The Political Economy of Regional Integration and Development in Africa: Rethinking
the theoretical models.
I.
Introduction:
Regional integration has been on the agenda of policy makers in Africa from independence in the
late 1950s to date. Post independence nationalist leaders like Kwame Nkrumah sees political
integration as a necessary precondition for economic development on the continent1. Although
the idea of a full political integration was shelved for a gradual approach canvassed by the
Monrovia group like Nigeria and Liberia, successive leaders on the continent have never stopped
engaging in what is known among scholars of regionalism such as Fredrik Soderbaum and Tim
Shaw2 as Summitry regionalism as different plans have been made and are still being made for
full integration of the continent.
Regional integration in Africa is informed by the need to address the structural problems created
for African economies
by the form of states bequeathed on the continent by departed
colonialists. Apart from the micro and landlocked nature of many of these states, virtually all
the states are externally oriented and unduly integrated into the global capitalist economy. As
Schneider3, contends, Africa is excessively open to the global capitalist system. This is
evidenced in the fact that the ‘ratio of extra-regional trade to GDP in Africa is twice that of Latin
America and nearly four times that of Europe’. Thus, the external orientation of African
economies has weakened the capacity for the actualization of the regional integration agenda. It
is even more problematic that Africa has been encouraged by development agencies such as the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund4 to specialize in the production of
commodities for exports. Empirical evidences from the Asian countries show that Africa may not
be able to effectively harness economies of scale in production and leverage on large domestic
markets that hold great potentials for economic growth and development on the continent.
The political economy of regional integration and development in Africa relates to the nature and
the character of the state, the degree of commitment of political leaders, institutional capacity of
each state and the theoretical models under which regional integration has been framed in postindependent Africa. The state in Africa is an artificial creation, whose main objective is
extraction of surplus for the developed economies in Europe, United States of America, Canada
and Japan. It was originally designed as a rental state which lacks capacity for productivity and
manufacturing5. The commitment of political leaders to full regional integration has been
affected by the paradox of nationalism and Pan –Africanism. While the leaders make slogans
about Pan-Africanism, they are conscious of their power base and the privileges that this confer
on them. Perpetuation of such privileges and the protection of the power base underlie the lack of
genuine commitment to a full integration of the African continent both economically and
politically6.
A transformational regional integration requires some level of institutional capacity both at the
national and regional levels. For example, the bureaucracy in each country must be staffed by
people who are capable and buy into the idea of integration7. The most important aspect of the
political economy of regional integration in Africa, which informs this paper, is the theoretical
model that has been adopted in Africa since independence, both at the sub-regional and
continental level. Neo-colonial African leaders, who often act as surrogates of the Transnational
Capitalist Class, to which they belong both by design and default8 have looked to Europe and its
integration process as an exemplar of process to follow in forming regional integration on the
continent.
Lacking in appreciation of the divergence in the evolution of the state in Europe and Africa,
African leaders have formed their integration agenda on the basis of market integration theory,
modernity and prevailing economic orthodoxy. This ‘Western, Euro-centric conceptions of
regionalism, particularly those centred on the market integration approach, have promoted a very
biased understanding of regional integration in many parts of the developing world’, thus leading
to a dismal performance in intra-African trade and making the prospect of a full continental
integration a remote possibility9. Despite the fits and starts of African experience with regional
integration, unfolding events in the global economy and a few instances of endogenous efforts in
enlarging the frontiers of interconnectedness, it remains the most viable path to economic
development as well as social and political stability on the continent today and in foreseeable
future10.
A study conducted by the United Nations Development Programme on regional integration and
human development11 shows the necessity of integration as a strategy for not just economic but
social development. For instance, based on empirical evidence from simulations in
some
African and Asian countries, the study finds out that ‘continental integration as opposed to a
sub-regional approach within Africa or integration in global markets-leads to significant
increases in welfare across Africa. In contrast, global integration in the absence of regional
integration may reduce welfare in African regions under certain circumstances’12
Consequently, this paper examines the limitations of the theoretical models that have been
adopted for regional integration and argues for the application of a new theoretical approach
which, at once de-emphasize the centrality of the state in driving the process, and also presents
higher possibilities for the formulation of a context specific and transformational integration.
The next section examines the political economy of regional integration in Africa and the
challenges confronting the realization of a full continental integration. Section three examines
the various theories that have been applied in the process of driving integration in Africa as well
as their limitations, while section four proposes a nuanced and workable theoretical model that
can assist in both realizing the objective of a continental integration in Africa by 2025 and
making integration transformative, through affecting the lives of ordinary citizens of Africa.
Section five concludes with further recommendations.
II The Political Economy of Regional Integration in Africa.
Studies on regional integration, especially in African context has usually been examined from
the economic point of view13. However, regionalism and regional integration are ‘political
economy phenomenon that requires a more general theory of social and economic
transformation’14. Other scholars such as Bob Jessop and Iver Newmann
15
have established the
intricate relationship between regionalization, regionalism or regional integration and politics.
