The robber barons

According to World Bank estimates from household surveys, the share of people in Africa living on less than $1.90 a day fell from 56% in 1990 to 43% in 2012.

However, there were many more poor people in Africa in 2012 than in 1990 (more than 330m, up from about 280m), as a result of rapid population growth.

Africa will not meet the Millennium Development Goal target of halving poverty by 2015 and projections are that the world’s poor will be increasingly concentrated in Africa. Of the 10 most unequal countries in the world today, seven are in Africa.

Despite the increase in school enrollment, more than two out of five adults are still unable to read or write, and the quality of education is very low. About three-quarters of sixth graders in Malawi and Zambia cannot read for meaning, providing just one example of the school quality challenge.

But almost half of the 10 million graduates churned out of the over 668 universities in Africa yearly end up unemployed.

Africa is not poor. Africa is a rich continent. She is the world's most resource-rich continent with 50 percent of gold, 55 percent of diamonds, 96 percent of oil, 40 percent of hydroelectric power potential and millions of hectares of arable lands. Africa is not only rich in natural resources but also in human capacity, which are its true riches in this twenty-first century. Across the length and breadth of the continent are vast potentials and budding talents of young people which when effectively harnesses and developed, would give impetus to Africa's social, economic and political efforts. The youth of Africa forms the generation of hope for Africa's development.

Africa is a rich continent led by greedy and covetous leaders. They grab all that there is but are not satisfied; they come to power broke but by the time they leave office they have amassed immeasurable wealth for themselves. Billions of dollars of public funds continue to be stashed away by some African leaders while schoolchildren have neither books nor desks nor teachers. Our people live in poverty, our hospitals are very poorly equipped and staffed, our teeming youths have no jobs and our roads are crumbling. Our greedy leaders have no care for the common people. They misuse funds, hide more in Swiss and other banks leaving the masses to suffer in absolute poverty. It is only greed that will make African politicians divert public funds meant for development into their personal bank accounts to build mansions and buy luxury cars.

Little changes

22 years after apartheid, we find startlingly little change in South Africa. Black people do occupy virtually all positions of power in the government at all levels. And formal segregation has been eliminated. While this is incredibly significant, in the end, the whites were willing to accept that form of change. Yet conditions of living for the Black majority have not improved dramatically.

While there are a few Black millionaires and even a couple Black billionaires, there is greater economic inequality today than at the end of apartheid in 1995. The whites have clung to ill-gotten economic power. Perhaps even more strikingly, the prison population has gone up in absolute numbers by about 30 percent in the last 22 years. More surprisingly, whereas in 1995 there were about 400 people doing life sentences in South Africa, today there are more than 13,000. Democracy in South Africa has come with mandatory minimums, "truth in sentencing" laws and even private prisons owned by the GEO Group and G4S. White economic power and the punishment paradigm remain hegemonic. South Africa failed to heed the warning of a great US freedom fighter who transitioned recently, Daniel Berrigan, who once reminded us that "a revolution is interesting insofar as it avoids like the plague the plague it promised to heal."

From here

Ghana and Poverty

Ghana's economy has witnessed steady growth over the last 30 years, economists say, but they have raised concerns over mounting inequality, which now sees the richest Ghanaians consuming 6.8 times more food than the poorest, up from 6.4 in 10 years ago.

Around a third of all national consumption is attributed to the wealthiest 10 per cent in the West African country, the poorest 10 per cent consume just 1.72 per cent, according to the Ghana Poverty and Inequality report produced this year.

The growth rate among the two groups has witnessed positive trends since 1990s, but the poor's growth rate has been lower than the wealthiest groups, Professor Andy Mckay from the economics department of University of Sussex, said. "Looking at consumption levels, we see that the gap between the poorest 10 per cent and the richest 10 per cent of the population has been on the rise and has also increased since 2006," Mackay said. "We also found that the average consumption of this wealthiest group increased by 27 per cent between 2006 and 20013, whereas for the poorest it only increased by 19 per cent, meaning growth for the richest group was over 1.4 times greater than for the poorest in this period." The increase in inequality, the report said, has dampened poverty reduction efforts.

