China good for Africa: development must be human-based.

The editorial in African Business' March 2007 issue, China is Good for Africa, will have been lauded by many people who are looking for a new development partner for Africa to either replace or complement the activities of the World Bank and the IMF.

So often, when Africa's present economic condition is discussed and being blamed on these international financial institutions, one is tempted to ask the question: If the World Bank and IMF had not made their presence felt in Africa, what would the economic conditions in Africa now be--better or worse?

Development is a more human-based issue than a money-based issue. Policy initiatives that do not address the core aspects of the human factor in development may not produce the right impact in the long term.

Therefore, the experiences gained from the effects of the policies of the IMF and the World Bank have clearly revealed that the development of a country's economy is more than providing physical cash backed by expert advice. Financial resources should be considered subordinate to the ability of people to utilise those resources to create wealth.

Countries which have developed their human resources in conjunction with the IMF and World Bank's assistance are often found to have performed better.

Many have pointed out that the economies of what are known as the 'Asian tigers' have largely been propelled by Asian citizens who stayed abroad in the US and other developed countries of the West and then returned home to put into practice the entrepreneurial skills they acquired abroad.

A similar trend is now taking place with the African diaspora helping to drive Africa's economies forward. As an article in the February issue of African Business made clear, Ghana's economy is currently benefiting from Ghanaians abroad who are now returning home to put their new found skills to good use.

Regarding what I have called the human factor, the Chinese are, by nature, talented entrepreneurs. The only thing that probably has held them back from being on top of the business world has been their lack of adequate technical know-how. Now that ICT and globalisation has made industrial technology easily accessible and inexpensive, that technical know-how is at the doorstep of every nation. So it is no surprise that China's economy is resurgent.

Looking at the points raised in the editorial, one problem one would envisage with China's entry into Africa is when the Chinese begin to take control of African businesses. If that were to happen, the outcome might be worse than our experience with the policies of the World Bank and IMF.

To be on the safe side, it would be good to exercise some caution. The editorial might have read: 'China is good for Africa--for now.' We should all wait and see, indeed wait and pray, to see what the future holds for this new relationship.

Promises and assurances from China may not be good enough, but let's accept that so far so good with China in Africa.

Stephen E K Loh

Accra, Ghana