Leadershipand Political Regime

Policy Formulation in Developing CountriesGRIPS Development Forum

Leadership is Crucial Top leader with proper vision and decisive action is crucial for

development. Not all strong leaders are effective leaders. Economic literacy

is the key requirement. A good leader is the primary force in institutional change,

because he/she can build other necessary conditions and systems.

Effectiveleaders

Strong leaders

All leaders

Good Leaders:Given or Can be Promoted? Leaders and leadership quality are not directly controllable for

anyone and for any political regime. However, there are indirect ways to raise the probability of

emergence of good leaders: Leadership and elite education Comparative studies in development politics Systematic analysis of technical aspects of effective policy making

(eg. This course and my book, Learning to Industrialize) Well-calculated cooperation and pressure from foreign

governments and aid agencies (eg. Leftwich’s DLP) Regional contagion of good leadership (eg. East Asian AD) Biographies, dramas, movies of excellent national leaders

East Asia’s Historical SolutionAdopt Authoritarian Developmentalism (AD) during the take-off period (for a few decades)

Key ingredients of AD Powerful and wise (=economically literate) top leader Development as a supreme national goal (obsession) Technocrat group to support leader and execute policies Legitimacy derived from successful development Popular support (because of rising income)

The leader, as the primary force of change, creates the other four conditions.

Authoritarian Developmental States in East Asia1945 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 2000 05 10 15 20

China

South Korea

Taiwan

Philippines

Indonesia

Singapore

Malaysia

Thailand

Vietnam

Laos

Cambodia LonNolChan

Sy

Myanmar Win

North Korea

Note: The pink area shows authoritarian developmental leaders and the dark area indicates pre-independence periods.Source: Information in Suehiro (2000), p.115 was revised, updated, and expanded by the author.

Hu JintaoJiang Zemin

Kim Dae-jungKim YS

Kim Il Sung

No Tae-woo MoonJae-in

Do Muoi Vo Van Kiet Nguyen Tan Dung Ng XuanPhuc

Thongsing Thongloun

Lee Teng-huiYenCK Chiang Ching-kuo Ma YJ

YudhoyonoWahid Megawati

Magsaysay y Ramos

Bouasone

Chuan Chuan

Phan Van KhaiHo Chi Minh

Sisavath BounnyangKayson Phomvihane KhamtayKingdom of Laos

IndependentKingdom

Kim Jong Il

PolPot Hun Sen

Kim Jong-un

Hun SenNorodom Sihanouk

Ne Win San Yu SawMaung Than Shwe Thein SeinHtin

Kyaw

RanariddhHun Sen

Sao ShweThaik

WinMaungBa U

Prayuth*

MahathirHussein

Sarit

Pham Van Dong

Chiang Kai-shek Chiang Kai-shek

Park Chung-hee

Sukarno

Quirino Garcia Macapagal

Lee Kuan-yew

C. Aquino

Goh Chok Tong

Estrada Arroyo

Chen Shui-bian

YingluckAbhisit

Deng Xiaoping Xi Jinping

Pibulsonggram Thanom

LaborParty

People's ActionParty

Prem

Lee MB ParkGH

Najib Mahathir

Thaksin

Mao Zedong

Rhee Syng-man Chun Doo-hwan

Razak

Roh Moo-hyun

Rahman*

Tsai Ing-wen

Duterte

Widodo

Abdullah

B. Aquino

Lee Hsien Loong

Marcos

Soeharto

Why Power Concentration is Needed? Growth requires a critical mass of mutually enforcing policies.

A free hand of the state is needed to mobilize resources quickly and flexibly.

Private sector is weak in most developing countries. The state must lead initially.

If broad participation is allowed, policies are too slow and can’t achieve critical mass due to:

- Power struggle, party politics, interest groups, etc.- Processes which require patience and compromise, including parliamentary debate and consensus building- Some groups refuse to cooperate with state purposes

Emergence of AD AD emerges through election as well as a coup. AD is more likely to rise when the nation’s existence is

threatened by: External enemy Internal ethnic/social instability Incompetent and corrupt leader

The rise and fall of AD depends on:- Development stage of each country- International environmentEg. Cold War – reduced global criticism of authoritarian states

Post Cold War – non-democratic states were not allowedNow?