Whereas Jessop sees regions as emergent socially constituted phenomena, Newmann argues that
regionalism is an inherently political act, which must be reflectively acknowledged and
undertaken as such.
The state in Africa as it is currently constituted is a product of many years of interrelated
domestic and external forces that acted in unison to determine its composition; exploit, extort
and subjugate its very essence. These forces have also shaped the contemporary structure of its
economy, altered its natural boundaries, assaulted its culture and emasculated its capacity for
autonomous development. As Geoffrey Schneider16 argues,
In fostering wars and trade in slaves, other economic endeavours were displaced
and contacts between many regions within Africa and other regions both inside
and outside of Africa were disrupted. Thus, in a dialectical fashion, while some
regions were experiencing globalization, others were increasingly isolated. And
the regions with the strongest global linkages were experiencing a destructive
form of trade, rather than developing skills, industries and technologies that might
form the basis for future economic successes.
He also notes that:
while colonialism enhanced African integration into the world economy, contacts
between African states under rival colonial powers and between Africa and Asia
were severed, disrupting long distance trading networks that had existed in much
of Africa for centuries and decreasing the scope of products exported from many
African countries…colonial powers actively discouraged entrepreneurial activities
and manufacturing by Africans, preventing a wider range of African products
from being produced and exported17
The structural disarticulation in African economies today is not by accident. As Bade Onimode 18
argues, Africa was forcefully integrated into the global capitalist economy not for its own
purpose of development, but for the sake of the development of the economies of the core
capitalist countries. The raw material export orientation of these ex-colonies was strategically
designed to be so. The forms of infrastructures that the colonialists developed were essentially
geared toward facilitating exports of raw materials. The strategy to keep African economies in a
disarticulated form did not end with colonialism. Former colonial masters such as Britain but
especially France continued to play active roles in playing the former colonies against one
another19 which has kept back genuine efforts toward achieving full integration on the continent.
International development agencies such as the World Bank and the IMF have continue to help
the erstwhile colonial masters in perpetuating their agenda by subtly and directly forcing Africa
leaders to keep their economies open to manufactured products from the west while
concentrating on exports of raw materials, on which according to these agencies, Africa has
comparative advantage.
Unfortunately, post-independence political leaders in Africa have cooperated with their former
colonial masters by involving themselves in primitive accumulation, inept leadership and
subservience to the dictates of the west20. Mismanagement of the economies of various countries
on the continent, with few exceptions created opportunity for the Bretton Woods institutions to
more or less usurp the power for policy making in African countries since the 1980s through
various reform packages and a virulent form of neo-liberal economic doctrine. Post-colonial
African leaders have paid lip service to regional integration because of its potential to undermine
the base of their power and authority. Given the kleptocratic nature of political leadership in
Africa, power confers enormous advantage such as influence, wealth and recognition. To
surrender these privileges willingly without the force of arm, in the name of regional integration
is akin to committing political suicide. The above historical narrative is essential for a full
understanding of the trajectory of regional integration and development in Africa today. Despite
the concerted efforts by agents of modernization to deconstruct and obstruct historical
interpretation of the African condition, history matters for development.
As stated earlier on, African leaders have made efforts to foster integration among the various
countries on the continent. However, such efforts have been informed by the need to follow the
example of European integration. Integration project on the continent has also been constructed
on the basis of creating market access for products from one region to the other. Other pertinent
issues such as industrialization cross border movement of people and cultural integration has not
received the kind of attention that is required to make integration meaningful and
transformational. Cases of xenophobic attacks on foreigners from one African country to the
other continue apace in places such as Nigeria against Ghana in the 1980s, periodic cases of
South Africa against her neighbours such as Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Nigerians and of late
Kenya against Nigerians.
Although various reasons which range from criminality to fears of taking over of local jobs are
often adduced for such actions, it goes to show that ordinary African citizens are yet to
understand the benefits of having their brothers and sisters from other countries making a living
in their exogenously constructed territories. The overarching benefits of regional integration has
not been effectively communicated to the rank and files of African citizens, For now, the
subjection of the integration agenda to purely economic imperative tends to cause hostility
against the idea, even at the most micro-level of the society.
The desire for market access creates its own challenges for integration on the continent. For
instance, overlapping integration, in which one country belongs to more than one free trade
areas, is a common feature of regional integration on the continent21 . Other challenges to
regional integration in Africa include infrastructural deficits, especially in sea and airports, road
networks, and rail networks. With the exception of South Africa, and increasingly Ghana,
Burkina Faso and a few other countries, generation and distribution of electricity to households
and industry remain a formidable challenge to majority of the countries in sib-Saharan Africa.
