NEO-PATRIMONIALISM & SOCIAL CONFLICT IN AFRICA

1. NEO-PATRIMONIALISM & SOCIAL CONFLICT IN AFRICA

2.  Contemporary politics in Africa is best understood as the exercise of neo-patrimonial power • ‘The inquiring student of African politics may be better advised to read Machiavelli or Hobbes than the “constitutions”, official plans, or party programmes of most African governments if he wishes to understand their central characteristics and dynamics’ - Robert H. Jackson and Carl G. Rosberg, Personal Rule in Black Africa

3. Neo-Patrimonialism and “Big Man” rule is endemic across Africa • “Big Man” politics - corrupt, autocratic and highly personalised rule – an extreme form of presidentialism

4. The Big Man syndrome is a quasi-traditional set of paternalistic and autocratic practices • Many African elites believe they are the only ones destined to rule • The Big Man feels above the law – which is only for the “little people”, the ordinary citizens

5. PATRIMONIALISM • Max Weber’s classification of ruling types Patrimonialism: a social/political order where patrons secure the loyalty and support of clients by bestowing benefits to them from their own or state resources • based on vertical links of patronage between the political élite and their client constituencies

6.  Related to concepts such as:  a. patronage - politically motivated distribution of favours to groups b. clientelism – exchange or brokerage of specific services and resources c. rent-seeking – individual receives resources from another person or persons as the result of a "favorable" decision on some public policy

7. NOTE: “rent” = financial income which is not matched by corresponding labour Rent here arises from the manipulation of the economic environment (e.g. monopolies, granting of contracts, import and trading restrictions, subsidies) 

8. Patrimonialism can be characterized as a system of rule in which all governmental authority and corresponding economic rights are treated as privately “owned” • Some forms of patrimonial rule have existed in many parts of the world • In the past, kings or emperors saw no difference between the public and the private realm • Taxes, or “tributes” were kept by the ruler as part of his household - even though they were collected by officials on behalf of the state

9. Officials cultivated their followers in a kind of master-disciple relationship • In most occasions the patrons provided protection, benefits, and also promised the promotions of their followers • In turn, the followers gave support needed by the patrons 

10. L'etatc'estmoi!

11. NEO-PATRIMONIALISM  The prefix ‘neo’ indicates a new and modern version of the earlier practice of patrimonialism. • it is in the interplay between the formal and the informal that the key features of African politics is to be found • Many African leaders, even though they publicly denounce corruption and tribalism, energetically maintain informal networks of patronage that are the basis of their power

12. Neo-patrimonialism is where patronage, clientelism, rent- seeking etc exist BUT where the structures of a modern state are ostensibly in place • A rational-professional formal bureaucracy was introduced during colonialism • Today modern bureaucratic norms co-exist with patrimonial ones  Public policy is mediated by the struggle between these two sets of norms

13. The real substance of African politics takes place primarily in an informal sphere • This is generally unseen by outsiders • The formal apparatus of government – institutions, constitutions, law, bureaucracies etc are often little more than a façade

14. Public officials are not impartial custodians of public services, but rather are links in the patrimonial chain that connects patrons with their clients

15. Political accountability rests on the extent to which patrons are able to meet the expectations of their followers • The quest for political legitimacy requires the fulfilment of obligations that have nothing to do with the emergence of a “neutral” public sphere or the general good • Power usually exercised through special links to the masses based on kinship, regional, religious or ethnic relations

16. In neopatrimonial systems the distribution of resources generally only benefits particular groups • These are the ones who are connected to the politicians through patronage networks - at the cost of the rest of the population

17. NEO-PATRIMONIALISM: CHARACTERISTICS AND LOGICS There are 4 basic elements: 1. Hybridity: informal patrimonialnorms and practices operate alongside formal rules and institutions i.e. the existence of both patrimonial and legal-rational institutions • In neopatrimonial states, patrimonial practices exploit (and free ride on) legal rational institutions 2. Little distinction exists between the public and private spheres