Guaranteed Failure of Development?Samuel P.Huntington and Joan M. Nelson, No Easy Choice: Political Participation in Developing Countries, Harvard Univ. Press, 1976.

Technocratic Model Populist ModelEconomic

growth Equalization

Political suppression

(authoritarianism)

Increased participation (democracy)

Rising inequality

Economic stagnation

Political instability

Political instability

Social explosion!!!

Political suppression!!!

START START

END END

East Asia’s Authoritarian Developmentalism

Economic growth

New social problems (inequality, crime, pollution...)

Political stability

Developmental policies

Exit to a richer & more democratic society (examples: Korea, Taiwan)

START

END

Social policies

(checked)

A few decades later

Exit of AD

AD is a temporary regime of convenience, needed only to push up the country to a higher level.

Once a certain level is reached, AD becomes an obstacle to further development.

Watanabe (1998) argues that successful AD melts away automatically through social change and democratic aspiration.

“if development under an authoritarian regime proceeds successfully, it will sow the seeds of its own dissolution” [improved living standards and diversified social strata]

Low income trap

High income society

Catching-up period(AD useful)

DemocracyPluralism

Gov’tװ

Capitalists

Farmers

Suppress

Farmers

Gov’tװ

Capitalists

Middle Mass

Workers, urban dwellers,professionals, students

Demand for democracy

20-30 years ofsustained growth

The Rise and Fall of East Asian Authoritarian Developmentalism

Government-capitalist coalition

(undemocratic)

Workers, urban dwellers

Features:

- Crisis as a catalyst

- Strong leader

- Elite technocrat group

- Developmental ideology

- Legitimacy through economic results (not election)

- Social change after 2-3 decades of success

Exit of AD – A Less Optimistic View However, there are also barriers to exit: stubborn leader,

bureaucratic resistance, interest groups. Therefore, leadership, policy and struggle are also needed for an exit.

Succession problem--strong leaders often refuse to step down because they will be revenged, jailed and even executed after transition, with most (all?) of their policies denied and reversed.

For a smooth exit, political maturity must accompany economic growth (difficult, but not impossible)

Opponents of AD Many people oppose AD for lack of democracy.

“I do not subscribe to the idea that you need to delay democratization just so that you can actually have growth or that you can have democracy only when you can afford it.” (Dani Rodrik, 2006)

Some argue that freedom, equality, participation and empowerment are required for development.

“Expansion of freedom is viewed… both as the primary end and as the principal means of development.” (Amartya Sen, 1999)

MDGs & SDGs, pro-poor or inclusive growth, endogenous development, human security

Korean ExperienceN.T.T.Huyen “Is There a Developmental Threshold for Democracy?: Endogenous factors in the Democratization of South Korea” (2004)

“Democracy as an advanced form of politics is not independent from socio-economic development.”

“Developmental threshold for democracy [is] a point in the development process beyond which democracy can be effectively installed and sustained.”

1960 1970 1980 1990

SyngmanRhee

(dictator)

Park Chung Hee(dictator)

Chun DooHwan

(dictator)

RohTaeWoo

Student protests

Minjung Movement

Yushin Constitution (1972)

Kwangju Massacre (1980)

Return to democracy (1987)

History of South Korean Politics

Corrupt & inefficient

Growth under AD & North threat

People’s protest mounts

Picked by Chun to be

elected

Economicgrowth

Socialmobilization

UrbanizationIndustrializationModernization

Political cultureCompromise as common political culture

Active political participationValues such as equality, moderation

Social structureRise of workers & middle class

Old classes losing powerEmergence of civil society

Democracy

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

1960 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94

Korea: Per Capita GDP in 1990 USD

Ms. Huyen’s Model

Graph1

1960

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

Real PCGDP

675.6756756757

392.4669350201

439.1891891892

595.6127360237

491.4004914005

424.0753911807

501.9305019305

580.5243445693

682.1428571429

793.2203389831

877.4193548387

905.1987767584

924.1982507289

1093.1506849315

1361.1111111111

1380.1843317972

1746.7532467533

2081.1359026369

2556.3909774436

2977.5474956822

2595.5766192733

2583.931133429

2559.4594594595

2677.9220779221

2773.631840796

2770.9832134293

3079.4392523364

3708.9467723669

4721.919302072

5456.7257559958

5917

6487.5954198473

6603.9325842697

6923.9230064161

7475.5671902269

8580.0681431005

Sheet1

Korea Per Capita GDP in USD (nominal)