The report also says child poverty is higher than the overall poverty and is also greater among farming households than any other group. This implied many rural children lacked access to good diet, education, health services and good drinking water. "We estimate that in Ghana, a child is almost 40 per cent more likely to live in poverty than an adult," McKay said, and "this inequality has risen substantially from the 1990s when children were only 15 per cent more likely to be poorer than adults."

The three regions in north of the country – northern, upper east and upper west – now have the highest levels of poverty. The upper west has the highest level of inequality and largest increase in inequality since the 1990s, while the lowest level of inequality is found in the greater Accra region.

Angola's Secret Health Crisis

Angola is facing a public health emergency.  The UN agency has declared the outbreak a “grade two emergency” on its three-point scale. (Other grade two emergencies include the conflict in northeastern Nigeria, Cyclone Pam in Vanuatu last year, and floods in Myanmar, Mozambique and Malawi that displaced tens of thousands of people.) No one knows the true mortality figures – a product of both Angola’s poor data-keeping and the government’s preference to bury bad news. But there have been media reports of 50 people (or 25 children) dying daily from malaria, yellow fever, dengue and typhoid.

Its under-funded hospitals, inadequate at the best of times, have been overwhelmed by a series of disease outbreaks, and the government has been forced to turn to private business and charities for help. The UN Resident Coordinator Pier Paolo Balladelli and the heads of UN agencies called a meeting with the Angolan Industrial Association to appeal for private sector donations and logistical help with the yellow fever crisis. Paula Roque of Oxford University said she had heard of Angolan doctors based in South Africa sending medical supplies back home to help ease the shortages in a country that is Africa’s second largest oil exporter, and until recently was a rising economic star on the continent. 

“Angola is going through a very serious economic crisis as it’s heavily reliant on oil,” said Vibeke Skauerud, from Norwegian Church Aid. “Revenues have fallen by more than half. Hospitals are running out of basic supplies. That, coupled with bad governance, has led to the deep crisis that we now see.”

An outbreak of mosquito-transmitted yellow fever has killed 168 people since it emerged in Luanda’s poor neighbourhood of Viana in December – with suspected cases now reported in 16 out of 18 provinces.  Health officials launched a vaccination programme in Luanda in February, but the World Health Organization says the campaign has been hit by a number of constraints. “These included availability of vaccines, inadequate number of vaccination teams and limited funds to cover operational activities," a WHO briefing said.  The immunisation campaign has so far reached only six out of a targeted 12 municipalities in Luanda. Cases seem to be accelerating across the provinces, with reports of yellow fever reaching the northern border with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, WHO said.

Oil accounts for 95 percent of government revenue. “Of course the oil price crash could be considered one of the reasons [for the crisis], but the huge corruption across the health sector is another one, and maybe the most important one,” said Alves da Rocha of the Centre for Studies and Scientific Investigation at the Catholic University of Angola.

“Civil servants haven’t been paid their salaries. Inflation has tripled food prices. Angola is going through a real financial crisis,” Paula Roque told IRIN. 

Rafael Marques de Morais catalogues in scary detail how health workers lack even some of the most basic items, like gloves and masks. Not the best backdrop for an emerging crisis that has so far flown largely under the international radar.

Author Ricardo Soares de Oliveira, an associate professor in comparative politics at the University of Oxford explains :

"Throughout modern history, the accumulation of capital has rarely been a pretty sight, but post-socialist Angola is in a febrile class of its own. It is virtually impossible for meaningful activity to occur outside the charmed circle of the politically protected.” Mr de Oliveira describes the ditching of "ill-cut uniforms" and their replacement with "Savile Row suits" as the country's elite embraced what he calls "oligarchic capitalism, Angola style". He observes how instead of the slave masters and mercenaries of years gone by, today armies of suited overseas advisors pull the strings within ministries and state-owned firms. Mr de Oliveira also explains how corruption has permeated every stratum of Angolan society, from having to pay for "free" primary school places and university pass marks, to body disposal by the state morgue. And he notes sadly how "most people in power are perceived as thieves", but criticism is muted by a desire for emulation and a share of that "easy-oil money" from this petro-state prosperity.