Institutional weaknesses at the national level also hinder effective planning, negotiation and
realization of the integration agenda. As the World Bank notes, in ‘Defragmenting Africa’ there
are various restrictions to the free movement of goods and services as well as of people across
the continent22. Low development of services industries such as finance markets, commodity
markets, capital markets as well as information communication technology also hinders effective
integration in Africa. These factors are responsible for the low performance of intra-Africa trade
today.
.
III.
Dominant theoretical models of regional integration in Africa
Theory matters in social discourse as it gives meaning to perspectives and orientations.
According to Fredrik Soderbaum23 theory can be a very practical tool, which enables us to make
sense of the world. Many theories have been proposed for discussing regional integration in
Africa. While some of these theories are essentially related to the old regionalism such as neofunctionalism, the focus of this section is the analysis of those theories of regional integration
that are essentially deterministic from economic perspective. This section examines four of such
theories, their limitations and implications for the success or failure of regional integration in
Africa.
Market Integration Approach:- The market integration approach to regional integration was
based on the liberalization of intraregional trade which was designed to abolish discrimination
between contracting parties.24 According to van Rooyen
25
‘market integration involves the
lowering and removal of trade barriers between states in a region in order to increase trade
between them’. Following Ballassa (1962),26 Lee (2003)27 lists the various forms of market
integration to include, free trade areas, customs union, common markets, economic union and
total economic integration. This approach to regional integration is essentially deterministic in
that it only considers the economic aspect without looking at the political and social dimensions
of such arrangements. Besides, this approach essentially favour
vertical integration, that is,
North- South integration. It is problematic for regional integration in Africa because of the low
level of industrialization of the economies as well as the concentration on primary exports.
The linear integration model of regional integration is not the most appropriate way to conceive
or structure regional integration in Africa. This is because the barriers to intra-regional trade
have more to do with underdeveloped production structures and inadequate infrastructure rather
than with tariffs or regulatory barriers. Also, many of the structural pre-conditions inherent in
the market integration paradigm are absent in Africa. Despite its limitation, it is the dominant
theoretical model informing regional integration in Africa today. Under some unique
circumstances few countries in Africa such as Mauritius and Botswana owed their continued
economic growth to the application of this model of integration, especially with the European
Community.
The Neoliberal Economic Theory
This theory is in the main, a variant of the market integration approach to regionalism. It
favours North-South integration while at the same time focusing on the integration of peripheral
economies into the global economy. According to Gibb28, this approach prioritizes
‘open
regionalism ….as a mechanism to enhance multilateral liberalization and promote integration in
the world economy. It is underpinned by the principle of comparative advantage, which says that
countries should specialize in producing what they are specially endowed to produce. Given the
specialization of the third world countries in Africa in the production of raw materials, this
theory somehow replicates the regime of what Sarmin Amin29 called unequal exchange between
the North and the South. In agreeing with Gibb, Gamble and Payne30 the neo-liberal theoretical
framework of analyzing integration is open regionalism, which tend to reinforce the detrimental
effects of economic globalization and global capitalism. They also see the contemporary form of
regionalism as a manifestation of economic globalization and prevailing form of hegemony.
Dependency or Development Cooperation Approach
This developed as a reaction to modernization theory of the 1950s. Modernization theory was
developed by Western scholars studying the political economies of the newly independent states
of Latin America, Asia and Africa. They attributed the development challenges
of these
countries to low political culture and undeveloped institutions. One of such scholars was W.W
Rostow 31 who attributed the development problems of the new nations as typical of countries at
their levels of development. He concludes that these countries possess the characteristics of
traditional societies, which will change to modern societies as they follow certain five stages,
which he termed stages of economic growth.
Dependency theory countered such postulations and tagged them a-historical. With particular
regard to a strategy for economic development, it emphasized development cooperation using
import –substitution industrialization strategy and protectionism32. According to Spero and
Hart33, due to the relative important position of developing countries in the 1970s (a result of the
oil crisis) this approach was adopted as a counter-poise to neo-classical approach. Its importance
is echoed by the strong voice of the call for a New International Economic Order (NIEO)
However, because like the neo-liberal approach, dependency is also essentially economistic, it
fails to capture other non-economic factors such as politics, history of state formation and
diversities among states, that drive regional integration. Therefore, as far as regional integration
in Africa is concerned, this approach has not facilitated economic development.
New Economic Geography Theories of Regional Integration.
The contribution of this theory to the issue of regional integration is premised on the prediction
that while all countries in South-South cooperation have a comparative disadvantage in
manufacturing relative to the global economy, there will be one with less of a disadvantage than
the others (i.e the regional growth pole)34. This will result into a situation where industrial
activities will be relocated to the country that is relatively advantaged at the expense of others.
As Draper35 further argues, due to reduction in tariff in the regional economic community,
countries that suffer from relocation of industries will experience trade diversion. The overall
effects of these could include generation of political tensions, loss of economies of scale and
retrogression in regional integration36.
The summary of this theory is that rather than encourage horizontal integration, that is, among
South-South countries, the underlying political friction and the loss of economic benefits to
weaker members of Regional Economic Cooperation (RCC) will undermine economies of scale.