PC GDPUS GDP defReal PCGDP

19601550.2294675.6756756757

61910.2318666667392.4669350201

621040.2368439.1891891892

631430.2400888889595.6127360237

641200.2442491.4004914005

651060.2499555556424.0753911807

661300.259501.9305019305

671550.267580.5243445693

681910.28682.1428571429

692340.295793.2203389831

702720.31877.4193548387

712960.327905.1987767584

723170.343924.1982507289

733990.3651093.1506849315

745390.3961361.1111111111

755990.4341380.1843317972

768070.4621746.7532467533

7710260.4932081.1359026369

7813600.5322556.3909774436

7917240.5792977.5474956822

8016430.6332595.5766192733

8118010.6972583.931133429

8218940.742559.4594594595

8320620.772677.9220779221

8422300.8042773.631840796

8523110.8342770.9832134293

8626360.8563079.4392523364

8732750.8833708.9467723669

8843300.9174721.919302072

8952330.9595456.7257559958

90591715917

9167991.0486487.5954198473

9270531.0686603.9325842697

9375541.0916923.9230064161

9485671.1467475.5671902269

95100731.1748580.0681431005

Sheet1

Real PCGDP

Sheet2

Sheet3

Farmers80%

RulersRulers and upper bourgeoisie

Students and professionals

Industrial workers, peasants, miners More than 50%

Middle class

38.5%

1961 1985Source: N.T.T.Huyen (2004)

Form vs. Substance of Democracy in the Context of Latecomer Development Is AD replicable in Africa? Central Asia? Elsewhere? Does 21st Century allow AD? The Cold War already ended. Can we separate “authoritarian” elements from

“developmental” elements, and take only the latter? Countries that already have free election, functioning

parliament, human rights—can they adopt developmentalism without sacrificing their political achievements?

Need to go beyond simple dichotomy between AD vs. democracy

Need to decompose democracy into components and stages and analyze its structure

Components of Democracy Human rights and freedom Legitimacy (election) Rule of law Participation Public purpose Power decentralization (L-E-J, center-local)

Only some components should be restricted, if at all, to conduct development policy. Amount of restriction should be reasonable.

Random, excessive oppression should never be allowed.

Instability of Developing Country Politics Even under the form of democracy, politics may be

characterized by instability, personal gains, intolerance and radicalism.

Rules have not been institutionalized, and authority is not firmly established or accepted.

Election results, human rights, parliamentary rules can be bended, and contested by opponents.

Disputes go to extremes (violence and terrorism). Negotiation and compromise are rejected.

“Revenge politics” – prosecution, ousting or even execution of former PM or President; complete denial of his/her policies.

Africa: Political Regimes 1955-2010

Sources: Author’s classification based on the following datasets and studies: M. Miyamoto & M. Matsuda, eds, Shinsho African History, Kodansha (1997); B. Ndulu, S.A. O’Connell, R.H. Bates, P. Collier and C.C. Soludo, eds, The Political Economy of Economic Growth in Africa 1960-2000, Cambridge University Press (2008); CIA, World Fact Book, various issues; Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Basic Data of Countries, various issues.

0

10

20

30

40

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

Transition period

At civil war

Multi-party system

Military regime

One-party system

Colony

Number of countries (total 48)

Graph1

195519551955195519551955

195619561956195619561956

195719571957195719571957

195819581958195819581958

195919591959195919591959

196019601960196019601960

196119611961196119611961

196219621962196219621962

196319631963196319631963

196419641964196419641964

196519651965196519651965

196619661966196619661966

196719671967196719671967

196819681968196819681968

196919691969196919691969

197019701970197019701970

197119711971197119711971

197219721972197219721972

197319731973197319731973

197419741974197419741974

197519751975197519751975

197619761976197619761976

197719771977197719771977

197819781978197819781978

197919791979197919791979

198019801980198019801980

198119811981198119811981

198219821982198219821982

198319831983198319831983

198419841984198419841984

198519851985198519851985

198619861986198619861986

198719871987198719871987

198819881988198819881988

198919891989198919891989

199019901990199019901990

199119911991199119911991

199219921992199219921992

199319931993199319931993

199419941994199419941994

199519951995199519951995

199619961996199619961996

199719971997199719971997

199819981998199819981998

199919991999199919991999

200020002000200020002000

200120012001200120012001

200220022002200220022002

200320032003200320032003

200420042004200420042004

200520052005200520052005

200620062006200620062006

200720072007200720072007

200820082008200820082008

200920092009200920092009

201020102010201020102010

Number of countries (total 48)