The real economic migrants - the rich

Kenya's super rich are stashing their money abroad and might relocate there in just under ten years to safeguard the interest of their children according to the report on global wealth. Andrew Shirley, editor of the Knight Frank Wealth report says there is an increasing interest in property in the United Kingdom and Dubai. Shirley explained that with a lot of the wealthy children studying abroad, they have acquired global exposure and are more open to opportunities out there.

"There is a great mobility of wealth with Africans and Kenyans buying property abroad. London is the most popular for Kenyans searching for property followed by Dubai," he told the Nation in Nairobi yesterday.

According to Shirley 24 per cent of Africa's Super-rich plan ditching the continent in the next decade for personal security, political issues and to access higher quality of education, health and life.

With at least 202 new entries into the elite club of dollar millionaires last year pushing the current figure to 8,500 up from 8,300 and which is expected to grow 80 per cent to 15,300 in the next ten years, Kenya might witness significant amount of wealth locked abroad.

Never shall the twain meet

It’s well known that Nigeria’s richest and poorest people are worlds apart

Off the coast of Lagos, Nigeria, land is being reclaimed from the sea to host Eko Atlantic, a futuristic new city for the mega-rich. Touted as the ‘Hong Kong of Africa’, it will boast the continent’s largest shopping mall and financial hub, a marina, private international schools and hospitals, and 250,000 residents.

Ten kilometres away is the slum neighbourhood of Makoko, also built on water and already home to 250,000 people. They live along polluted waterways, in densely packed stilted houses, under constant threat of demolition by government.

For the first time, the US think-tank Center for Global Development (CGD) has published figures on the middle (median) incomes of almost all countries. It turns out that the middle earner in Nigeria takes home just US$1.80 each day — below the international poverty line of US$1.90 a day. The data also shows that in several countries with a similar GDP (gross domestic product) per capita to Nigeria, the middle earner has a more comfortable living: more than US$7 in Tonga and US$9 in Bolivia, for example. Meanwhile, in Nigeria’s northern neighbour Niger — six times poorer as a country per capita — the middle earner lives on US$1.90 per day.

It’s incredible that this data wasn’t published before. We knew Nigeria had an inequality problem, but until now discussions have been steered by per capita (mean) incomes — and these are heavily skewed by the incomes of the mega-rich. But by looking at median income statistics we can see just how poorly Nigeria’s economy is set up to serve most people, and how rampant inequality there is compared to other countries.

Sharing out the billions?

The wealth gap between the world's richest and poorest has continued to widen in recent years. About 15 percent of Africa's population lives on less than $1.00 per day, according to the Brookings researchers .

Researchers at the Brookings Institution suggest that the generosity of just one billionaire would completely restructure the poverty landscape in Swaziland, whose economy is nearly 4,000 times smaller than that of the U.S. More than 40 percent of Swaziland's 1.3 million citizens live below the global poverty line of $1.90 per day, but these people could be hauled over that benchmark by a single individual's act of philanthropy, according to the report.

The Brookings researchers calculated the net worth of the richest billionaire in a handful of emerging and developing economies. In Swaziland's case, that billionaire was international business icon Nathan Kirsh, whose net worth clocks in at about $3.9 billion. If Kirsh pledged to give half of his wealth to the citizens of Swaziland over the course of the next 15 years (not entirely unlike Bill and Melinda Gates' Giving Pledge), extreme poverty would be eradicated from the country. South Africa's richest billionaire would only be able to lower the country's poverty rate from 18 percent to 14 percent, even with a net worth of $7.4 billion.

Findings from the study was that it's much harder to pull African countries out of poverty than it is countries elsewhere, thanks in part to "the depth of poverty in Africa" and the region's relatively high prices for basic necessities.