18. 3. Relative importance of formal and informal institutions: • The formalised state grants legitimacy and recognition from the international state system (a prerequisite for a state to be a state) • This grants access to aid, loans from the IMF etc, political and economic support from outside of Africa

20. 4. Unpredictability: • Neo-patrimonial states lack a common set of predictable rules • Within the system the application of formal and informal rules are often inconsistent, producing uncertainty about which rules are enforced, when and why • This deters productive, long-term, investment – except in capital intensive industries such as resource extraction

21.  The informality of neo-patrimonial states is then expressed through four characteristics: 1.Weak/no separation of public and private spheres: • The result is the private appropriation of the public sphere and the use of public resources for political legitimation – manifested in nepotism and corruption 2.Vertical ties predominate  Weak class formation (and weak attachment to the state) mean that people identify their interests not with horizontal (class or national) lines but rather vertically i.e. kinship, ethnicity, regional.

22. Combined with weak separation of the public and private spheres, this can result in the perceived “ethnicisation” of the state, tribalism and conflict –Rwanda, Burundi, DRC, all examples of this

23. 3. Zero-sum (“winner takes all”) nature of neopatrimonial regimes  Competition and control of the state is everything • It is vital for the patron to maintain his position and so have access to state resources) • Only this can guarantee the loyalty of the clients i.e. the patron is able to deliver favours (in the absence of reliable public services and alternative sources of power and money)

24. 4. Personalism:  Power is concentrated in one individual’s hands who dominates the state apparatus and stands above its laws (the “big man” syndrome)

25. The political culture and logic is thus one of a mixture of formal and informal institutions, rules, norms and practices with personalism, clientelism and patronage granting legitimacy in a winner-takes all situation  all based on fluid, often unstable, political alliances grounded in the pursuit of power (and money) rather than issues or political principles/ideologies

26. BASIC FORMS OF NEO-PATRIMONIAL SYSTEMS

27. Botswana, Mauritius, Cape Verde, and possibly Rwanda, South Africa, Namibia, (and to a lesser extent, Ghana and Seychelles) would be placed in between bureaucratic neopatrimonialism and the Weberian model of a modern state • NOTE: States may move from one ideal type to another •  Under Sani Abacha (1993-1998) Nigeria was a sultanistic regime - it is now probably more an oligarchic regime • It is not a precise science!

28. PROBLEMS FOR SICIAL COHESION • Neo-patrimonialism seemed to work during the immediate post-independence period (although it was always unstable) But… • Relative economic well-being of the 1960s/early 1970s was shattered by the world economic crisis in mid-1970s • As revenues declined and debt increased, African patrons began to run out of means to supply networks

29. Since access to state resources is central, struggles for power intensified, often leading to conflict • Also, neo-patrimonialism is essentially anti-development and leads to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a very few  legitimacy based on patrons feeding networks in a climate of short-termism • Long-term purpose of national development is not a priority

30. LINK TO SOCIAL CONFLICT Neo-patrimonialism: • Politicises ethnic and regional identities through the partial exploitation of state and state resources • Promotes the weakness of government institutions to manage conflict • Hinders long-term availability of resources to population Elites in neo-patrimonial states govern by a logic which generates a very weak sense of the public realm - resources are not used to provide public goods

31. Leaders have incentives to prevent development in order to perpetuate the system of "ins" and "outs“ • Elites have access to universities and hospitals in the developed world, and enjoying personal wealth and status – why bother with broad-based development?

32. 4. State seen as honey-pot of resources to be absorbed and appropriated – but those outside the networks may feel violence is the only way to access such riches 5. High inequality in access to resources: • The "ins" of the system benefit; the "outs“ lose out • in Nigeria, 80% of oil revenue has accrued to 1% of the population

33. Access to governmental assets is paramount – thus struggles for power intensify and violence seen as the only answer to get inside the patronage loop  Gaining support is often based on developing ethnic constituencies

34. CONCLUSION • Many (most?) African leaders have relied on effected control and patronage rather than through building a coherent, integral state • They control the state but it is a state which their own practices daily undermine and subvert

35. ANY QUESTIONS?