Yesterday, we argued that Liberia must become more deliberate about building national capacity: Think Liberia, Build Liberia's Capital, Leverage the World.
But there is another side to that argument.
What happens after we build the capacity?
Too often, we fail to preserve or use it.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
Liberia has a habit of starting over. A new government comes to power with a new slogan, new development plan and new priorities. New ministers want new programs. What the previous government started can easily be pushed aside, renamed or replaced.
Of course, elections are supposed to bring change. A new government has every right to correct what did not work and pursue different priorities.
But change should not mean starting from zero.
Liberia saw another version of this problem during the early postwar years. Public institutions, including JFK Medical Center, received equipment and supplies from foreign partners. Yet some donated equipment reportedly proved unsuitable for Liberia's needs, difficult to maintain or of little practical use.
There was an important lesson in that experience: receiving something does not necessarily mean gaining something useful.
The same is true of government programs.
President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf's administration spent 12 years rebuilding institutions after the civil war. Its record was far from perfect, but policies, systems and institutions were developed during that period.
Sirleaf also launched a national visioning exercise, taking the conversation around the country and asking Liberians what kind of nation they wanted Liberia to become by 2030.
Then came President George Weah and the Pro-Poor Agenda for Prosperity and Development. His administration introduced its own priorities and changed or replaced some approaches inherited from the previous government.
Now President Joseph Boakai has come with the promise of "Rescue" and the ARREST Agenda for Inclusive Development. His administration has also found itself addressing problems inherited from the Weah years while establishing priorities of its own.
This is normal to a point.
The problem comes when political change becomes institutional disruption.
One of our weaknesses is the difficulty political rivals have acknowledging that their predecessors did something worth keeping. Opposition parties often campaign as though the government accomplished nothing. When they eventually take power, there can be pressure to prove that everything must now be done differently.
But development does not work that way. Development is cumulative.
A road started by one president and completed by another is still a Liberian road. A useful government system does not become useless because another political party created it. A good idea should not have to die because its author has left office.
The greater concern, however, is what happens to people.
Every year, Liberians receive government and bilateral scholarships to study abroad. Many of these opportunities are meant to strengthen Liberia's professional and technical capacity.
People study medicine, engineering, agriculture, technology, finance, public administration and other specialized fields.
Then they return home, and some discover that the institutions that sent them away have no clear plan for using their new skills.
Their old positions may have been filled. Managers may not have positions matching their new qualifications. In some cases, returning professionals may even be viewed as competition by colleagues or supervisors.
The result can be extraordinary waste.
A government employee can be sent abroad specifically to acquire expertise Liberia needs, return with that expertise and then spend years doing work that barely uses it.
Some scholarship beneficiaries are required to serve government for a period after completing their studies. But simply keeping someone on the payroll does not amount to capacity building.
Eventually, the service obligation ends. The professional moves into the private sector, joins an international organization or finds another opportunity.
The expertise remains with the individual and Liberia starts looking for another expert.
And we start over.
This should change.
Before government sends someone abroad for specialized training, it should know how that person's skills will be used upon return.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Where will the person work? What responsibility will he or she assume? Does that institution actually need the specialization? Who will track whether the investment is producing results?
The same questions should apply to government projects.
Before launching something "new", officials should first ask: What already exists? What worked? What failed? What should be improved rather than discarded?
Innovation does not always mean inventing something new.
Sometimes progress means taking a good idea from the previous government and making it better.
Presidents and ministers will change. Political parties will come and go. Development plans will have different names.
But Liberia remains.
We cannot build a country if every administration behaves as though Liberia's history began on inauguration day.
And we cannot build national capacity if we train people, fail to use them and then wonder why the expertise disappears.
Nations are not built by continually starting over.
They are built by learning, keeping what works and continuing forward.