Of course Swaziland's despotic monarch could also make a huge difference by giving up his wealth. Socialists don't call for the rich to share with the poor but call for the expropriation of the expropriators. 

South African Inequality

South African Inequality

In 2014 it was found that two men (Johan Rupert and Nicky Oppenheimer) owned the same amount of wealth as the poorest 50% of the South African population.

Oxfam says South Africa is deeply unequal with the rich getting richer and the poor poorer. Its report says in 1993, as apartheid was coming to an end, the richest 10% of the population had a combined annual income of $36 billion. By 2011 this has grown to $69 billion. In comparison the poorest 10% earned a combined income of $1 billion. In all of 17 years this did not increase at all.

Oxfam says in 1993 3.7 million people in South Africa, which constituted the richest 10% of the population, earned $25 billion more than the poorest 50% of the population (19 million people). That meant 3.7 “mainly white people” earned four times more “than 19 million mainly black people”.

By 2011 the richest 10% (around 5 million people) had an income of $69 billion compared to the poorest 50% who had an income of $11 billion. This means “five million still mainly white people where now earning 6 times more than 25 million mainly black people”, says the charity.

The report states that while economic growth is often seen as the solution to the problem of economic inequality, the questions should be asked what is happening with regards to growth while this explosion in inequality is continuing? Some of the facts that needs to be considered are:

In 1993 the population of South Africa had a total income of $77 billion.

By 2011 this total income had grown to $128 billion.

The income of South Africa’s population had grown by 40%.

The income of the richest 10% had grown by 64%.

The income of the poorest 50% had grown by 3%.

The income of the poorest 10% had not grown at all.

A growth of 40% in the total income meant nothing for the poor.

The Gravy Train

A storm is brewing over the acquisition of new VIP jets for President Jacob Zuma and his Cabinet at a cost of R2 billion, just after Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene announced revised spending plans to reduce waste. Three new VIP jets - a Boeing Business Jet and two new Falcon 900 Business Jets - were being acquired for "international commitments" as the president's international obligations have increased dramatically. The Boeing Business Jet was expected to cost R600 million second-hand, which was reportedly seen as a bargain. However, the money to be spent on the new jets was originally earmarked to buy crucial freight carriers for aging military cargo planes.

The Zulu monarchy is set to issue six new Mercedes Benz E-Class sedans, collectively worth nearly R5 million, to the King’s six wives. A seventh luxury German sedan has reportedly been purchased and will be kept as a “back-up”. King Goodwill Zwelithini's household is supported by the provincial government, with an annual pay-in of nearly R60 million. The management of money by the Zulu Royal Household Trust raised concerns last year when the allotted R54.2 million was spent before the end of the financial year. This prompted a R5 million bailout in February. Former Zulu Royal Household Trust chair Jerome Ngwenya said the queens had chosen to travel in Mercedes Benzes for a number of reasons. “The cars befit the status of the Zulu royal family”

THE TEN RICHEST AFRICANS OWN AS MUCH AS THE POOREST HALF OF THE CONTINENT

In January 2014, Oxfam released a widely-cited briefing paper which argued that the richest 85 people in the world owned more than the poorest half of the population in 2013. Following a methodology similar to Oxfam’s, the available data show that the ten richest Africans own more than the bottom half of the continent, a grim illustration of the stark divide between the very-wealthy and the rest.

To reach the total wealth of the bottom 50% requires the total wealth of the 22 richest Indians, compared with the ten richest Africans. In China, the total wealth of the richest 5 individuals is only enough for the bottom 10%, while this would suffice for more than 40% of the poorest Africans.

Nigeria's growth is meaningless

Despite growth of 5.9 per cent; Nigeria is one of ten countries in the world with the highest number of extremely poor people. So what exactly is meant by growth particularly in the context of a country’s growth?

Poverty is still rife; there are high levels of unemployment and inequality as well as the contentious issue of corruption within the Nigerian government.

Speaking at an interactive session with the Lagos State Governor's Office Correspondents (LAGOCO) last week, governor of Lagos State, Babatunde Fashola said corruption in the state was “multi-faceted” with theft being the worst part of the practice.

