The focus of this research is the cultural assumptions underpinning Africa’s strategies of economic development, taking the Lagos Plan of Action (LPA) and the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) as case studies. It considers the issue whether the neglect of Africa’s cultural beliefs and values in African plans and policies of economic development may not lead to a development impasse. Accordingly, three major objectives are pursued. The first objective is to attempt a critical assessment of the two strategies of economic development, LPA and NEPAD, against the background of theories of economic development that informed them respectively and their cultural assumptions. Using both a theoretical reflection and an empirical approach, I argue that LPA and NEPAD relied on theories of economic development whose cultural foundations are not African. Consequently, although they were designed in Africa, their respective philosophical bases are not African. The second objective is to investigate the relationship between African cultural values and economic development and the extent to which the neglect of the African value system in African policymaking and planning could lead to a development impasse. Based on a theoretical reflection as well as empirical research, I argue that in both LPA and NEPAD, the beliefs and values that structure the African value system have been neglected to the extent of being ignored. The major implication of this neglect is that there is insufficient room for people’s participation in the process of their economic development. Participation makes possible the democratisation and the inculturation of economic development, and thus translates the universal conception of economic development to its local, cultural feasibility. The third objective is to propose certain philosophical premises that could guide development planning in Africa. I revisit the African value system and retrieve the Bantu concept of the human person as umuntu-w’-ubuntu / umuntu-mu-bantu in order to ground the future economic development of Africa on the African foundation. Using Sen’s capability approach which defines development in terms of the ability of people to lead the life they value and have reason to value, human agency and the expansion of capabilities (or real freedoms people enjoy), I suggest four philosophical premises which link African economic development to what Africans believe and value. The first premise consists of the shift from extroversion to the freedom of people to lead the lives they value and have reason to value. This premise deals with the spirit of extroversion which prevents Africans from appreciating their beliefs and values in the process of economic development. It emphasises the fact that development is not a project, but rather a process by which people create and recreate themselves and the conditions by which they can flourish fully. The second premise is the human agency. It deals with the shift from the conception of development as an autonomous process to the conception of development as an agency-based process. It emphasises that the development conceived of as an agency-based process, has as its starting-point and end-point the people. The third premise deals with the shift from the conception of development as an end product to development as an expansion of capability or the real freedoms people enjoy. This premise emphasises three major things. The first is that the expansion of people’s capability is both the end and the means of development. People’s capabilities are not only the primary end of development, they are also its principal means. The second is that development conceived of as the expansion of people’s capability is the concern of both the people and their structural institutions. The third is that the interaction between people and their structural institutions makes it possible to transcend the various dualities often observed in certain development approaches such as the bottom-up and topdown development. The fourth and last premise is the principle of baking the cake together. This premise follows from the fact that the capability approach leads to development as a participatory and inclusive process. It expresses the traditional practice of collaboration in the African community. It emphasises that the three major actors in the development process, namely, the state, the people and the market which tend to exclude each other, are all agents and must work together inclusively to achieve a sustainable economic development. These are the premises suggested to lead future economic development in Africa. Each of these assumptions has implications which are unpacked in the conclusion. / Thesis (PhD)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Philosophy / unrestricted

The point of departure of this dissertation is that notwithstanding the controversy about the right to development (RTD), the African human rights system expressly recognises it as a human right of a collective nature. The content of this right is a bundle of rights (civil and political as well as economic, social and cultural) which should be understood in their interdependency and interconnectedness. In addition, the RTD is a claim for a global justice characterized by a fair and equitable redistribution of the world’s resources. The purpose of this dissertation is to critically investigate the extent to which the RTD can be realised under the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). NEPAD is the economic and development arm of the African Union which is compelled by its human rights mandate to ‘promote and protect human and peoples’ rights in accordance with the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights including the RTD. The dissertation looks at how NEPAD could be used to realise the RTD in Africa. After clarifying the theoretical and contextual links between NEPAD and the RTD, explaining the concepts pertaining to RTD, its nature and after locating its existence in the African human rights system, the dissertation examines the prospects for the realisation of this right through NEPAD. In doing so, it analyses NEPAD from a human rights perspective. It then goes on to look at the extent to which NEPAD’s programmes on vulnerable groups and participation, are integrated into national development policies in Africa through case studies of Cameroon and South Africa. The dissertation also examines whether the new global partnership as prescribed by NEPAD is conducive to the realisation of the RTD. The basic conclusion is that although NEPAD’s plan to foster the provision of goods and services is not defined in terms of legal entitlements, with legal mechanisms to claim such entitlements, NEPAD’s objectives and purposes are to improve human welfare, which is also the objective of the RTD. However, to enhance the prospects for the achievement of the RTD in Africa, NEPAD should establish and strengthen mechanisms for a full domestication and ownership of its plans and standards in African states. It should also strengthen the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) institutions at both continental and national levels. Further, it should involve the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which has expertise in human rights, in its APRM. At the global level, among others, NEPAD should not only strive to be economically self-reliant, but its member states should speak with ‘one voice’ and present the African Union/NEPAD’s position at international fora and consistently ensure that Africa’s development contracts and agreements are informed by international human rights standards. / Thesis (LLD)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Centre for Human Rights / unrestricted

