
See all comments (10).
More Political Freedom Brings More Wealth
Mhh.
And of course the foreign whites define what "political freedom" means. And by design, it can't exist in countries not subordinated to whites, right?
[And the lion would not define "being nice" to include the act oif the antelope kicking at the lion.]
What do these rhodies, their handlers and their native boys mean by "political freedom" anyway?
[ For instance, does it exist in the USA?]
.
"Brings More Wealth"?
Cunning propaganda. "Brings" from where?
Well. Does that statement mean the same as "creates more wealth"?
"freedom". Until the western plunderers ended up with the current financial meltdown and economic recession, such "wide guys" as we find in this study told us that unfettered "free enterprise" is the way to go. No more.
I suppose that, according to the nincompoops here, the impoverishment of Zimbabwe and starvation death of multitude of Zimbabweans had nothing to do with foreigners and their economic sanctions. IDIOTS.
What "Bring more Wealth" to Europe and has done so for centuries is the plunder of Africa's mineral, human and land resources - with the attendant impoverishment and death of African populations.
It is said that Africa is the richest continent, resource-wise.
"In a survey of selected countries across the continent .." Cunning rhodies. Wouldn't it be more "scientific" if the countries were chosen AT RANDOM?
Hint:
1) Can one with an agenda SELECT the countries to show the contrary conclusion? Suppose I select for the studies the countries Libya, Morocco, Egypt, Algeria, ..
There was a study that showed that IMF/World Bank had "helped" 87 out of 88 countries studies into destitution over a period of 4 decades. And the IMF of "experts" brags about its capabilities to African countries.
Here is a better study topic: Does the degree of involvement of, and domination by, foreigners (including IMF and World Bank) in an African country's diplomatic, political, economic/ commercial, social and educational life condemn the country unto destitution? Answer: YES!!
[ But the foreign involvement sure brings prosperity to the foreign country. Case in point UK and its "Commonwealth". Historical case in point: Scramble for Africa, slavery, colonialism, apartheid, neo-colonialism.]