Free market economy, ‘developmental state’ and party-state hegemony in Ethiopia: the case of the ‘model farmers’

Abstract

Ethiopia's development strategy rests on the promotion of a market economy, driven by ‘new entrepreneurs’, both urban and rural, while, to bring it to ‘maturity’ and to compensate for its present ‘failures’, the resolute intervention of a ‘developmental state’ is essential. Simultaneously, the ruling party aims to sustain its political hegemony by enrolling massively among those at the top of the social pyramid, to which most of these ‘new entrepreneurs’ belong, so as to build its new constituency on them. In the rural areas (83% of the population), the merger of these two objectives leads to the mobilisation of the upper group of smallholder farmers, recruited both as ‘model farmers’ to become the engine for the growth, notably with the support of a massive public Agricultural Extension Programme, and also as members of the ruling party. However, the subordination of the regime's economic objectives to its political agenda undermines the implementation of its development strategy at the field level. This raises questions about the efficiency of the programme and the room left for entrepreneurship, even though this is a mainstay of the market economy that the regime sees as ‘vital’ for Ethiopia's ‘survival’ (Meles 2006).

Seed for change : the making and implementation of seed policies in Ethiopia

“…Similar to other studies -e.g. Berhanu and Poulton (2014), Chanie (2007), Chanyalew (2015), Chinigò and Fantini (2015), and Lefort (2012) -this study revealed that a major reason behind the status quo of centralized seed distribution, regardless of improvements made in seed supply efficiency through DSM, or the government's commitment to market-based policy, is that the government considers it to be of fundamental importance to maintain strong political ties with the farmers. For the government, seed distribution 'guarantees' the link with farmers, whereas DSM is expected to result in the opposite.…”

“…To this end, it is important to have a competent bureaucracy based on merit and with long-term professional career prospects (Evans 1995;Fritz and Menocal 2007;Rauch and Evans 2000). However, as argued by Lefort (2012), the version of the developmental state in Ethiopia does not include this concept as a necessary condition. Lefort (2012) further explains that the executive leaders of Ethiopia believe that they can formulate policies on their own and guide their implementation.…”

“…However, as argued by Lefort (2012), the version of the developmental state in Ethiopia does not include this concept as a necessary condition. Lefort (2012) further explains that the executive leaders of Ethiopia believe that they can formulate policies on their own and guide their implementation. This policy making approach denies experts and bureaucrats the capacity and power to operationalize hegemonic development projects as well as to give constructive suggestions in the decision-making process, particularly when the idea is outside the frame of the government.…”

“…It is thus important for the ruling party to directly provide agricultural inputs, including seed, as one of the strategies for attaining and maintaining strong links with farmers. Prior studies in Ethiopia have shown that agricultural input and extension services are used as a means to favour a certain group of farmers, showing the government's vested interest in remaining in the process of seed distribution (Berhanu and Poulton 2014;Chanie 2007;Chinigò and Fantini 2015;Lefort 2012). Thus, the distribution of seed of the major food crops is used as a strategy for creating a strong political link with the majority of the farmers, and for attaining economic growth.…”

Taxing the Urban Boom: Property Taxation and Land Leasing in Kigali and Addis Ababa

“…Like Rwanda under the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), Ethiopia under the Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) since 1991 has been associated with a highly ambitious developmental vision, consistent growth and substantial reduction in poverty, as well a long history of statehood and authoritarian governance (Clapham 2009;Markakis 2011;Lefort 2012;Gagliardone 2014). 3 The transformation of the capital city has likewise elicited comparison with Kigali.…”