The World Bank lists Nigeria as one of six countries in Africa and one of 10 in the world with the highest number of extremely poor people.

President of the World Bank, Jim Yong Kim describes the term “extremely poor” as people living on less than US$1.25 a day. In Nigeria, US$1 a day could buy one loaf of white bread while 89 per cent of the population is dependent on a single bread winner. This means that without this individual, 89 per cent of the population are left without food. This is substantial, considering only 51 million people in Nigeria are employed out of a population of over 177 million.

Nigeria’s growth has had a minimal positive impact on the country’s people.

http://www.cnbcafrica.com/news/western-africa/2015/02/24/nigeria-real-gdp-west-africa/

Rwanda -the Social Inequality Persists

Whilst the Economist in 2011 ranked Rwanda 10th on the world’s fastest growing economies list in the world, the African Development Bank (AfDB) ranked Rwanda 3rd smallest middle class economy among 44 African countries surveyed.

The AfDB reported that only 2.6% of the Rwandan population is categorised as stable middle class with the capacity to spend between US$4 – US$20 per day. Considering its high record of economic growth over the last two decades, one would have expected that Rwanda has developed a burgeoning middle class. This has not been the case. Indeed only 82% of the country’s population continues to live on less than US$ 2 per day. Moreover, the seemingly poverty reduction achieved in Rwanda is based on the country’s poverty line not on the international poverty threshold of US$1.25 per day. Had the former been used to measure poverty level in Rwanda, 63% of the country’s population would still be counted as living well below the poverty line in contrast to the official and widely reported figure of poverty level of 44.9%.

Not only is the average household income very low, but it is also unequally distributed in Rwanda. A recent joint report by The United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) and African Union (AU), revealed that inequality undermines effort to reduce poverty in Africa. The poorest 20% of the population often accounts for less than 10% of total income while the richest 10% controls from quarter to half of it or more in Africa.

The report mentions Rwanda among the few African countries where the richest 10% earn more than 40% of total income and the poorest 10% earn between 3 and 5%.

Rwanda’s Gini index1 level is 0.49 and remains the highest among the East African Community2 (EAC) member states.

The Human Development level of Rwanda is affected by low and unequal distributed income household in the country. This is because the level of household income determines the living standard of that household. A 2014 UNDP report shows that although Rwanda’s overall human development index (HDI) is increasing, the country loses 33.2% of its HDI due to inequality in life expectancy, education and income.

Unequal distribution of land among households across the country is a significant cause of the low and unequal average household income in Rwanda. The majority of Rwandans who live in rural areas earn their income through selling their harvest from their cultivated land or through working as labourers on the land. However, there is an increasing inequality in land distribution in Rwanda according to a study in 2011 which found that more than a quarter of agricultural households cultivated less than 0.2 hectare in 2006. This happened despite the existence of land holdings of hundreds or even thousands of hectares in Rwanda. Interestingly, most of these lands are held by government and military representatives, other members of the urban elite and foreign investors. Land is increasingly becoming a precious asset in Rwanda. Persistent scarcity and unequal distribution of land make it a contentious asset in the country.

The increasing inequality of land distribution is intertwined with land rights inequality among households across the country. A study of land rights inequalities in Rwanda of 2011 revealed that households headed by women (35 % of all households in Rwanda are headed by women) or young persons, households who have been displaced due to conflict or people who resettled in village settlements referred to as “imidugudu” have weaker land rights. Therefore, it is not surprising that stakeholders with more influence and resources exploit inequalities in land rights and acquire lands from the vulnerable and the poor. Such land transfers from the majority that are vulnerable and poor towards the few that are rich works to the detriment of Rwanda’s economic and human development. This is so because it expands income inequalities within the country.

