Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, Volume 7, Number 2, Summer/Fall 2006

CIAO DATE: 08/07

Georgetown Journal of International Affairs

Marching to a Different Drum: The World Bank and African Development
Callisto Madavo

Excerpt

Callisto Madavo, a visiting professor at Georgetown University, held several senior level positions at the World Bank, including regional vice president for Africa.

The World Bank has been a catalyst in the enormous progress that has been made overall in global economic development and the fight against poverty around the world. Over the three decades I spent at the World Bank, I watched my employer transform from a relatively small, exclusive, and conservative bank, into a world-class, inclusive development institution. However, such substantial progress is tainted by the continuing difficulties in the development of Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), where a lag in progress poses a challenge not only for the people of the continent, but also for the stability and well being of the international development community at large.

I worked in Africa, Asia, and Latin America as a sector economist, program manager, and country director before ending my career at the Bank serving as the vice president for Africa—my home continent. While the World Bank has come to wield considerable influence as a center of development, research, and knowledge, its eventual contribution and success will depend on whether it can help Africa become an integral participant in the prosperity that is now spreading across the globe. To play this role in Africa, the Bank will require strong leadership as exemplified by Robert McNamara and James Wolfensohn, a broad-based and inclusive approach to development, and the capacity to listen and learn. In this article, I will look back on my career in the Bank to examine its role in the development of SSA and look ahead to what can and must be done in the years to come.

Progress and Development since the 1960s

With the exception of SSA, which is still finding its way, the world has seen unprecedented progress in growth and wealth creation during the past four decades. We have seen the pervasive poverty of East Asia in the 1960’s give way to the prosperity of the ‘tiger’ economies, of Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and so on. Overall, an annual increase in world per capita income was at its peak—at 3 percent —during the 1960s and remained above 1.5 percent through the remainder of the twentieth century.1

This growth and increased wealth have had a profound impact on the quality of life for many in developed and developing countries alike and have lifted many out of poverty. For example, between 1960 and 2000 infant mortality decreased from 140 to 52 deaths per thousand births, life expectancy increased from 43 to 64 years, and the illiteracy rate was reduced from 53 percent to 28 percent. The poverty ratio in the developing world (those living on less than $1 a day) fell from over 50 percent in 1960 to about 13 percent in 2000, and the World Bank estimates that the number of poor people fell from 1.1 billion to about 650 million in that same period of time.2

This progress is remarkable and shows that, with few exceptions, development efforts worldwide have been largely successful in terms of improved incomes; improved quality of life; and the widening of possibilities, opportunity, and choice for many. There were, of course, significant regional differences. East Asia registered dramatic progress, as did Latin America and South Asia. SSA, however, marched to a different drum, witnessing increases in both the poverty ratio and the number of poor at large.

Better Understanding of the Development Process

Equally important during this period has been the significant evolution of development thinking and the accumulation of knowledge through research, policymaking, and development practice—including learning by doing and sharing knowledge across countries. In the 1960s, modernization theory and the concept of the two sector model (traditional and modern) held sway. Authors W.W. Rostow, Sir Arthur Lewis, and Ragnar Nurkse theorized that industrialization was the key to the transformation of traditional and backward agricultural economies into modern ones and that accumulation and capital were the drivers of change. At the same time, the state was seen as an important instrument of transformation in developing countries. The role of markets received little attention because the preconditions for markets to flourish, such as human capital and adequate infrastructure, were largely missing. Consequently, the notion of a developmental state that could compensate for market failure became popular, inspired in part by the Soviet bloc...

1 Cooper, R.N. Half Century of Development, Lessons of Experience. Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics. (World Bank, Washington D.C., 2005)
2 World Bank. World Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty. (World Bank, Washington D.C., 2001)