Social policy refers to the various measures taken by government to protect the poor and vulnerable and to ensure for them a minimum of welfare. Social policies come in various forms: welfare benefits, social credits, financial transfers, meal vouchers, school meals and health insurance.
When most of our African countries embarked upon the adventure of economic development in the 1960s, the widespread assumption was that the benefits of development will ultimately “trickle down” to the poorest groups. The priority was on prestige projects anchored on import-substitution industrialisation and modernisation. Social Welfare Departments had the lowest budgets in terms of government spending. Social Work was virtually unknown as a profession. One of the few exceptions was the Republic of South Africa. But even in that country, social policy was principally directed at the privileged whites to the detriment of the black majority.
In the 1980s many of our countries were coerced into implementing so-called “structural adjustment programmes” under the tutelage of the Bretton Woods institutions. Much ink has been spilled analysing the pros and cons of those structural reforms, the debate on which we would not be detained. Suffice it to say that the Washington institutions were themselves suffering from the “tyranny of received paradigms” hashed by the loquacious Nobel laureate Milton Friedman and his colleagues at the University of Chicago.
The economist John Maynard Keynes famously remarked that most leaders are prisoners of some defunct economist, political philosopher or madman hearing strange voices. As it turns out, the Chicago economists, with the possible exception of Robert Lucas, were one-eyed monsters who heard strange voices telling them that government is the enemy, that markets are the magic solution, and that the poor basically deserve their lot. Ronald Reagan in America and Margaret Thatcher in Britain took that gospel and ran with it. Margaret Thatcher notoriously declared that “there’s no such thing as society”. These people made nonsense of the timeless verities of political science and public ethics as laid down from Aristotle to Thomas Aquinas and Abraham Lincoln. The cumulative end result was an asset bubble and sub-prime crisis that plunged the world into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
In Africa and the developing world, we found ourselves in a situation whereby the economic fundamentals were up while human welfare went steadily downhill. The rolled-back state became a Leviathan that sucked the blood of the people. Riots in Sudan, Nigeria and Chile were violently suppressed by oppressive military oligarchies. Hunger increased dramatically while children dropped out of school and expectant mothers and their babies suffered higher rates of mortality.
As de-industrialisation spread everywhere across Africa, a rising army of unemployed youths took to the streets and the highway. Many sought to escape the Hobbesian nightmare by plunging into the Mediterranean in a hopeless bid to reach Europe – a continent that no longer has a place for them. Violence, prostitution and cultism took over our societies and the process of social decay has yet to be reversed.
A few economists began to write about “adjustment with a human face”. Leading the pack were the likes of Indian Nobel laureate Amartya Sen and my own esteemed teacher Professor Frances Stewart. These voices were a civilising and moderating influence over a ghastly experiment that took back Africa’s industrialisation by more than a generation. International agencies such as UNICEF and UNDP led the efforts to humanise the neoliberal reforms and to make the medicine more palatable to the poorest of the poor. Social protection measures were designed to meet the needs of “vulnerable groups” such as the aged, the poor, the infirm, women and children. Most of these were palliatives, of course; a case of sugar-coating a bitter pill to make it easier to swallow.
Today, social policy is back at the forefront of development discourse. The examples of two countries, South Africa and Brazil, provide capital lessons for us.
In 1994 when Nelson Mandela took over the mantle of leadership in the New South Africa, poverty and destitution was the lot of the black majority. The ANC launched the Growth and Re-Distribution Strategy (GEAR) which aimed to combine macroeconomic reforms with social intervention programmes. The rand was stabilised while structural bottlenecks on the economy were removed. More than 1 million homes were built in 5 years while 2.5 million poor Africans had access to electricity for the first time. Social transfers were carefully designed to meet the needs of the poorest while avoiding corruption and waste. Water and sanitation were improved while major investments were made in education and skills. The Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) was put in place to enable more Africans to participate in the economy. The GEAR has been adjudged a success, although it has not significantly reduced income inequalities between black and white and unemployment among the African population.
The Brazil of the 1980s was a third world country riddled with corruption, poverty, military dictatorship and hyper-inflation. The presidency of Henrique Cardoso oversaw a cache of reforms that reduced inflation and stabilised the economy while improving social conditions especially among the poor blacks.
His successor President Lula da Silva implemented a package of courageous reforms that have taken Brazil dramatically to the front ranks of leading nations. His “Zero Hunger” was premised on the axiom that no child in Brazil should be allowed to go to bed hungry. A food security programme was launched to feed hungry families and their children. School meals were introduced. These interventions were linked to local farm communities and food and agricultural research institutions. Linked to this was the “Bolsa Familia” programme which provided monthly social transfers to the poorest homes on condition that their children do not miss school.
The results were dramatic. In the span of 10 years, over 20 million Brazilians were lifted out of poverty. Brazil has become a happier and more prosperous society, with strong prospects of becoming the fifth-largest economy in the world during the coming decade.
Of course, challenges remain. But we can all learn from the success of Brazil, imperfect as it is. My country Nigeria has become a society without any conscience. The suffering of the people is immense while a few oligarchs are congesting the airports with their glistening new private jets. There is no social security and no social protection to speak of. Much of our oil is being stolen by former Niger Delta militant criminals that have ironically been given contracts to oversee the security of the oil sector. In the North, Boko Haram continues to ravage an entire region in what can only be described as a holocaust.
As we enter another electoral cycle, none of the frontline politicians is addressing the real issues. Instead, they are jostling to take possession of the spoils of office. While our country is bleeding to death, they are amassing arms – including warships – waiting for Armageddon. The Nigerian people will be the poorer for it.
(Summary of a public lecture at the first Africa Social Welfare Policy Reform Summit, European Parliament, Brussels, Monday, 10
November, 2014)
OBADIAH MAILAFIA
Mailafia is an economist with a DPhil from Oxford. He has also served as deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria
