Hello everyone! During half term I had may requests to write about colonialism as many expressed concern about a lack of note. I did post the essay I wrote on "To What Extent Is Colonialism To Blame For Low Levels Of Development In Sub-Saharan Africa?" - you know the first essay we wrote this year - as this is what I am using to revise from as it includes all the key case studies I am planning to use. However, a few of you said you still didn't really find that helpful, so I am going to try and briefly explain it for you!
COLONIALISM = a movement with the sole purpose of constructing and conserving colonies in one territroy by people from another
- European powers had a 'scramble for Africa' in the late 1800s and all land was claimed as colonies except Ethopia and Liberia
- Capturing of the Moroccan town of Ceuta in 1415 by the Portuguese marked the beginning of European colonialism in Africa
- Main European colonial powes were the UK, Belgium, France, Italy, Portugal and Spain
- 'Scramble for Africa' saw 1/5 of the globe added to European overseas territories
- 1884 Berlin Conference witnessed the fragmentation of the African continent from 10,000 territories to 57, as present
- Colonialismestablished the economies of many parts of Africa for many years due to the exporting of materials but left them economically vulnerbable as were reliant on one export
- African nations began to gain independence between the late 1950s and 1960s - note: not all colonies were African and India gained independence in 1947
- After gaining independence, countries aligned themselves with either the USA/France (mainly central and southern nations) or USSR (northern states), and they recieved aid from such countries, although in many cases primarily military aid
How has Colonialism hindered Development in sub-Saharan Africa?
Social:-
- Civil conflict due to the fragmentation, which occured at the 1884 Berlin Conference, as this occurred without consideration of psychological or societal divisions
- Religions introduction to Africa was a secondary impact if colonialism as did not aid unification, so by generating social tensions only increased the chance of civil conflict, and also hampered disease treatment, especially AIDS/HIV due to no recongition of use of contraception
- Impacts of disease were accentuated by colonial legacy as in worn torn nations it is increasingly difficult to deliver aid to those in need
Political:-
- Formation of dictatorships which have hindered formation of stable and sustainable trade partnerships, thus limited export potential, thereby restricting economic growth
- Political instability is not attractive to TNCs whose presence and appending FDI can provoke cumulative causation, and thereby accelerate development
- No peace means not options for preferential trading or successful groupings of nations
Environmental:-
- TNCs exploiting land that lacks environmental legislation, leading to environmental degradation, desertification and deforestation - evidence for the 'paradox of plenty'???
- Environmental exploitation and contamination leads to distruption of any regulatory in food and water supplies and quality
Economic:-
- Siphoning of resource wealth continued past post-independence trade agreements
- Economic vulnerability due to reliance on one export (this is a characteristic of all LDCs)
- Formation of HIPCs with most debts originating from ambitious development projects initiated by corrupt leaders following independence
Demographic:-
- Colonialism lead to introduction of European lifestyles, principally introduction of religion, which only increased population growth rate, which is expected to exceed Asia's
- Bites in population pyramids due to civil conflict and ethnic cleansing are demographically biased, targetting the young fit men which impacts agricultural productivity
The above are some on the ways colonialism has affected development throughout Africa and then how the resonnace of the colonial era continues to hinder development - for case studies, look at the essay, as I am too lazy to write them all out again! I was trying to think of positives of colonialism on Africa but I am finding it quite difficult. In India, for example there is the education system that was installed, with lessons taught in English which has greatly enabled its development via the service industry, but for Africa I am finding it quite hard. If you have any ideas then let me know!
What were the impacts of Colonialism for MDCs (the colonialists!)?
I think this is quite an interesting question as we don't seem to look at it from this perspective but do you think the UK, for example, would have developed so fast without colonialism and would we have gone so whole heartedly down the route of industrialisation? I don't think it would have happened so fast and underestimating the importance of colonialism in early development is arguably one of the biggest criticisms of the Rostow Model of Development. Formation of colonies gave us access to raw materials, provided jobs and a workforce which we exploited, whilst also enabling early trade partnerships; all of which were intrinsic to our development. Therefore could we say that the UK would not have developed without colonialism? Maybe that is going a bit far, but I definently think that it played an important role - let me know what you think?
