The World Bank recently released a Working Paper entitled Are There Lessons for Africa from China's Success against Poverty? In it, Martin Ravallion concludes that despite different contextual constraints (foremost among these: African states have higher inequality, higher dependency rates and lower population density), two key lessons stand out. First, "the importance of productivity growth in smallholder articulture, which will require both market-based incentives and public support." Second is the "role played by strong leadership and a capable public administration at all levels of government."
While these lessons are seemingly correct, neither strikes me as particularly new. Debate over rural development in Africa has been a long-standing issue with policymakers sitting on both sides of the fence. Most of my personal encounters with African leaders would suggest the short-term necessity of such an approach, with a switch to an urban economy when the time is right. The need for strong institutions to bring such reforms to fruition is also not especially novel. For decades Western donors have been emphasizing the need for good governance and institutional reform in African development.
Why, then, the Chinese comparison? Is it that Africa has 'gone East' so much so that these lessons resonate deeper when presented from a Chinese standpoint? Perhaps. Is this report in part a suggestion that China is quickly replacing the West as a purveyor of foreign assistance and lessons in development. Quite possible. I haven't quite made up my own mind about these issues, but a cursory examination of recent Sino-African relations leads me to answer both questions in the affirmative. Regardless, Ravallion's paper offers an interesting perspective on an old issue. Have a look and let me know what you think.