Thesis (MBA (Business Management))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) represents the New Partnership for Africa’s Developments’ (NEPAD) framework for revitalising Africa’s agriculture. Improving agricultural performance is at the heart of improved economic development and growth. NEPAD believes that agriculture will provide the engine for growth in Africa. The CAADP framework was developed by the NEPAD Steering Committee in collaboration with the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations. It also includes the contributions of other institutions such as the International Fund for Agricultural Development (FAD), the World Food Programme (WFP), the World Bank, and the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA). The CAADP focused on investments in four pillars that can make the earliest difference to Africa’s agricultural crisis. These mutually reinforcing pillars were expected to bring about improvements in terms of Africa’s agriculture, food security, and trade balance. This will ultimately enable Africa to reach its Millennium Development Goal of reducing hunger and poverty by half by 2015 (WDR). For the purpose of this particular study, the first investment pillar, which is water and land management, will be scrutinised extensively, as this is critical to achieving the so much talked about food security. The study will utilise both secondary and primary documents of NEPAD. More specifically the implemented water and irrigation projects in the East and West Africa countries will be reviewed to determine success in African agricultural development under NEPAD. It will identify specifically water management projects already implemented and those already initiated, and find out whether the CAADP is set to deliver the Millennium Development Goal. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die ‘Omvattende Landbou Ontwikkelingsprogram’ (CAADP) is die raamwerk van NEPAD se pogings om Afrika se landbousektor te hergenereer. Verbeterde landbou is die kern van verbeterde ekonomiese groei en ontwikkeling in Afrika. Trouens, NEPAD glo dat landbou die dryfkrag van Afrika se ekonomiese groei sal wees. Die CAADP-raamwerk is ontwikkel deur NEPAD se leierskap, in noue samewerking met die Verenigde Nasies se Voedsel en Landbouorganisasie (FAO). Die raamwerk sluit ook in bydraes van ander liggame, soos die Internasionale Fonds vir Landbouontwikkeling (FAD), die Wêreldvoedselprogram (WFP), die Wêreldbank en die Forum vir Landbounavorsing in Afrika (FARA). Die CAADP fokus op vier investeringspilare wat Afrika se landboukrisis van onder af kan aanpak. Hierdie interafhanklike pilare is veronderstel om Afrika se landbou, voedselversorging en handelsbalans gelyktydig aan te pak. Hierdie stappe behoort te help dat Afrika die Millennium Ontwikkelingsoogmerk (nl. ‘n halvering van honger teen 2015) te bereik. In hierdie studie val die klem op die eerste pilaar, nl. water en grondbestuur, as voorwaarde vir voedselsekuriteit. Die studie maak gebruik van sowel primêre en sekondêre dokumentasies van NEPAD, met besondere fokus op water en besproeiingsprojekte in Oos- en Wes-Afrika. Daar word gekyk na spesifieke projekte wat reeds bestaan en wat geïnisieer is, ten einde die sukses van CAADP te bepaal.

In post-colonial Africa, conceptions of the nature and purposes of development as well as the theories and strategies for achieving them have remained a territory traversed predominantly by non-African social scientists. In this context, social scientists studying Africa's development proclaimed, at the dawn of the 1990s, a "paradigmatic crisis" and embarked on a quest for new paradigms . In advancing this quest, a number of "homegrown" development strategies have emerged. This work argues that these are mere adaptations and reconstructions of dominant Eurocentic paradigms that exaggerate the value of economic goods and wealth creation founded on a competitive marketplace by making them immutable features of development. Yet the ethic of competition theoretically condones a trajectory of killing in the quest for wealth accumulation. In this way, internalist epistemologies perpetuate epistemicide and valuecide in Africa's strides towards development. The stranglehold of internalist epistemologies has resulted in the impasse of rationality. By this we mean that Reason, apotheosized since the Enlightenment, has advanced humanity out of barbarism to "civilization" but has now placed humanity on the brink of unredeemable barbarism. Reason, through its manifestations in the philosophy of Mutual Assured Destruction and global warming, has condemned humanity to willful but avoidable suicide. Since the subjects and objects of development must be one and the same, development is necessarily culture-derived and culture-driven, with the preservation and improvement of human dignity and welfare as its ultimate aims. Accordingly, we defend the thesis that it is necessary for a framework meant for Africa's development to be founded on indigenous knowledge and values, if it is to succeed. And at this moment of impasse reached by Reason, an African ethics-based development paradigm, predicated on humaneness and "life is mutual aid", can restore Reason to sober rationality and liberate Africa's development efforts from the intoxicating prison of profit making. Hence the institutions and frameworks devoted to Africa's development, such as the Constitution and Strategic Plan of the African Union as well as NEPAD, must incorporate salient features of the philosophic ethic emanating from the knowledge and ontological systems of indigenous Africa into visions of the African future. / Philosophy / D. Phil. (Philosophy)

