-
Political Leadership And Economic Development In Developing Countries
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 2 of 4
-
-
-
Meanwhile,
Nigeria with all its natural resources endowment held more prospects
for development than India at independence. Paradoxically, India with
less natural resources endowment is today one of the Asian tigers.
Today, countries like China and India with mega populations are the
fastest growing economies while Nigeria is still struggling with
underdevelopment; Malaysia and South Korea are developed economies while
Ghana, Uganda and Zimbabwe are either recent graduates of highly
indebted poor countries or on the brink of economic disaster (Ajakaiye,
2007). This sharp contrast is very relevant as some African countries
such as Mauritius and South Africa are on the NIC horizon with the later
rapidly overcoming its apartheid history in terms of bridging racial
divide. These countries are taking policies and steps that are not too
different from the Asian NICs.
India and other newly industrialized
countries of the South and South East Asia have successfully made giant
strides in socio-economic development and transformation far beyond the
Nigeria and majority of Sub-Saharan African Countries, some of which
compared favourably with the Asian countries fifty years ago (since
1950s).
However, the linchpin factor in this situation is quality
leadership in providing, direction, setting agenda and executing change
which distinguished these countries from most of the Sub-Saharan African
nations. The prospects of such quality leadership to facilitate
Africa’s economic development is already emerging in countries like
South Africa, and Mauritius who are already NICs in all intents and
purpose, while countries such as Botswana, Ghana, Mozambique, Seychelles
and Rwanda, for example, have improved their leadership and are
witnessing progress in economic growth and development. Ajakaiye (2007)
presents an account of the status of the rapid development in China,
India, Malaysia and South Korea since 1990. it is significant that all
these countries were characterised by low income, low growth, poverty,
illiteracy, etc, and their economies were dominated by agriculture and
primary production like Sub-Saharan African countries a few decades ago,
but today it is clear that these economies are fast growing, have high
and rising per capital Gross Domestic Product (GDP) even though because
of their populations, China and India still trail behind the others in
terms of per capita indicators, but their macro indicators are under
primed by transformation of the structures of their economies. Adoption
of technology and innovation is in top gear by them. Their overall Human
Development Index levels sum up the progress of the Asian NICs compared
to Sub-Saharan Africa.
There is a very wide gap between Nigeria and
India today judging from the indices for measuring national development;
Purchasing Power Parity (PPP); standard of living (cost of living);
inflationary gap; currency exchange rate; level of technological
advancement; adoption of technology and innovations, etc. thus,
comparing Nigeria with India is like “Polar-Oppositeâ€.
The researcher
is therefore compelled to probe the political leadership of Nigeria as a
developing nation in comparison with India with a view to bringing out
where Nigeria is missing out and to recommend a functional leadership
model for Nigeria that is capable of rapid economic development if
Nigeria must achieve her goals of socio-economic development and
transformation by the year 20:20.
Leadership is conceived in this
research work as the mechanism which produces policies to drive and
direct prudent economic management to achieve socio-economic development
and transformation by which individuals and groups work towards the
attainment of prolonged social stability or peace, development of
management capacity, long term vision and agenda, deliberate change in
mindset and work ethic, creation of enabling environment for non-state
actors, judicious exploitation of globalization and relentless pursuit
of human and natural resources development and socio-economic
infrastructure.
Since India and many of the former Third World
Countries that are making giant strides in development are not as much
endowed as Nigeria in terms of natural resources, many analysts have
agreed and concluded that the real problems are those managing the
affairs of Nigeria. Ojah (2005) describes leadership as the major bane
of Nigeria’s development, though Nigeria is considered as Africa’s
leading country in terms of human and natural resources, but her failure
to produce political leaders with vision has kept the country virtually
underdeveloped till date when compared to her historical peers that are
fast developing (Asuquo, 2012).
Indeed, countries like India, China,
Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Indonesia etc, currently referred to
as fast developing nations or economies attained these positions by
effectively utilising available resources to develop and improve their
conditions. Leadership is a process of influencing the activities of an
organizational group in a task of goal setting and goal achievement
(Stogdill, 2003). Mac Ogonor and Steve (2000) sees it as the process of
motivating, mobilizing resources and directing people to passionately,
diligently and strategically pursue a vision that the people of a state
or nation jointly embrace by performing tasks. From the above, a leader
must possess the following characteristics; knowledge, moral discipline,
charisma, clearer understanding of reality and vision, and is a team
player.
Emphatically, Joseph (1995) in Asuquo (2012) noted that in
Nigeria, all the abundant ingredients for building a great nation are
present: Land, water, mineral resources and human. The only element
standing between Nigeria and greatness is political leadership. The
selflessness that leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Manmohan Singh and many
other Indian national leaders provided which makes the country to be a
fast developing and industrialized nation is what is lacking in
Nigeria. India like China deserves special attention because of its
size and recent robust growth. From 1996 to 2008, India’s average annual
growth rate exceeded 7 percent (Goldstein and Pevehouse, 2012). India’s
success could be, in the coming years a repetition of China’s rise out
of poverty. India’s economy was for decades based loosely on socialism
and state control of large industries but private capitalism in
agriculture and consumer goods. The state subsidized basic goods and
gives special treatment to farmers. Unlike China, India like Nigeria has
a democratic government, but a factional one, with various autonomy
movements and ethnic conflicts. Indian government has suffered from
corruption, although this has improved in recent years.
Obviously,
South Korea, with only iron and coal resources, developed competitive
steel and automobile industries that export globally, creating a trade
surplus; Taiwan also used a strong state industrial policy, specialising
in the electronics and computer industries and in other light
manufacturing; Hong Kong controlled by China since 1997 also has
world-competitive electronic and other light industries with greatest
strength in banking and trade; Singapore is a trading city located at
the top of the Malaysian Peninsula – convenient to the South China sea,
the Indian Ocean and Australia.
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 2 of 4
-
-
ABSRACT - [ Total Page(s): 1 ]At independence, the economies of Nigeria and India were dominated by primary production, mainly agriculture. However, within some decades, India transformed and overtook Nigeria, emerging as one of the fastest growing economies in the world, while Nigeria’s development lagged behind considerably. This research comparatively assessed the role of leadership in economic development experiences of these two countries from the period of their independence to 2013. The indices of comparison we ... Continue reading---