Colony

One-party system

Military regime

Multi-party system

At civil war

Transition period

45

1

0

2

0

0

44

1

0

2

1

0

43

2

0

2

1

0

42

3

0

2

1

0

42

3

0

2

1

0

25

14

1

7

1

0

23

15

1

8

1

0

20

15

1

10

2

0

19

16

1

9

2

1

17

19

1

9

1

1

16

18

2

10

2

0

14

18

5

9

2

0

14

18

5

9

2

0

11

19

6

10

2

0

11

19

6

10

2

0

11

19

7

10

1

0

11

18

8

10

1

0

11

20

9

8

0

0

11

21

9

7

0

0

10

19

12

7

0

0

5

24

10

6

2

1

4

24

9

8

2

1

3

25

10

7

2

1

3

25

11

6

2

1

3

25

11

7

2

0

2

25

12

7

2

0

2

24

13

7

2

0

2

25

12

7

2

0

2

25

12

6

3

0

2

26

11

6

3

0

2

26

11

6

3

0

2

25

12

6

3

0

2

26

11

6

3

0

2

26

11

6

3

0

2

26

11

6

3

0

1

18

9

15

5

0

1

13

6

21

7

0

1

7

3

29

7

1

0

7

1

33

6

1

0

6

2

34

6

0

0

6

2

35

5

0

0

6

1

36

5

0

0

6

1

36

5

0

0

6

1

35

6

0

0

6

1

35

6

0

0

6

1

36

5

0

0

6

1

36

5

0

0

5

0

37

5

1

0

5

0

37

4

2

0

5

0

37

4

2

0

4

0

38

3

3

0

4

0

39

2

3

0

4

0

40

2

2

0

4

0

41

2

1

0

4

0

40

3

1

0

5

0

37

5

1

F2-1

Figure 2-1. Authoritarian Developmentalism in East Asia

19455055606570758085909520000510

49769702

ChinaMao ZedongDeng XiaopingJiang ZeminHu Jintao

48606179808792970308

South KoreaRhee Syng-manPark Chung-heeChun Doo-hwanNoh Tae-wooKim YNKim Dae-jungRoh Moo-hyunLee MB

497578880408

TaiwanNationalist PartyChiang Kai-shekYen CKChiang Ching-kuoLee Teng-huiChen Shui-bianMa YJ

4648535761658692980110

PhilippinesQuirinoGarciaAquinoRamosEstradaArroyoBA

6798990104

IndonesiaSukarnoWahidMegawatiYudhoyono

495559659004

SingaporeLabor PartyPeople's Action PartyLee Kuan-yewGoh Chok-tongLee Hsien Loong

577076810309

MalaysiaUMNO / RahmanRazakHusseinMahathirAbdullahNajib

464857586373 757677808891929701060811

ThailandPhibunSaritThanomPremChuanChuanThaksinAhbisit

5176

VietnamIndochina Communist PartyLabor PartyVietnamese Communist Party

759198010611

LaosKingdom of LaosKayson Phom VihaneKhamtaiSisavathBounnhangBouasone

4953607076798993

CambodiaIndependent KingdomMonarchy-RegencyKhmer RepublicPeople's Republic of KampucheaKingdom of Cambodia

4862889711

MyanmarU NuBurma Socialist Programme Party ･Ne WinSLORCSPDC/Than Shwe

4857629411

North KoreaKim Tu BongChai Yong-KunKim Il SungKim Jong Il

Note: The grey area shows authoritarian developmental leaders and the dark area indicates pre-independence periods. For China, the most influential leader among those holding highest positions is indicated.

Source: Information in Suehiro (2000), p.115 was revised, updated, and expanded by the author.