In post-colonial Africa, conceptions of the nature and purposes of development as well as the theories and strategies for achieving them have remained a territory traversed predominantly by non-African social scientists. In this context, social scientists studying Africa's development proclaimed, at the dawn of the 1990s, a "paradigmatic crisis" and embarked on a quest for new paradigms . In advancing this quest, a number of "homegrown" development strategies have emerged. This work argues that these are mere adaptations and reconstructions of dominant Eurocentic paradigms that exaggerate the value of economic goods and wealth creation founded on a competitive marketplace by making them immutable features of development. Yet the ethic of competition theoretically condones a trajectory of killing in the quest for wealth accumulation. In this way, internalist epistemologies perpetuate epistemicide and valuecide in Africa's strides towards development. The stranglehold of internalist epistemologies has resulted in the impasse of rationality. By this we mean that Reason, apotheosized since the Enlightenment, has advanced humanity out of barbarism to "civilization" but has now placed humanity on the brink of unredeemable barbarism. Reason, through its manifestations in the philosophy of Mutual Assured Destruction and global warming, has condemned humanity to willful but avoidable suicide. Since the subjects and objects of development must be one and the same, development is necessarily culture-derived and culture-driven, with the preservation and improvement of human dignity and welfare as its ultimate aims. Accordingly, we defend the thesis that it is necessary for a framework meant for Africa's development to be founded on indigenous knowledge and values, if it is to succeed. And at this moment of impasse reached by Reason, an African ethics-based development paradigm, predicated on humaneness and "life is mutual aid", can restore Reason to sober rationality and liberate Africa's development efforts from the intoxicating prison of profit making. Hence the institutions and frameworks devoted to Africa's development, such as the Constitution and Strategic Plan of the African Union as well as NEPAD, must incorporate salient features of the philosophic ethic emanating from the knowledge and ontological systems of indigenous Africa into visions of the African future. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / D. Phil. (Philosophy)

The object of this study is good governance, the context for its consideration is the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the disciplinary perspective from which it is considered is Public Administration. Good governance is a conceptual problematique. It is multi-dimensional, value-laden, trans-contextual and nebulous. The question of what good governance means is a subject of contestation. Good governance is used in NEPAD as a principle without the attempt to clarify its meaning at the conceptual level. Much of the existing body of scholarship on NEPAD also considers good governance largely as a principle rather than a concept. This erroneously presupposes unanimity on its meaning. The African leadership is divided on what good governance means in the context of NEPAD. In this regard scholarship largely fails to provide an intellectual solution. The extent of complexity of the concept in the study lies in the fact that the context of its consideration [NEPAD] is itself a subject of contestation whereas the disciplinary perspective [Public Administration] from which it is considered has not yet reached a consensus with itself about its theoretical base. Against this background the question that the study asks is, what does the concept good governance in the context of NEPAD mean for Public Administration? The study examines this question to make a contribution towards a better insight into, and broadening of, the body of scientific knowledge by engaging in conceptual, theoretical and philosophical studies to understand good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. The study finds that the paradigm of engagement in the existing body of literature is framed in the binary logic, which is rooted in realist epistemology or positivism. This approach to scientific discourse is limited in dealing with complex conceptual, theoretical and philosophical questions. The study develops, as a contribution to science, an alternative epistemological framework from which good governance in the context of NEPAD could be understood. Such epistemological framework is, for the purpose of this study, termed the contingent co-existence of opposites. It is used to conceptualise good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. / Public Administration / D.Litt. et Phil. (Public Administration)

The object of this study is good governance, the context for its consideration is the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), and the disciplinary perspective from which it is considered is Public Administration. Good governance is a conceptual problematique. It is multi-dimensional, value-laden, trans-contextual and nebulous. The question of what good governance means is a subject of contestation. Good governance is used in NEPAD as a principle without the attempt to clarify its meaning at the conceptual level. Much of the existing body of scholarship on NEPAD also considers good governance largely as a principle rather than a concept. This erroneously presupposes unanimity on its meaning. The African leadership is divided on what good governance means in the context of NEPAD. In this regard scholarship largely fails to provide an intellectual solution. The extent of complexity of the concept in the study lies in the fact that the context of its consideration [NEPAD] is itself a subject of contestation whereas the disciplinary perspective [Public Administration] from which it is considered has not yet reached a consensus with itself about its theoretical base. Against this background the question that the study asks is, what does the concept good governance in the context of NEPAD mean for Public Administration? The study examines this question to make a contribution towards a better insight into, and broadening of, the body of scientific knowledge by engaging in conceptual, theoretical and philosophical studies to understand good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. The study finds that the paradigm of engagement in the existing body of literature is framed in the binary logic, which is rooted in realist epistemology or positivism. This approach to scientific discourse is limited in dealing with complex conceptual, theoretical and philosophical questions. The study develops, as a contribution to science, an alternative epistemological framework from which good governance in the context of NEPAD could be understood. Such epistemological framework is, for the purpose of this study, termed the contingent co-existence of opposites. It is used to conceptualise good governance in the context of NEPAD and determine its meaning for Public Administration. / Public Administration and Management / D.Litt. et Phil. (Public Administration)