Young people who have not access to quality education and gained relevant qualifications will be left behind and they are the majority. With noted low and unequal household income, only few can afford private schooling in Rwanda or abroad which offer better quality education than the public schools available in the country. A global report by UNESCO published in 2012 reads in reference to Rwanda that “ it is not clear that ICT and other services, which tend not to create as many jobs as other types of industry, can help children of poor parents escape from poverty…”

http://www.jambonews.net/en/news/20150223-rwanda-looking-beyond-the-economic-growth-numbers-part-one/

Nigeria. What growth? What prosperity?

Despite Nigeria’s rapid growth in economy, the disparity between the rich and the poor continues to get wider and the country’s poverty level soars up rather than reducing, even with the setting up of Committee for Rural Development Strategies and Poverty Alleviation programmes. Young workers continue to search for employment. Politicians continue to increase their remunerations at the expense of millions of poor Nigerians. It was reported that the salaries and allowances of Nigerian legislators are the highest in the world and yet millions of Nigerians live in abject poverty.

According to the report, the number of poor Nigerians living below the poverty line has increased measurably, even as the growth rate of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the country is flourishing, yet there is no sign of reduction in poverty level. The 2013 World Bank report on Nigeria Economy reads: “Job creation in Nigeria has been inadequate to keep pace with the expanding working age population. The official unemployment rate has steadily increased from 12 per cent of the working age population in 2006 to 24 per cent in 2011. Preliminary indications are that this upward trend will continue if there is no job creation.”

In 2012, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) also reported that not less than 112 million (about 68 percent) of Nigerians live below the poverty line and which the North-East and North-West were ranked highest in poverty rate of 77.7 and 76.3 per cent respectively. “In summary, statistics on poverty and unemployment in Nigeria, together with other direct indicators of welfare, suggest a story that is rather different from the national accounts data. GDP growth has not been sufficient to support levels of poverty reduction and job creation necessary to prevent a growing number of poor and unemployed (underemployed) Nigerians.”

 Growth has not had a corresponding effect on the lives of average Nigerian.

Reforms have failed

The policy of reforms and fixes taken in the past to tackle poverty are all to no avail. Starting  from 1976 when General Olusegun Obasanjo introduced the Operation Feed the Nation (OFN) programme which many saw as a programme designed to fool Nigerians rather than feed Nigerians, as it never created any food security as envisaged. Former President Shehu Shagari also introduced Green Revolution programme aimed at producing enough food at reduced cost for the citizens which is expected to alleviate the poverty level of Nigerians. Unfortunately, the programme became a failure due to the hijacking of fertilizers, farming tools and incentives meant for the rural poor farmers by the rich government officials.

Former self imposed military president ,General Ibrahim Babangida  during his  tenure, established National Directorate for Employment  which was aimed at creating employment and by so doing reduce the poverty level riddling the country but like other programmes, it was hijacked by the powers that were in position. The aim or the objective of the programme was defeated. Some other past leaders established one programme or the other to fight poverty but the situation remained same and has become a national threat.

Numerous poverty alleviation agencies established by various administrations both past and president include the Family Support Trust Fund, Federal Department of Rural Development, Family Economic Advancement Programme, National Directorate of Employment Peoples, Nigerian Agricultural Insurance Corporation, National Commission for Nomadic Education, National Primary Health Care Development Agency, National Agricultural Land Development Authority, National Commission for Mass Literacy, Adult and Non-Formal Education, Federal Agricultural Coordinating Unit Directorate for Foods, Roads and Rural Infrastructures, Agricultural Projects Monitoring and Evaluation Unit, Industrial Development Centre Federal Ministries of Agriculture, Water Resources, Power and Steel;  River Basin Development Authorities; National Centre for Women Development and National Economic Reconstruction Fund, among others. After the failure of OFN, President Olusegun Obasanjo’s civilian administration in 1999 under the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) formulated a good number of development policies such as the National Poverty Eradication Programme (Napep) with the aim of eradicating poverty in Nigeria by the year 2010. Nigerians were assured that the programme would stamp out unemployment, poor educational system, lack of portable water, poor power generation and supply, poor health care system, inadequate infrastructure and insecurity of lives and properties but for over 9 years later, the situation remained the same due corruption in high places. Public funds were allocated for the implementation of these programmes