Marcos

Suharto

F2-2

A:植民地 ショクミンチマグレブを除く、サブサハラ・アフリカ48カ国 ノゾコク

B:一党制 イットウセイ多党制への移行時期は、基本的に「多党制を認める憲法制定」時とする。 タトウセイイコウジキキホンテキタトウセイミトケンポウセイテイジ

C:軍政など グンセイ内戦経験国は、アンゴラ、ソマリア、モザンビーク、ルワンダ、リベリア、スーダン、コンゴ民、チャド、エリトリア、ブルンジ、シエラ・レオネ、とする。 ナイセンケイケンクニ

D:多党制 タトウセイ

E:内戦 ナイセン

F:移行期間 イコウキカン

country19551956195719581959196019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977197819791980198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

ANGOLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEFFFFFDDB91年に多党制認める憲法制定。それ以降を多党制とするか？1975年～2002年まで内戦とするか？2002年以降の体制は？ ネンタトウセイミトケンポウセイテイイコウタトウセイネンネンナイセンネンイコウタイセイ

BENINAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

BOTSWANAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

BURKINA FASOAAAAABBBBBBCCCCCCCCCFFFFCCCCCCCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDegaでは1966-1980年が多党制となっているけど何で！？ ネンタトウセイナン

BURUNDIAAAAAAAEEFCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD独立後66年までの体制？1992年の民主選挙以降も内戦状態が続いたり・・・ ドクリツゴネンタイセイネンミンシュセンキョイコウナイセンジョウタイツヅ

CAMEROONAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD　

CAPE VERDEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLICAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

CHADAAAAABBBBBEEEEECCCCCBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

COMOROSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDコモロ多党制以前の体制、soaで要確認 タトウセイイゼンタイセイヨウカクニン

CONGOAAAAABBBFBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD独立後数年間の体制？多党制の時期soaで要確認。 ドクリツゴスウネンカンタイセイタトウセイジキヨウカクニン

COTE D'IVOIREAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDCCCEEEFFDDDE憲法では多党制を認めていたが、実質は93年まで一党制（唯一の合法政党）。90年に初の複数政党制選挙（これをもって多党制とするべきか）。99年に軍事クーデター。 ケンポウタトウセイミトジッシツネンイットウセイユイイツゴウホウセイトウネンハツフクスウセイトウセイセンキョタトウセイネングンジ

DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGOAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBFFFFDDDDD６５年モブツ政権前の体制は？90年に多党制を認める憲法制定（soaで要確認）。Egaではずっと一党独裁と分類。 ネンセイケンマエタイセイネンタトウセイミトケンポウセイテイヨウカクニンイットウドクサイブンルイ

DJIBOUTIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB92年に多党制を認める憲法制定。（でも実質は一党独裁の内戦状態）。Egaでは一党制としている。 ネンタトウセイミトケンポウセイテイジッシツイットウドクサイナイセンジョウタイイットウセイ

EQUATORIAL GUINEAAAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBCCCBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB91年に多党制を認める憲法制定。しかし、今に至るまで実質一党独裁体制。どうする？Egaでは一党制になってるけど。 ネンタトウセイミトケンポウセイテイイマイタジッシツイットウドクサイタイセイイットウセイ

ERITRIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

ETHIOPIABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCCCCCBBBBBFFDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDメンギスツが失脚してから多党制認める憲法制定までの間の体制はどうする？ シッキャクタトウセイミトケンポウセイテイアイダタイセイ

GABONAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD　

GAMBIAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD96年以降、一党制か多党制か？Soaで要確認。多分多党制。 ネンイコウイットウセイタトウセイヨウカクニンタブンタトウセイ

GHANAAABBBBBBBBBCCCDDDCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

GUINEAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD2008年、コンテ大統領死亡後、軍のクーデター。2010年に民主的大統領選挙実施。 ネンダイトウリョウシボウゴグンネンミンシュテキダイトウリョウセンキョジッシ

GUINEA BISSAUAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCBBBBBBBDDDDDDDEEDDDDDDDDDDE1991年に憲法改正。でも軍事クーデター続いてるよー。 ネンケンポウカイセイグンジツヅ

KENYAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

LESOTHOAAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

LIBERIADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDCCCCCCCCCCEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEFFFFF2006年、選挙により大統領就任,正式政府発足 ネンセンキョダイトウリョウシュウニンセイシキセイフホッソク

MADAGASCARAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEE2009年軍事クーデター・・・・ ネングンジ

MALAWIAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

MALIAAAAABBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCCCBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

MAURITANIAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD1991年複数政党制を認める憲法。体制としては多党制、だけどその後軍事政権の場合？ ネンフクスウセイトウセイミトケンポウタイセイタトウセイゴグンジセイケンバアイ

MAURITIUSAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

MOZAMBIQUEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD内戦にするかねえ ナイセン

NAMIBIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

NIGERAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD1996年クーデターにより軍事政権。その後も軍事クーデターが続いて.憲法停止したりして今に至る。一方、複数政党制は機能している。 ネングンジセイケンゴグンジツヅケンポウテイシイマイタイッポウフクスウセイトウセイキノウ

NIGERIAAAAAADDDDDDCCCCCCCCCCCCCDDDDCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDD独立後、軍事クーデターまでの政治体制がわからん ドクリツゴグンジセイジタイセイ

RWANDAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDCCCCCBBBBBBBBBBBBEEEEEDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD独立後、７３年までの体制（egaでは多党制）？いつから多党制とするか（９１年に憲法改正。だけどすぐ内戦開始。）？91～94年は内戦にするかな？その後はすぐ多党制でいいのかな？ ドクリツゴネンタイセイタトウセイタトウセイネンケンポウカイセイナイセンカイシネンナイセンアトタトウセイ

SAO TOME AND PRINCIPEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

SENEGALAAAAADDDBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEGAでは独立以降ずっと多党制ということになっているが、soaや外務省資料（http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/oda/shiryo/kuni/04_databook/05_africa/africa_25/africa_25.html）では、1976年に複数政党制導入になっている。ので、EGAの記載を修正。 ドクリツイコウタトウセイガイムショウシリョウネンフクスウセイトウセイドウニュウキサイシュウセイ

SEYCHELLESAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

SIERRA LEONEAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDCCCCCCCCCCCCCEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDDDD91年以降、軍政とするか、内戦とするか。９０年に多党制認める憲法制定してるが直後に内戦に入ってるので、多党制としないのでいいか。２００２年大統領・議会選挙実施。以降を多党制としていいのか？ ネンイコウグンセイナイセンネンタトウセイミトケンポウセイテイチョクゴナイセンハイタトウセイネンダイトウリョウギカイセンキョジッシイコウタトウセイ

SOMALIAAAAAADDDDDDDDDCCCCCCCBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE独立後すぐに憲法制定、それに基づき選挙（多党制としとく）。 ドクリツゴケンポウセイテイモトセンキョタトウセイ

SOUTH AFRICADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD９４年以前も多党制とする？ ネンイゼンタトウセイ

SUDANAEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEECCCCCCCCCCCEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE独立後、連立政権（多党制としてもいいのか？）５８年にクーデター。６４年に移行政府（全政党代表から成る）に権限移譲。６９年にクーデター。第二次内戦1983年勃発。終結はいつ？ ドクリツゴレンリツセイケンタトウセイネンネンイコウセイフゼンセイトウダイヒョウナケンゲンイジョウネンダイニジナイセンネンボッパツシュウケツ

SWAZILANDAAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

TANZANIAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

TOGOAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEGAの区分の根拠（73年まで多党制、以降一党制）が全くわからない。独自判断で修正。独立後６3年までの体制？軍政から一党制への移行時期(一応、７２年の民政移管からとしている）？ クブンコンキョネンタトウセイイコウイットウセイマッタドクジハンダンシュウセイドクリツゴネンタイセイグンセイイットウセイイコウジキイチオウネンミンセイイカン

UGANDAAAAAAAADDDDBBBBBCCBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDD独立以降、オボテ政権までの体制？どこまでが軍政？どこからが一党制？２００５年７月、複数政党制を支持する国民投票。翌年、複数政党制のもとでの大統領選実施。 ドクリツイコウセイケンタイセイグンセイイットウセイネンガツフクスウセイトウセイシジコクミントウヒョウヨクネンフクスウセイトウセイダイトウリョウセンジッシ

ZAMBIAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD2000年以降ok。1973年に一党制が宣言されたが、EGAでは1970年時点で「一党制」となっているので、それ以前も一党制として扱う。 ネンイコウネンイットウセイセンゲンネンジテンイットウセイイゼンイットウセイアツカ

ZIMBABWEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

Souce:

宮本正興・松田素二編「新書アフリカ史」講談社　1997年

Ndulu, Benno J., Stephen A. O'Connell, Robert H. Bates, Paul Collier, and Chukwuma C. Soludo, eds. (2008), The Political Economy of Economic Growth in Africa 1960-2000, Cambridge University Press, Volume I. pp.339-344.

