Jazzy Growth

For a poor country like Ethiopia, which has been bogged down in the swamps of a command economy for nearly two decades, economic growth has a strong reason to exist. Yet, whether it brings a blessing or a curse depends on the social and political implications that comes along with it.

Every year, the government promises to realise double digit economic growth. For a country with 29pc of the population living under poverty line – one dollar a day – this may seem like a target to be commended. Nonetheless, the distributional aspect of economic growth is often overlooked.

This entails how much of the benefit from economic growth is going to the rich and the poor, respectively. It also refers to how much of the cost of economic growth the rich and the poor, respectively, shall bear.

At face value, this calls for the answering of two critical questions. Should we continue in the current “model of growth”, which has allowed some to drive a hammer, while a significant mass is going to bed hungry? With the widening urban-rural, inter-regional and intra-urban income inequality, how can we avoid the blessing of our growth becoming a “curse”?

Whatever one’s answers and the underpinning arguments for these questions are, it seems that time is running out. We must quickly recognise that growth is not an end, but only a means to an end. A comprehensive way to walk the talk, therefore, demands putting the ‘growth’ theme into the social and political context of our fair nation.

Although the diversity of 80 plus ethnicities living harmoniously in our fair nation can make conclusions tricky, our social life could more or less be expressed as “collective”. We eat, drink, dance, pray, fight and work together.

However, there is still adequate operational space for individual efforts. The reward could even stretch to the level of giving implicit veto power in social decision making.

That is why a rich guy, in both rural and urban areas, holds more leverage in social decision making at grass root level than the poor. This is from the formal kebeles to informal iddirs, and covers decisions like which primary roads to maintain first, which areas to get more emphasis in security, who shall be helped first through a social safety net, which kebele services need immediate reform and so on. Thus, our double digit growth will not be of any importance if it cannot overhaul this biased local decision making system.

Some might argue that this mindset has already been abolished with the introduction of a market-oriented economic system. Yet, a deeper look at the hands behind the fulcrum of the market would persuade the naysayers to question their own argument.

If, after all, growth is thought to be a way of ensuring human development, it should give more emphasis to changing social systems than affecting change in mere numerical aggregates. If so, governmental declarations need to start to explicitly state the social indicators of growth.

Equally as important as the social aspect is the political platform, with which the double digit growth is being achieved. Growth is meant to lift our political culture out of the box that it has been contained in for centuries. It is supposed to bring about a more transparent, deliberative, policy-oriented and informed political debate. It is thought to create competent political parties, established on clear ideologies and value systems.

It is believed to bring to light persuasive politicians with thoughtful development alternatives. It is also expected to continually introduce new generations of politicians.

Economic growth ought to also create a politically conscious citizenry, confident enough to express their will peacefully. The double digit growth should also be accompanied by legitimate and sustained institutional structures. Yet, it is questionable on how far we have gone in realising all of these points.

No matter how proud we are of the achievement of double digit growth for the past nine consecutive years, we should not forget our assignment with regard to renovating latent and suppressive social systems. By working hard to minimise income inequality, we will reduce the implicit leverage of the rich and empower the poor.

Not least, we should update our political playing field, in order to make it resilient to changing economic and social conditions, both nationally and internationally. It is only then that our mouths could speak what our hearts believe in, while our reports will be a summary of our reality. To me, that is what good growth is all about.