Enhancing the capacity of political and bureaucratic institutions is crucial for Africa’s development prospects. How can this be achieved? This paper from the World Bank Institute argues that reformers must find a middle ground. In only a few countries are there likely to be major gains in the short-term. However, some way forward for building state capacity is always likely. The process of cumulative causation points to the possibility that small beginnings can set in motion progressively more profound consequences.
Africa’s governance landscape in the 21st century offers a mixed picture. In the decades immediately following independence, a majority of countries succumbed to a downward governance spiral, characterised by perverse incentives on the part of political and economic actors and the corresponding decay of political and bureaucratic institutions. Beginning in the 1980s, a combination of external pressure and internal discontent set in motion processes of economic and political liberalisation that broke this pattern. Even so, the transformation does not appear to be dramatic enough to change a vicious spiral into a virtuous one. The risks that a downward spiral will reassert itself remain high.
The first round of efforts to build state capacity had limited success. The principal reason for this was the implicit presumption that weakness of public administration was managerial and could be remedied by financial support and training.
- However, public administrations are embedded in a complex interdependent system, which incorporates the bureaucratic apparatus, political institutions and broader social, economic and political interests.
- Only in Tanzania is the political environment sufficiently favourable to warrant the pursuit of a comprehensive programme of administrative reform.
- There is a striking difference in the performance of capacity building initiatives focused on improving expenditure accountability and those focused on human resource management.
- Large groups with vested interests and legitimate claims in the bureaucracy may see expenditure accountability activities as less threatening than the more politically sensitive administrative reforms.
- The capacity to adopt technically rational pay policies is greatest in settings that are characterised by high levels of political and administrative institutionalisation but that have low levels of political competition.
- The quality of national budget formulation, execution and reporting is the highest priority although the reality falls short of best practice approaches.
In countries where the political environment is less favourable, reform components need to be carefully selected and tailored to start with basic and politically less contentious reforms while creating opportunities for more comprehensive ones.
- In most settings, the way forward for administrative reform is likely to be an incremental one.
- Ongoing involvement and consensus building among cabinet members is key to both fiscal sustainability and the sustainable pursuit of a coherent prioritised set of policies.
- The road linking a participatory poverty reduction process to a genuinely inclusive and consensual process of budget formulation is a long one.
- In most countries, the emphasis could be better placed on approaches to administrative reform that are tailored to country-specific windows of opportunity and on determined follow-up.