African countries that are so characterized by integral weakness and structural problem are
encouraged to focus on forming vertical integration, that is, with advanced capitalist economies
of the North37. Interestingly, regardless of the benefits or loss to African countries from regional
integration, political elites on the continent have been more inclined to following the prescription
of this theory.
The end result of the market approach to integration in Africa is the low level of intra-Africa
trade, ‘the continent’s structural deficiency, which manifests itself in the dichotomy between the
traditional and modern sectors in the excessive dependence on external inputs, and in external
rather than domestic markets, as the principal mover in the development process’38. According to
WTO39 intra Africa trade has consistently remained low, averaging 10-12 percent in the last
decade. Africa lags behind other regions in the world in terms of intra-regional trade. For
instance, in 2009, intra-European trade was 72 percent, intra Asian trade (52 percent), intraNorth America trade (48 percent), intra-South and Central American trade (26 percent).
The tendency to see regional integration purely as economic activities such as preferential trade
area or a customs union obscures other aspects of the concept and limits its application as a
development strategy40
IV.
Regional Integration Theory and Praxis: Towards a workable Model in Africa.
Against the backdrop of the failure of the afore-mentioned theoretical models to drive
transformational integration and economic development in Africa, it becomes imperative to reexamine the basis of integration on the continent. Regional integration as a development strategy
flows from regionalism. But regionalism is not a neutral spatial phenomenon. It is both a
response and a reactive process to the hegemony of global capitalist order. As Amin41argues, the
industrial development of capitalism has been to gradually move from the local to the global, and
at each step to create new polarizing tendencies. To be able to improve their economic positions,
peripheral countries have had to delink themselves from the global system and adopt alternative,
countervailing strategies, one of which is regionalisation. And as Allen Scott
42
notes, ‘the
continual expansion of capitalism over the very long run makes it extremely mutable in
geographic terms’.
As the debates between what constitute old and new regionalism unfolds, perhaps a good
understanding of what constitute new regionalism might be helpful to lay a theoretical model that
will be adaptable for regional integration and development in Africa. Varynen43 made a balanced
analysis of the dominant literature on the process of regionalization and how that can lead to a
regional arrangement that fosters not just economic cooperation, but political trust and cultural
belonging. As he explains, ‘the process of intraregional change is often called regionalization
and depicted conceptually as a multidimensional (economic, security, cultural and
environmental) process that proceeds simultaneously on several levels.
Regionalisation evolves into regionness, which according to Hettne44 implies the degrees of
regionalization that have occurred in terms of spatiality, cooperation and identity. The above
falls into the conceptual and empirical orientation of the new regionalism approach. This
approach to the explanation of inter-state cooperation is not limited to economic activities.
Rather, it incorporates social, political, security and environmental concerns. Importantly, it is
process that is driven from below with the cooperation of non-state actors such as civil-society
organizations and the private sector. Olivier45 lend credence to this approach when he amplifies
that under ‘New Regionalism Approach ‘integration is conceptualized as a multidimensional
and socially constructed phenomenon, wherein cooperation occurs across economic, political,
security, environment and other issues. It involves not only state actors but also private industry
and civil society’. Mistry46 argues that in contrast to conventional economic integration theory,
the New Regionalism theory is not a second best but actually a first best solution (to the
problems of the South), in response to dysfunctional multilateralism and globalization.
In view of the broad based coverage of the New Regionalism Approach, its benefits to all parties
and in particular the ownership of the process by the private sector and the civil society, this
paper argues that this approach should be the underlying force that drive regional integration in
Africa. The suitability of this approach to the discourse on regional integration in Africa is based
on some valid assumptions. One, since it has been proved above that unwillingness to let go their
power base has been responsible for the lackluster attitude of political leaders to integration in
Africa, pressures from the civil society and the private sector will make them to act in
accordance with the continental integration of the continent. Two, the failure of the economic-
centric approach to integration can be mitigated by making the integration agenda to be allencompassing, to include plans for political cooperation, security, cultural identity and
environmental sustainability.
On the issue of security for instance, the emergence of cross-national terrorist organizations like
Boko Haram, Al Shabab, Ansaru in the East and West African regions has shown that a
continental approach to security is of absolute necessity. Third, as argued above, pre-colonial
African nations related well among themselves and they have some cultural and linguistic
affinities, which can be harnessed at the supranational level. The new approach to regional
integration in Africa should incorporate recognition of these socio-cultural and linguistic
relations. The structure of the current state and regions are not sacrosanct and they can be
changed. To the extent that socially, culturally and politically constructed affinities facilitated
cross border flow of goods and services as well as movement of people from one region to the
other in pre-colonial times, they could help to enhance integration of the continent today.
