Reflections on Development in Ethiopia

Introductory Note

I visited Ethiopia frequently and traveled extensively in all parts of the country during the Derg period. I observed firsthand the deleterious effects of the Derg's attempt to turn the country into a communist "people's republic."¹ Since the fall of the Derg in May 1991, I have made 11 visits to Ethiopia (with a 12th scheduled for June 2001), usually for periods of several weeks, totaling well over a year of travel in the country in all. During these same years I have also spent time in 16 other post-communist countries, ranging from Slovenia and Armenia to Mongolia, observing the political, economic, and social problems of recovering from communism and restoring cultural heritage. I delivered a paper summarizing some of this experience in comparison with Ethiopia at the 14th International Ethiopian Studies Conference (IESC) in Addis Ababa in November 2000.² The present discussion is based on observations from travel in Ethiopia, discussions at the 14th IESC and other conferences, and familiarity with literature relevant to the subject of economic and social development.

The Role of Governments in Development

It has become almost universally recognized in the world since the collapse of communism that governments that try to take total responsibility for economies and societies more often than not do the wrong things or do the right things badly. Maximization of government control impedes the freedom and innovation that is essential for accelerated development. By the time the Tigrayan People's Liberation Front/Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (TPLF/EPRDF) took power in 1991, its dominant leaders had come to the realization that decentralization was desirable in Ethiopia. They recognized that the population longed to be relieved of the burden of government on their lives and quickly implemented several measures giving individuals greater freedom of decision and action. They then proceeded to lay the basis for a decentralized governmental system. They chose ethnicity as a framework for devolving authority to regional administrations.³ The 1995 constitution formalized this and other liberal, modern principles. They have been gradually implemented, though some are too idealistic to be rapidly realizable.

Decentralizing Ethiopia has not been easy. Capacity for governance has had to be created in the new regional states. Centuries of tradition and decades of bureaucratic habits have accustomed the population to think that all initiative must come from higher authority. All over the country, wereketoch (papers) still have to be produced to get things done. Bureaucracy is still a serious problem in Ethiopia. Local authorities are often reluctant to authorize or initiate activity without the approval of higher-level officials. They lack the confidence and willingness to take responsibility for the right things. In developing the capacity to govern their states, regional governments have had to expand the capacity of the bureaucracy.

Investors, both Ethiopians and ferenjis (foreigners), often complain that they encounter several layers of authority that do not coordinate with each other when they try to implement a project or start a new activity. Bureaucrats naturally tend to maximize their own satisfaction and self-interest—this leads them to say no more often than yes, to impede more often than facilitate. Limited revenues make it difficult to pay bureaucrats high salaries. When they earn little, the temptation to exploit their status to gain money or services is sometimes irresistible. Thus, bureaucracy breeds corruption. A communist system leaves a legacy of tolerant attitudes in the population toward corruption. It is regarded as the only way to get things done, or done quickly. The dilemma for accelerating developmental momentum in a more open economy is that the mentality of both government bureaucrats and the public must be changed.

Democratic practices and procedures are no magic cure for these problems, but in experienced democracies, openness works well most of the time to deter or contain undesirable practices to hold corrupt officials accountable. Periodic elections give the public opportunities to eject corrupt officials. Opposition candidates scrutinize the records of officials they aspire to replace. The private press publicizes governmental shortcomings and officials' misdeeds. I have observed these desirable trends beginning to develop and...