Neo-colonialism
- There is now a new 'dash' for land in Africa but not from Europe this time, but instead from the oil rich Gulf states and Asia. Countries like Saudi Arabia and China are leasing huge tracts of sub-Sahara, sometimes in exchange for money, ports, schools etc, are using the land to grow crops for food and biofuels to send back home. Is this right? Well, developed countries do not really possess the moral highground to object and stop this as it is essentially the same as what we did! Can nations benefit from this with regards to development? It is probably to early to say, but if it is legal, managed and fair then sub-Sahara may benefit whilst its waits for the global shift (which could be for a while!!!). However, the biggest issue could be the leasing of fertile soils in areas which already struggle to feed their growing populations - a subject you need to form you own opinion on!!!
I think this really covers the basics and hopefully for those of you who didn't understand my essay, this makes a bit more sense. As this area is missing from the textbook, I am guessing it is something we need to understand and be aware of but is not perhaps something we are likely to be asked directly about; well that is what I am hopinf for anyway!
I am thinking about moving on to write about climate for a while, with some tectonic stuff, so let me know if there are any topics, especially with development and globalisation before I move on too far, that you would like me to cover - case study maps for all three modules are on the way but they take a while so you will have to bare with me! I hope the revision is going well!
Showing posts with label Colonialism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Colonialism. Show all posts
Wednesday, 2 May 2012
Wednesday, 25 April 2012
'Paradox of Plenty' - Myth or Reality???
Ever since watching the film Blood Diamond, reading some of Tim Butcher's books on various African countries and revising the impacts of colonialism on sub-Saharan African development; I have been thinking about this idea of the 'Resource Curse', also known as the 'Paradox of Plenty'. The general idea is that, in some cases, on balance, natural resource abundance is more of a hindrance than driver of development...... BUT the question is, is this a myth or can an abundance of natural resources significantly hamper development?
Attraction of colonial powers to Africa is perhaps testament to the existence of the ‘Paradox of Plenty’, whereby the abundant raw material reserves easily exploitable and profitable offered by Africa, provoked detrimental European attention, consequential impacts clearly visible in Sierra Leone and along the Gold Coast. This is not only seen in Africa but in other parts of the world too and neo-colonialism in Africa and South America is arguably a continuation of this trend. This is the idea on its very basic level and there are many complexities to it, with economic repercussions, such as economic vulnerability as perhaps countries with one abundant raw material are more likely to rely on that for trading and industry, generating a lack of economic diversity that leaves the nation vulnerable to market fluctuations.
However, as a continent, South America through preferential trading has illustrated the benefits that possessing resources can have and how, if exploited, they can help accelerate the process of development. Therefore, this indicates that if utilised appropriately it can help rather than hinder development so why is it then that having resources has so far failed to aid African development?
The re-occuring development hindrance seems to be the lack of peace and political stability throughout the continent and once peace can be achieved then perhaps development will occur. However cultural differences are so inherent in society, to a degree not previously seen that, when combined with political instability formulates a strong barrier against trade and ensuring environmentally sustainable resource exploitation can be utilised to generated economic sustainablility that can support development.
As with much of this Development and Globalisation stuff, there is no right or wrong answer, but forming opinions on it is crucial so let me know what you think! Does the Paradox of Plenty exist in reality??? And, if so, what can be done to dilute its influence?
Attraction of colonial powers to Africa is perhaps testament to the existence of the ‘Paradox of Plenty’, whereby the abundant raw material reserves easily exploitable and profitable offered by Africa, provoked detrimental European attention, consequential impacts clearly visible in Sierra Leone and along the Gold Coast. This is not only seen in Africa but in other parts of the world too and neo-colonialism in Africa and South America is arguably a continuation of this trend. This is the idea on its very basic level and there are many complexities to it, with economic repercussions, such as economic vulnerability as perhaps countries with one abundant raw material are more likely to rely on that for trading and industry, generating a lack of economic diversity that leaves the nation vulnerable to market fluctuations.
However, as a continent, South America through preferential trading has illustrated the benefits that possessing resources can have and how, if exploited, they can help accelerate the process of development. Therefore, this indicates that if utilised appropriately it can help rather than hinder development so why is it then that having resources has so far failed to aid African development?
The re-occuring development hindrance seems to be the lack of peace and political stability throughout the continent and once peace can be achieved then perhaps development will occur. However cultural differences are so inherent in society, to a degree not previously seen that, when combined with political instability formulates a strong barrier against trade and ensuring environmentally sustainable resource exploitation can be utilised to generated economic sustainablility that can support development.