As Hettne47theoretical formulation of New Regionalism connotes, regions are processes, which
involve making or unmaking as well as shifting in boundaries. Using a constructivist approach,
he contends that regions comes to life as we talk and think about it. The import of this theory is
that given the shifting nature of what today constitutes regions of the world both in spatial and
structural terms, concern for development should warrant an obliteration of the artificially
constructed boundaries both at the regional and national levels. The New Regionalism Approach
falls under the critical-constructivist theory of international political economy, which challenge
the existing theories such as neorealism and neoliberalism
Despite the various set-backs in meeting the deadline for fusion of Regional Economic
Communities in Africa as indicated in the Abuja Treaty48, recent developments in East Africa
portend prospect for a full integration in Africa. Countries like Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda and
Burundi have already started making moves to convert the EAC into a federal union. The sixteen
countries of the Economic Community of West African States have also made tremendeous
progress in building regional institutions on monetary, health, legislative and judicial issues.
According to UNECA49 , the top four RECs which actively pursued intra-REC exports were
SADC (accounting for 34 percent of intra-REC trade), CEN-SAD, (26 percent), ECOWAS (15
percent) and COMESA (11 percent).
The report also notes that growth in intra-COMESA trade has been particularly impressive with
value of exports increasing from US$1,701 million in 2002 to US$8,587 million in 2010. The
Southern African Development Community and Southern African Union, which is the most
development regional economic community on the continent, are both anchored on some
institutions, which can facilitate easy integration. The impressive performance of this region is
based on what Schneider50 called autocentred economy, which favour manufacturing and
production, rather than the prevalent emphasize on commercialization and removal of barriers to
trade and investment.
Notwithstanding the reality of current tension and the possibility of future concerns by smaller
countries in the SACU, as pointed out by Alden and Soko51, the uniqueness of this regional
economic integration in terms of ability to establish a manufacturing corridor as well as well
developed infrastructure could serve as a basis for greater expansion, but importantly as learning
example for other regional economic communities that have been based solely on removal of
barriers to trade or commercialization.
Political tensions that may arise in the process of
consolidating the gains recorded from such integration efforts can be mediated by non-state
stakeholders like the private sector and the civil society. As Mattli52 notes, demand factors
emanating from business leaders in a region are more decisive than the supply side actions of
politicians. The overall benefits from a more functional and transformative integration in Africa
should stimulate more pragmatic and concerted action among non-state actors to fast-track the
full implementation of all treaties, protocols and agreements made under the auspices of the
African Union Commission. But as it has been noted above, the focus should not just be
economic consideration but social, cultural, linguistic and political integration.
V.
Summary and Conclusions.
This paper has examined the prevailing theoretical orientations that underlie ongoing attempt
at forming regional integration in Africa. It has examined the political economy of Africa,
using as a point of departure, the historical foundations of the current asymmetric
relationship with the advanced capitalist countries. The paper argues that integration efforts
on the continent has, while following the European model of integration, focused excessively
on the economic imperative. It contends that by neglecting the political and social dynamics
of African societies, the various theories such as market integration, liberal, new geography
thesis or even dependency have failed to foster integration on the continent. The low intraAfrica trade that have been recorded since the launch of various integration schemes are a
function of the structural weaknesses in the domestic economies of African countries, and
the undue focus on commercialization at the expense of manufacturing.
It is the central contention of this paper that the desire to establish African Community
Market and an African Economic Community may not be realized unless a new theoretical
approach to integration is adopted at the level of conceptualization of the drivers of the
process and the focus of the integration agenda. While establishment of free trade areas may
be the fad in Europe and the United States of America with more developed economic and
institutional structures, the particular condition of Africa in terms of the structure of the
economies, weak state institutions, sovereignty and power conscious political elites, and fear
of domination by the bigger countries calls for a new approach to regional integration.
Examples from integration in Asia show that removal of trade barriers among contiguous
countries is not enough. Production and manufacturing that is anchored on developmental
industrial and trade policy are critical elements. As UNDP study shows53 formulation of a
regional industrial policy could encourage skills upgrading for value added in agriculture and
other manufacturing opportunities. Examples from the support given by Association of
South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries to small and medium enterprises for building
an integrated economic space by unbundling production across countries could be a
benchmark on industrial policy in Africa.
The New regionalism approach which embraces the involvement of more stakeholders, and
which provokes regionalism from below is deemed to be more appropriate. The state-centric
approach to regional integration is fraught with multiple complexities that undermine its
utilitarian values. As Boas, Marchand and Shaw54 have argued in respect of the importance
of a multi-stakeholder approach to regionalism,
There is so much more to current regionalization process than whatever
can be captured by a focus on states and formal regional organization. In
many parts of the world, what feeds people, organizes them and construct
their world views is not the state and its formal representatives (at local,
national, or regional level), but the informal sector and its multiple
networks, civil society, new movements and associations. Of course
people participate not solely in the formal or the informal sector. Rather,
they move in and out of both and its precisely this kind of interactions and
the various forms of regionalism that they create, which studies of
regionalization should try to capture
Flowing from the above, it is imperative for all stakeholders to be involved in driving a
continental integration that is capable of bringing about transformational development, which
encompasses social, economic, cultural and political development in Africa.
