|
Vision 2010 (Nigeria) and
Vision 2020 (Ethiopia)
We at IDEA have always
believed that a visionary and patriotic leadership
can make a marked difference in nation building
and the welfare of the popular masses especially
if the visions are translated into action. There
is no doubt that respective African nations and
citizens will be better off if they enjoy the
fortune of visionary, patriotic, committed and
abler leadership. The latter four ingredients are
the necessary components and preconditions for a
meaningful economic and political, as well as
social transformations of African societies.
IDEA is proud to present Vision 2010
(Nigeria) and Vision 2020 (Ethiopia) so
that our subscribers could benefit from the
dialogue and discourse that have been widely
discussed, in an effort to chart out the future of
these two countries. While Vision 2010 is a
Nigerian government initiative, Vision 2020 is
the making of the Ethiopian Economic Association (EEA).
The Nigerian undertaking is lead by a Committee
that comprise 248 members aimed at implementing a
concerted action in order to make Nigeria a
developed nation by the year 2010 (Nigeria’s 50th
independence anniversary). Ethiopia’s Vision
2020 is essentially a discussion forum with an
objective of looking forward and with hope of
influencing public policy for the betterment of
Ethiopia. It is not a government initiative, nor
does the EEA have at its disposal a government
budget like that of Nigeria.
According to the EEA, “building on the
experience of its Round Table Discussion, the
Ethiopian Economic Association
(EEA) organized the first round of a
monthly discussion forum entitled Vision 2020
Ethiopia, which was conducted for the past six
months. The forum provided prominent persons from
different backgrounds with the opportunity to
share their personal perspectives on Ethiopia’s
future. Each presentation was followed by in-depth
and constructive discussion among
participants.”
The rationale of Vision 2020 entertains
at least three important advantages: 1) policy
makers could be able to see and examine the larger
picture; 2) discussions about the future entail
overall positive enhancement of the culture of
debate; 3) the discussion will foster “ a sense
of shared destiny in a community.”
By contrast, the Nigerian Vision 2010
“was set up in 1996 to look at all aspects of
Nigerian society, helping to define for [Nigeria]
our Country its correct bearing and sense of
political, socio-cultural and economic
direction.” Vision 2010 Report
“proposes both immediate, Short Term and Long
Term measures to stimulate economic growth and
transform Nigerians into patriotic citizens.”
Like the Ethiopian vision, the Nigerian one
also came up with three simple but profound
rationales: 1) where we are (and why)? 2) Where do
we want to be? 3) How do we get there? Quite
obviously, the Nigerian rationale looks backwards
before it begins to see forward. That the Nigerian
foresight is preceded by a hindsight is clearly
stipulated in the following: “a) to
constructively analyze why after more than 36
years of political independence, our development
of a nation in many spheres has been relatively
unimpressive, especially in relation to our
potential; b) to envision or visualize where we
would like to be at the time the nation will be a
fifty-year old independent nation in 2010 and; c)
to develop the blueprint and action plans for
translating this shared vision into reality.”
Moreover, the Nigerian visionaries have
clearly anticipated that “success on the
political and socio-cultural fronts requires a
long term orientation,” and that the
implementation of Vision 2010 must be
viewed in relation to “a highly competitive
world driven by the forces of liberalization,
globalization and technology.”
Quite obviously, the Nigerian vision is
action-oriented rather than mere policy
formulation; that of Ethiopia, by contrast,
gravitates toward traditional panel presentations
at annual conferences. Some of the papers
presented in the Ethiopian vision include Promoting
Stability in the Horn of Africa; Agriculture Based
Growth Strategies: Lessons from Morocco, China
& Chile and their relevance for Ethiopia; The
Role of Ethiopians in the Diaspora in the
Country’s Development; Breaking the Cycle of
Recurrent Famine in Ethiopia: Natural Resources
Management and Drought Related Famine Prevention
etc.
The
Ethiopian vision is characterized by intellectual
discussion with an overall objective of dissecting
themes and topics that address the future of
Ethiopia. The Nigerian vision, on the other hand,
must come with a blue print of development program
and submit it to the government. In fact, the
economic imperative of the Nigerian vision
includes the following principles:
a)
Government needs to focus on creating an
enabling environment, which stimulates private
sector savings and investment. The government
should provide conducive infrastructure, build
human capital (education, health care and
technological know-how); govern effectively in the
public interest; and orient the economy towards
diversified, export-oriented development based on
national comparative advantage;
b)
Private sector is to support government in
a truly progressive partnership. The private
sector must become the engine of growth of the
economy and this can be achieved through
undertaking significantly higher level of
investment, concentration on the best global
practices and quality standards, penetration of
West African and global markets, and utilization
of domestic natural resources, skills and inherent
competitive advantage; and
c)
Macro-economic framework and economic
institutions, which are similarly
outward-oriented, based on free markets and global
competition, and fostering high domestic savings
and investment. This will be supported by stable
and consistent economic policies with emphasis on
achieving low inflation rates, and strong
fiscal/monetary discipline.
In
terms of organization and overall goal
orientation, the two visions have essential
differences, but themes incorporated in the
respective topics discussed by both visions share
a common denominator aimed at transforming both
societies. In some instances, the tone of the
topics resonate similar, if not the same messages
and objectives. For instance, in the Ethiopian
vision, Bahru Zewde’s article entitled “What
did we dream? What did we achieve? And where are
we heading?”
nicely coincides with the Nigerian
rationale “where we are (and why)? Where do we
want to be? How do we get there?” (Mentioned
above). Although Bahru is professor of history and
his synthesis of contemporary Ethiopian politics
is primarily historical, the title of his topic is
crucial for the present and future economic
imperatives in Ethiopia. Both visions are
historically significant in terms of galvanizing
the urgency of economic and social transformations
that our respective societies must undergo. The
precondition for a meaningful transformation,
however, lies in the dynamics of a dedicated and
visionary leadership, and in this context the
primacy of politics still remains determinant.
Economic determinism should not obscure the import
of a democratic system with attendant
accountability and transparency that can
contribute to a whole gamut of political arena,
that in turn serves as conduit between the people
and the transforming agencies.
IDEA,
Inc. ©
|
