This book reminds me of the Yoruba adage “ona kan o woja” which means “there are multiple routes to the market”. While it identifies the crucial role, that economic growth plays in poverty reduction, it promotes the idea that there is no one size fits all approach for nations to explore in realizing said growth. It does this while making a case for higher contextual understanding of the peculiarities of nations whenever we need advocate for them to embrace certain economic principles.
The first argument made in the book which I agreed with is that nations need to be strategic with their policies to benefit from globalization. In his reference to China and India, I found a relevant point to my proposed topic around improving intracontinental trade in Africa. In my reevaluation of the the problem of trade within Africa, I believe a major challenge to increased volume of trade is that most African countries usually have similar raw materials to export. Apart from the fact that this holds little comparative advantage, investment flows to the direction of finished products and since the teeming population of young people on the continent need readymade quality products, the direction of trade moves outside the continent. Considering this in Rodrik’s ideas, if the continent wants to take advantage of globalization, a key approach would be to explore productivity that ensures a full engagement of the production value chain. This will impact on our ability to provide more value and hopefully engage on an equitable footing in terms of foreign trade and investment.
I also agree that for a developing continent like Africa, the government is needed to actively promote economic development and support emerging markets to a stage where they can thrive. Unlike developed countries which seem to have recorded some level of success by adhering to certain economic principles, African countries are building state capacity, and a way to strengthen these structures is to engage the state to prioritize economic development.
These points lead me to a reflection that a free trade agreement may fail to solve the continent’s intracontinental trade problems if we are not strategic. Since our problems are unique, our focus should be on achieving certain outcomes, not necessarily following acceptable policy recommendations.
My major criticism of the book is that Rodrik did not refer to the other advantages that China and other East Asian countries enjoyed, particularly with respect to the political history of state capacity that enabled them experience swift economic development. I do not think that the economic growth happened only because these countries took a different approach in terms of economic principles, I think the growth occurred due to various factors such as political history and the intellectual transfer of knowledge that continues to happen between the western world and Asian countries.
Commentaires