At the level of the economy, regional development corridors that focus on industrialization
are necessary to be established in the various regions under a very strong public-private
partnership. This will require more investment in infrastructures across the continent. As
political elites are unlikely to yield their power base to the control of any supranational
authority, it is incumbent on the civil society organizations and the private sector to advocate
for a transformational integration in Africa. As Oloruntoba and Gumede
55
have
recommended, one of the ways through which a transformational integration can be achieved
on the continent is through a deliberate effort by African Union Commission to be involved
in spear-heading the fusing of various Regional Economic Communities into one. Successful
completion of the fusion of one or two RECs would be followed by others.
Communication of the benefits of integration to all the stakeholders will be very instrumental
to the achievement of full integration in Africa. The people who are the focus of development
will buy in into the agenda if they know that they will derive benefit from the process. This
will require the development and deployment of both hard and soft communication
infrastructure on the continent. Another critical point of emphasis is the need to boost
indigenous industrialists in Africa. While foreign direct investment can stimulate
development, experiences of this in Africa over the past decades show that foreign direct
investment concentrate their activities in extractive sectors such as oil and gas and mineral.
As important as this sector is, their multiplier effects on Africa’s economy is very minimal.
Indigenous companies like Dangote Group, MTN and others should be given incentive to
expand their operations to different parts of Africa. This can increase learning effects, create
job opportunities, boost skills acquisition and expand the value chains agro-allied businesses,
mineral processing and technology transfers across the various regions.
1
Nkrumah (1963)’s famous statement ‘seek ye first the political kingdom and all that things shall be added
underscore the importance that was attached to political integration in Africa.
2
Summitry regionalism here refers to the various meetings among African Heads of States and Government to
forge ahead with the project of integration in Africa. Examples of such summits include the Lagos Plan of Action,
Abuja Treaty, African Economic Community and the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) See
Soderbaum, F and Sbraiga, A. 2010. Linking European Integration and Comparative Regionalism. Paper for UACES
Conference. Bruges
3
Schneider G, 2003 ‘Globalisation and the poorest of the poor’.2003:p5.
4
Ibid.
5
Ake, Claude, 1980. The Political Economy of Africa, empahises this point and show how the colonial government
deliberately encouraged cash crop farming and concentration on raw material as against industrialization.
6
Olivier, G ‘2010’. Integrative Cooperation in Africa.
7
Kaplan, S 2006. West African Integration: A New Development Paradigm? Kaplan gives a detailed account of how
bureaucrats, who feel threatened by the establishment of supra-national organisation, which regional integration
requires deliberate act to frustrate such projects.
8
Robison, W 2004 ‘The Theory of Global Capitalism’ describes the Transnational Capitalist Class as owners of
foreign capital, their corporations, the international agencies such as the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund and the National Bourgeoisies in neo-colonial states. These elites, on account of personal benefits
make policies that favour the multinational corporations, even if such as sub-optimal to their people.
9
Gibb, R, 2009, p 701. ‘Regional Integration and Africa’s Development Trajectory: meta-theories, expectations
and reality. Gibb argues that various theoretical models that inform regional integration in Africa are essentially
based on market integration. The result of which is the failure of such endeavours. However, Schneider, 2003,
qualifies this general assumption by alluding to the relatively successive integration programme in Southern Africa,
where manufacturing, technology and skills development was considered important and applied.
10
Olivier, G, 2010, World Bank, 2012: Defragmenting Africa, UNECA, 2004. Regional Integration in Africa. These
studies show that regional integration is the most viable option to development in Africa
11
UNDP, 2011: Regional Integration and Human Development: Pathway to Africa. New York: UNDP. This study
emphasise the relevance of continental integration to African development. Apart from economic issues, it
stresses that regional integration can actually contribute to social development in education, health and
environmental sustainability
12
Ibid p8
13
World Bank, 2012, Draper, 2010. These studies concentrate on the economic variables that drives regional
integration. Draper for instance focuses his study on the issue of economic agglomeration, size of the market and
the possibility for competition by firms.
14
Gibb, R 2009,p 702
15
Jessop, B. 2005, The Political Economy of Scale and the Construction of Cross-Border Micro-regions, Newmann, I,
2005. A Region Building Approach.
16
Schneider, G 2003, p 390
Ibid, p 391.
18
Onimode, B 1988. A Political Economy of African Economic Crisis. . Onimode creatively linked the crisis of
development in Africa today to the disarticulation caused by the tripod of slave trade, imperialism, and
colonialism. This is being accentuated today by post-colonialism.
19
Asante, S.K 1986. The Political Economy of Regionalism in Africa: A Decade of ECOWAS. New York
20
Joseph, R. 2013 ‘The Logic and Legacy of Prebendalism in Nigeria in Adebanwi, W , and Obadare, E. Democracy
and Prebendal Politics in Nigeria: Critical Interpretations. New York: Palgrave Macmillian. What is true of Nigeria is
true of many countries in Africa.
