The Financial Times articles mentioned below can be
accessed for free by following the links.
On 28 January 2014 the FT published an article by chief
foreign affairs correspondent Gideon Rachman entitled “Growth and
globalisation cannot cure all the world’s ills”. With this article Mr Rachman questions the accepted
trouble-shooting prescriptions that have been used by policy makers for the
past twenty years.
YaleGlobal
online, a publication of the MacMillan Center, gives a good summary of the article:
“Global leaders and elites, such as those who gathered
for the World Economic Forum in Davos, regard economic growth via globalization
as the prescription for difficulty or political conflict, suggests Gideon
Rachman for the Financial Times. But economic growth, globalization and
capitalism do not necessarily curtail inequality, instability, environmental
degradation, nationalist rivalries, jihad and the other stubborn quests for
power that ignore democratic decision-making. Rachman identifies three areas of
the concern: Syria and other places in the Middle East are beyond the fixes of
economic rationality. The Chinese-Japanese rivalry intensifies despite the fact
that China is “Japan’s largest trading partner and the biggest recipient of
Japanese foreign investment” and Rachman points out that “in some respects,
China’s growing prosperity is actually driving the increase in international
tensions in Asia.” And in Europe and the United States, globalization has
enriched many but contributes to wage stagnation and a widening inequality that
could lead to more political extremism.”
What a coincidence that Gideon Rachman should write on the same day
as the FT’s Africa Editor, Javier Blas, reports “UK shifts
African aid focus to economic development” with its emphasis on growth.
Mr Rachman’s insights are particularly relevant for
African aid because, despite being the world’s fastest growing region (by some
accounts) and globalising at a dizzying pace, the benefits are by no means
curing the continent of its many political, social and environmental ills, and
in many respects are making them worse.
Mr Rachman’s well-argued Comment should therefore act as
a signal to Justine Greening, head of the UK’s Department for International
Development (DFID) , to make sure that investments that boost growth are
sustainable and inclusive. In the current system this is easier said than done.
Economic growth, measured by gross domestic product, has the tendency to have
the opposite effect. The only known solution to this conundrum is through
investments designed to boost green growth measured by green GDP, a 21st
century accounting system not yet recognised in Africa or elsewhere.
If, as Ms Greening says, DFID’s departure in the way the
UK spends its aid budget is “radical”, “revolutionary” and yet “pragmatic”,
this is a unique opportunity for her department to live up to those words and
direct aid towards Africa’s emerging green economies instead of towards
business-as-usual.
Britain has many advantages for supporting green growth
in Africa including historical connections, unrivalled knowledge of the
continent, leadership in green technologies and a deputy prime minister, Nick
Clegg, who championed the green economy at the UN’s Rio+20 Earth
Summit in 2012.
2013 was the year of “Africa Rising”. With Britain's, and
more specifically DFID’s, influence 2014 can be the year of Africa’s Rising
Green Economy.
Related posts:
Africa's Green Voice Falls Silent: 2013 London Memorial to
Meles Zenawi (30/06/13)
Britain's Role in Unlocking Africa's Green Economy (16/05/13)
A Letter to the FT: Europe's Role in Unlocking
Africa's Green Economy (09/03/12)