Yet the poverty situation gets worse yearly. What then has happened to the money vested on these said agencies set up to tackle poverty? Poor people have visions but no money to actualize their dreams.

http://businessworldng.com/new/?p=22495

Africa needs to change

Africa accounts for a large share of the world’s people living in absolute poverty. The number of impoverished people has doubled since 1981. Africa’s share of the world’s poor rose from just below 20% to close to 25%. Nearly 50% of the population in Sub-Saharan Africa live on less than US$ 1 a day today: the world’s highest rate of extreme poverty. In Liberia, nearly 60% of the population live on less than US$ 2 a day. In the Central African Republic, the figure is 50%. In contrast, North Africa has only 2.2% of the population living on less than US$ 1 a day, and 23% on less than US$2.

Africa is also the world’s second most inequitable region after Latin America. Inequalities have not diminished over time. In 2010, six out of the 10 most unequal countries worldwide were in Sub-Saharan Africa, and more specifically in Southern Africa. Africa's  economic growth is not inclusive or equitable.

Moreover, Africa's growth has largely been an urban phenomenon. Most Africans have low levels of education and limited skills. They often live in remote villages and depend on subsistence agriculture. These Africans lack access to water, electricity and health services. Maternal and child mortality is often high. The debilitating effects of hunger and malnutrition stalk the children that survive. Two-thirds of the under-five deaths in Africa are due to preventable causes, most of which are exacerbated by malnutrition. Undernourished children under five have an increased risk of death, anaemia, fever, respiratory infections and stunting. Research shows that children who are stunted before the age of five will have cognitive impairment and are highly likely to underachieve in school; repeat grades and drop out of school. The number of stunted children in Africa has increased from 45.7 million to 56.3 million between 1990 and 2011. A recent UN report, 'Cost of Hunger in Africa', reveals that child under-nutrition costs the Uganda government $899 million, equivalent to 5.6 per cent of GDP. This includes costs to the healthcare system, to education and losses in labour productivity.

It is very unlikely that the vast majority of Africans will experience the tangible benefits of the so-called “Africa Rising” phenomenon. Under a business-as-usual growth scenario, the gulf between the rich and the poor will only widen. What is more disconcerting is that the horrifying health, nutrition and education outcomes will persist.

Millions of Hectares of African Land ‘Grabbed’

Over 55 million hectares of land in Africa have been “grabbed” since 2000, according to research presented at a conference on Wednesday. 

More land had been “grabbed” in Africa between 2000 and 2012 than in the rest of the world combined, Dr Blessing Karumbidza, senior research associate at the Durban University of Technology, told the Africa land Grab conference in Midrand. He made a presentation on behalf of Prof Robert Home from Anglia Ruskin University in the United Kingdom. 

Land grabs were broadly defined as large-scale land acquisitions which displaced vulnerable communities and farmers, with disregard for the rights of these people and social and environmental impacts. They took place without free prior and informed consent, within the context of poor institutional governance structures. Large multinational companies, with the consent of the state, and the state itself, were implicated in land grabs. 

A contributing factor to land grabs was the legacy of the colonial land ownership system which, following decolonisation, left the question of who owned what land unresolved. “Even in countries like South Africa, where they have the resources… the knowledge of who owns what specific land is not yet clear,” Karumbidza said. “The whole governance framework is not yet resolved within South Africa and across the continent. What is the best land system that would suit Africa?” he asked. 

from here

The land system that would best suit Africa is the same land system that would best suit all regions of the world - that of common ownership, democratically 'controlled' for the benefit of all, not for profit - a novel idea in a global capitalist system?

JS

UK Aid Money Finances 'Corporate Scramble For Africa'

£600 million in UK aid money is going to a scheme to help big businesses increase their profits in Africa, a report by the World Development Movement reveals today. The campaign group has slammed the scheme as fuelling a ‘corporate scramble for Africa’.