17
21
Ott, A and Patino, O, 2009. Is Economic Integration the Solution to African Development? Int. Adv
Econ Res. 15: 278-295. The author shows the various regional economic communities ion Africa.
While others are deriving benefits, some stay as laggards.
22
World Bank, 2012 Defragmenting Africa: Deepening Regional Trade Intergation in Good and Services.
Washington, DC. World Bank. The study shows that the huge potentials in cross border trade is lost in
Africa due to the various obstacles to free movement of goods and services.
23
Soderbaum, F, 2004. Introduction: Theories of New Regionalism. In Soderbaum, F and Shaw, T. Theories of New
Regionalism: A Palgrave Reader. London: Palgrave Macmillan
24
Gibb, 2009: p705
25
Rooven, V 1998: p128.Regional Integration as a Development Strategy: The Case of SADC. Africa
Insight. Vol. 28. No.3/4
26
Ballassa, B.1962, The theory of Economic Integration. London: Allen and Urwin. His stage approach to regional
integration is still very prominent today.
27
Lee, M, 2003. The Political Economy of Regionalism in Africa. Cape Town: UCT Press
28
Gibb, 2009, p708
29
Amin, S 1976. Un-Equal Development: An Essay on the Peripheral Formation of Capitalism. London: Harvester
Press
30
Gamble, A and Payne, A, 2005 ‘The World Order Approach’
Rostow, W 1960. Stages of Economic Growth: A Non Communist Manifesto
32
Frank, A, 1966. The Development of Underdevelopment. Monthly Review. September, pp 17-35
33
Spero and Hart, 2010, The Politics of International Economic Relations
34
Draper, 2010, p 18 Rethinking the (European) Foundations of sub-Saharan African Regional Economic
Integration: A Political Economy Essay. Working Paper 293, Paris: OECD.
35
ibid
36
Collier and Venable, 2008. Trade and Economic Performance. Does African Fragmentation Matter? Annual World
Bank Conference on Development Economics.
37
World Bank, 2000. Trade Blocs. Policy Research Report. Oxford: Oxford University Press
38
UNECA, 2013. Eight Session of the Committee on Trade, Regional Cooperation and Integration. Report on
International and Intra-Africa Trade. 6-8, February. This report assesses the performance of Regional Economic
Cooperation in Africa. It shows that intra-Africa trade has been specifically lower than trade with the outside
world, especially Europe.
39
WTO 2011. World Trade Organisation (WTO). World Trade Report
31
40
Varynen R, 2003. Regionalism: Old and New. The author argues that Economists think regionalism is only limited
to Preferential Trade Agreements or Customs Union. It is instructive that this economic view has been the
dominant paradigm for viewing regional integration in Africa since independence era.
41
Amin , S 1996
42
Scott, A 1998,p 25. Regions and the World Economy: The Coming Shape of Global Production.
43
Varynen, R 2003
44
Hettne, B 1999
45
Olivier, G
46
Mistry, P. 2005, ‘New Regionalism and Economic Development’ In
47
Hettne, B, 2005. The New Regionalism Revisited’ In.
48
Ibid. Olivier shows how the Abuja Treaty highlights the roles of Regional Economic Communities as building
blocks for political and economic integration in Africa.
49
UNECA, 2013, Eight Session of the Committee on Trade, Regional Cooperation and Integration. Report on
International and Intra-Africa Trade. 6-8,
50
Schneider, G 2003. The emphasis on manufacturing is particularly relevant to the African situation because it is
through production that jobs can be created.
51
Alden, C and Soko, M, 2005. South Africa’s Economic Relations with Africa: Hegemony and its discontents.
Journal of Modern African Studies. Vol. 43: 3,pp 367-392. These authors detail the perceived overbearing influence
and undue advantage that South Africa has over smaller countries like Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland in terms of
revenue from duties. They also advised that it might be in the interest of all for South Africa to make room for
some compromises such that these smaller countries can derive more benefits from the union.
52
Mattli, W, 1999. The Logic of Regional Integration: Europe and Beyond. New York: Cambridge University Press
53
UNDP, 2011 p9
54
Boas, M, Marchand, M and Shaw, T 200. The Weave World: The Regional Interweaving of Economies, Ideas and
Identities. In In Soderbaum, F and Shaw, T. Theories of New Regionalism: A Palgrave Reader. London: Palgrave
Macmillan
55
Oloruntoba and Gumede, 2013. Regional Hegemons as catalyst for continental integration. A Comparative
analysis of the roles of Nigeria and South Africa in Africa’s Integration and Development. Paper prepared for the 3 rd
Colloquium of Thabo Mbeki African Leadership Institute, University of South Africa, August 22-24,
References
Ake, C, 1980. The Political Economy of Africa. London: Longman
Alden, C and Soko, M ,2005. “South Africa’s economic relations with Africa: hegemony and its
discontents”. Journal of Modern African studies. Vol. 43.3 pp 367-392.