CIA, World Fact Book

Africa South of Sahara

外務省　各国基礎データ ガイムショウカッコクキソ

19551956195719581959196019611962196319641965196619671968196919701971197219731974197519761977197819791980198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

A4544434242252320191716141411111111111110543332222222222111000000000000000000

B1123314151516191818181919191820211924242525252524252526262526262618137766666666555444445

C00000111112556678991210910111112131212111112111111963122111111000000000

D22222781099109910101010877687677776666666152129333435363635353636373737383940414037

E01111112212222211000222222223333333577665556655544322235

F00000000110000000000111100000000000001100000000122332111

国数確認 コクスウカクニン4848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848484848

Fig. 2-2. Political Regimes in Africa

Sources: created by the author using the following materials: Miyamoto and Matsuda (1997); Ndulu et al. (2008); CIA, World Fact Book (various issues); and Japanese Ministry of Finance, Basic Data of Countries (various issues).

F2-2

Number of countries (total 48)

Colony

One-party system

Military regime

Multi-party system

At civil war

Transition period

Ethiopia’sDemocratic Developmentalism (DD) Prime Minister Meles Zenawi (in power 1991-2012) Aiming at paradigm shift from Neo-liberalism to DD DD: “A developmental regime that stays in power for long

by winning free elections under multiple parties”- Strong state promoting value creation and punishing rent seeking- Small farmers as political base (not capitalists)- Agricultural Development Led Industrialization (ADLI)

Example: leather industry promotion- Sticks: tax & ban for unfinished/semi-finished exports- Carrots: Leather Institute (training, technology, etc.), donor support, twinning with India, prioritized allocation of loans/forex, matching with foreign firms, monthly gov’t-business meetings and monitoring, etc.

Gov’tװ

Ruling party

Capitalists(Large & medium size producers,merchants, banks, foreign firms)

Urban workers, SMEs, service providers

Small farmers(Drivers of agriculture?)

Political coalition

Drivers of industrialization

Leadership by strong developmental state

Institutions, policies, incentives (carrots & sticks) for allocating

rents to value creators and punishing rent

seekers

Donors

ProfessionalsIntellectuals

Ethiopia: DD, ADLI, GTP

Are AD and DD Really Different? Today’s latecomers are not necessarily more advanced than

past latecomers in political maturity, human resource or private sector dynamism.

They must adopt “democracy (elections),” free market and globalization because these principles now rule in the world (since 1990s).

The substance of development (productivity, competitiveness, policy quality, etc.) cannot be realized just by changing political or economic frameworks.

AD and DD are different adaptations by national leaders to shifting global environments for the same purpose of development through receiving international aid and support.

PM Meles of Ethiopia（Letter dated July 30, 2009)

“Democratization in developing countries that comes as a result of external pressure is in my view unsustainable… because the external pressure is unsustainable. The neo-liberal triumphalism… is coming to an end.”

“There is an unavoidable trade-off between democratization and policy continuity… There is always the risk that the developmental state will be voted out… [but] it is not inevitable.”

“One last point I want to stress however is that AD and DD are much closer to each other than AD is to other Authoritarian governments or DD is to other democratic governments.”

Pure dictatorship

Advanced democracyAD DD

Leadership�and Political RegimeLeadership is CrucialGood Leaders:�Given or Can be Promoted?East Asia’s Historical Solutionスライド番号 5Why Power Concentration is Needed?Emergence of ADGuaranteed Failure of Development?スライド番号 9Exit of ADスライド番号 11Exit of AD – A Less Optimistic ViewOpponents of ADKorean Experienceスライド番号 15スライド番号 16スライド番号 17Form vs. Substance of Democracy in the Context of Latecomer DevelopmentComponents of DemocracyInstability of �Developing Country Politicsスライド番号 21Ethiopia’s�Democratic Developmentalism (DD)スライド番号 23Are AD and DD Really Different?PM Meles of Ethiopia�（Letter dated July 30, 2009)