The UK government is channelling £600 million in aid to the G8-sponsored ‘New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition’, claiming it will lift 50 million people out of poverty by 2022. But campaigners say the scheme is set to benefit multinational companies like Monsanto and Unilever at the expense of millions of small-scale farmers, and is likely to increase poverty and inequality on the continent.

In return for receiving aid money and corporate investment through the New Alliance, the African countries involved have to change their laws, making it easier for corporations to acquire large tracts of farmland, control the supply of seeds, and ship agricultural produce to other parts of the world. The World Development Movement believes the scheme will lead to increased land-grabbing, higher costs for small-scale farmers, and the prioritisation of crops for export instead of to feed local populations.
 

The conditions imposed on African countries appear to contravene UK aid policy, which states, “We will not make our aid conditional on specific policy decisions by partner governments, or attempt to impose policy choices on them.”
The New Alliance aims to increase food production in Africa. But the World Development Movement has argued that increased production on its own is not the solution to hunger. Sub-Saharan Africa produced ten per cent more food per person in 2011 than in 1991, but the numbers of undernourished people rose by 40 per cent in the same period.
The campaign group has also accused the New Alliance of targeting African countries where companies can make the most money, instead of the poorest countries.
Nick Dearden, director of the World Development Movement, said:
“It’s scandalous that UK aid money is being used to carve up Africa in the interests of big business. This is the exact opposite of what is needed, which is support to small-scale farmers and fairer distribution of land and resources to give African countries more control over their food systems.
“Africa can produce enough food to feed its people. The problem is that our food system is geared to the luxury tastes of the richest, not the needs of ordinary people. Here the British government is using aid money to make the problem even worse.”
Read the report ‘Carving up a continent’.
from here

A Few Big Men

Sub-Saharan Africa sees, nearly 50% of its population live on less than US$1 a day: the world`s highest rate of extreme poverty according to the African Development Bank. In Africa, increasingly we are seeing the emergence of an elite obscenely rich section of society; “A few big men” with virtually all control of the economic factors of production.

“Africa grew at a faster rate in the last decade than most other regions, but the impact on poverty is much less than we would`ve liked. Africa`s growth has not been as powerful in reducing poverty as it could have been because of the high levels of inequality ,” says Francisco Ferreira, acting Chief Economist, World Bank Africa Region.

Declining Poverty - Reality Check

Bill Gates predicts that “By 2035, there will be almost no poor countries left in the world.”

While the point that the majority of countries are growing is certainly valid, it should also be pointed out, per capita incomes in Kenya and Ethiopia, two of the fastest-growing countries in Africa, would have to grow at 8 percent and 10 percent per year over the next 20 years—a historically staggering achievement—to reach China’s current income level, the benchmark used by Gates.
It’s also worth pointing that despite China’s incredible reduction in poverty, as of 2009, the number of people living on less than $2 a day there still exceeded the population of the United States.

Another reality check comes Christoph Lakner and Branko Milanovic, which finds that between 1993 and 2008, the average per capita income in sub-Saharan Africa increased just $20, from $742 to $762 per year measured in 2005 dollars. As the Economist’s Free Exchange blog points out, when you exclude South Africa and the Seychelles, the region actually saw a decline from $608 to $556.

Moreover, global inequality is increasingly determined by location. “Whereas in 1993 about 25% of the world’s poorest 5% lived in sub-Saharan Africa, by 2008 it was nearly 60%,” the Economist writes.

From Here

South Africa's Billionaires

It is possible to capture today’s mind-boggling inequality by looking at extremes. According to Forbes Magazine, South Africa has 14 dollar-billionaires today, out of which only one is black. Their wealth amounts to about $30 billions. In comparison, according to World Bank data, one-third of the population lives on about $11 billions, annually (between $1.25 - $2.5 per day in purchasing power parity).
This means a handful of individuals possess almost three times more than what 16 million people live on during a year. Although not an exact science, this comparison illustrates one of the major problems in South Africa today. And it goes without saying that these billionaires and other wealthy individuals (the economic elite) have much more leverage and influence than people in general.

taken from here