Amin, S , 2002 .“Africa Living on the Fringe”. Monthly Review 53: 41-50
Amin, S 1976 . Un-Equal Development: An Essay on the Peripheral Formation of Capitalism.
London: Harvester Press
Ballasa, B. 1962. The Theory of Economic Integration. London: Allen & Urwin
Boas, M, Marchand, M & Shaw, T. 2004. In Soderbaum, F and Shaw, T. Theories of New
Regionalism: A Palgrave Reader. London: Palgrave Macmillan
Collier, P. & Venables, T. 2008. “Trade and Economic Performance: does Africa’s
fragmentation matter?” Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics,
Cape Town, South Africa. June
Draper, P. 2010, Rethinking the (European) Foundations of sub-Saharan African Regional
Economic Integration: A Political Economy Essay. Working paper No. 293, Paris;
OECD.
Frank, A. 1966. “The Development of Underdevelopment” Monthly Review. September.pp.1731
Gamble, A and Payne, A. 2004. The World Order Approach. In Soderbaum, F and Shaw, T.
Theories of New Regionalism: A Palgrave Reader. London: Palgrave Macmillan
Gibb, R. 2009. ”Regional Integration and Development Trajectory: Meta-theories, expectations
and reality” Third World Quarterly. Vol. 30, Number 4 (21) . (pp. 701-721)
Hettne, B. 2004. The New Regionalism Revisited. In Soderbaum, F and Shaw, T. Theories of
New Regionalism: A Palgrave Reader. London: Palgrave Macmillan
Hettne, B 1999. Globalisation and the New Regionalism: The Second Great Transformation. In
B. Hettne, A. Sapir and O. Sunkel (eds.) Globalism and the New Regionalism. New York:
St. Martins
Joseph, R. 2013 ‘The Logic and Legacy of Prebendalism in Nigeria in Adebanwi, W , and E.
Obadare. Democracy and Prebendal Politics in Nigeria: Critical Interpretations. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kaplan, S, 2006. West African Integration. A New Development Paradigm? Washington
Quarterly.29: 4 pp81-97
Lee, M, 2003. The Political Economy of Regionalism in Africa. Cape Town: UCT Press
Mattli, W, 1999. The Logic of Regional Integration: Europe and Beyond. New York
: Cambridge University Press.
Mistry, P. 2004. New Regionalism and Economic Development. In Soderbaum, F and Shaw, T.
Theories of New Regionalism: A Palgrave Reader. London: Palgrave Macmillan
Nkrumah, K, 1963, Africa Must Unite. London: Panaf Books
Olivier, G . 2010. Integrative Cooperation in Africa. IUP Journal of International Relations.
Vol. IV Nos 1 & 2.
Onimode, B. 1988. A Political Economy of the African Crisis. London: Zed Books
Oloruntoba S, and Gumede, V. 2013. Regional Hegemons as catalyst for continental integration.
A Comparative analysis of the roles of Nigeria and South Africa in Africa’s Integration and
Development. Paper prepared for the 3rd Colloquium of Thabo Mbeki African Leadership
Institute, University of South Africa, August 22-24,
Ott, A and Patino, O, 2009. Is Economic Integration the Solution to African Development? Int.
Adv Econ Res. 15: 278-295.
Robinson, W. 2004. A Theory of Global Capitalism. Production, Class and State in a
Transnational World. Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press
Rostow, W. W. (1960). The Stages of Economic Growth. A Non-Communist Manifesto.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schneider, G. 2003. Globalisation and the Poorest of the Poor: Global Integration and the
Development Process in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Economic Issues. Vol XXXVII.
No. 2, pp 389-396.
Scott, A. 1998. Regions and the World Economy: The Coming Shape of Global Production.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Soderbaum, F and Sbraiga, A. 2010. Linking European Integration and Comparative
Regionalism. Paper for UACES Conference. Bruges
Soderbaum, F, 2004. Introduction: Theories of New Regionalism. In Soderbaum, F and Shaw, T.
Theories of New Regionalism: A Palgrave Reader. London: Palgrave Macmillan
Spero, J and Hart, J, 2010. The Politics of International Economic Relations. Australia and
United States: Wadsworth Cengage
UNDP, 2011. Regional Integration and Human Development: Pathway to Africa. New York:
UNDP
UNECA, 2013, Eight Session of the Committee on Trade, Regional Cooperation and
Integration. Report on International and Intra-Africa Trade. 6-8
Vayrynen, R, 2003. Regionalism: Old and New. International Studies Review. Vol.5 No. 1 pp
25-51
World Trade Organisation (WTO) 2011. World Trade Report: The WTO and Preferential Trade
Agreements: From Co-existence to Coherence. Geneva, Swizerland. WTO.