As with much of this Development and Globalisation stuff, there is no right or wrong answer, but forming opinions on it is crucial so let me know what you think! Does the Paradox of Plenty exist in reality??? And, if so, what can be done to dilute its influence?
Friday, 6 April 2012
Reasons for low levels of development in sub-Saharan Africa - Is colonialism really to blame???
The capturing of the Moroccan town of Ceuta in 1415, by the Portuguese, marked the beginning of European colonialism in Africa; a movement with the sole purpose of constructing and conserving colonies in one territory by people from another, reaching its peak between 1880 and 1914, a period infamously known as the ‘scramble for Africa’. The main European colonial powers (UK, Belgium, France, Italy, Portugal and Spain) were attracted to this continent by its abundance of industrially valuable raw materials and the opportunity to exploit them. Despite independence granted to most sub-Saharan countries in the 1950s and 1960s, the vast majority remain LDCs with prevalent social, political, environmental, economic and demographic issues on a multitude of levels. Many feel that development, which is the process of social and economic advancements which leads to improvements in people’s quality of life and general wellbeing, in sub-Saharan Africa has been greatly hindered by colonialism, thus leaving European colonial powers to blame for low levels of development reflected by projections that at least 23 sub-Saharan nations will fail to reach the Millennium Development Goal 4 by 2040. Although at first, it may seem easy to completely lay blame with European colonial powers, other contributory factors are also responsible for the current situation in sub-Saharan Africa.
The ‘scramble for Africa’ saw 1/5 of the globe added to European overseas territories whilst the 1884 Berlin Conference witnessed the superimposition of colonial powers domains on Africa, condensing a previous 10,000 territories into 57. Fragmentation occurred without consideration of psychological or societal divisions and consequently has seen the continent torn apart by civil war, such as the 1994 Rwandan genocide which claimed 800,000 lives. Societal resonance of the ‘scramble for Africa’ has provoked civil conflict, such as the unresolved Darfur Crisis, therefore colonialism can be blamed in part for the low development levels in these countries with both considered one of the 33 classified as LDCs by the UN. The introduction of religion to African society was a secondary impact of colonialism and whilst not aiding unification of these greatly divided countries thus generating social tensions which heighten the probability of civil conflict, their greatest hindrance has been with regards to disease treatment. Religions such as Catholicism do not recognize or accept the use of contraception, making controlling the spread of HIV/AIDS incredibly challenging, with 68% of people with this disease living in Africa. This is proving to be a huge problem in Botswana where 38% of its population are infected and 1/3 of its working force. Appending demographic issues have been developmentally detrimental, with 10 million AIDS orphans in Africa alone and the wider demographic implications of religions introduction to Africa evident within Uganda’s youthful population; a factor that can be linked back to colonialism which has without a doubt de-accelerated African development. Disease, in general, is a huge social problem in Africa, greatly hindering development and whilst some diseases, such as malaria, are a result of Africa’s climate, the impacts that they have on society and thus development have been accentuated by the colonial legacy as in war torn nations aid is increasingly difficult to deliver to those in need, as currently seen in the Horn of Africa, whilst in countries such as DR Congo which has seen 111,971km of road disintegrate into 1000km following independence, the lack of infrastructure hampers aid distribution.
Civil conflict clearly has economic, social, demographic and environmental implications on a multitude of levels with its roots often lying within the political colonial legacy. Upon authorization of independence, power vacuums capable of overthrowing embryonic democracies fabricated by colonial powers led to the formation of dictatorships, with only 9% of sub-Saharan countries classified as democratic. Whilst democracy has often permitted development Botswana, who gained independence in 1966 and have sustained arguably the most stable democratic political system in Africa, have failed to rank significantly higher on development indicators, thus suggesting the dominating development hindrance lies elsewhere. Dictatorships have hindered the formation of stable and sustainable trade partnerships, thus limited export potential, thereby greatly restricting economic growth and therefore development. Inherent cultural differences, which have not be seen to such a degree elsewhere, are the complicating factor preventing not only peace but also preferential trade which permitted 8% growth for the past 5 years in South America and is possibly the best path for Africa to follow. Whilst the occurrence of civil wars cannot solely be blamed on colonialism, its legacy generated favourable conditions for conflict, making it a reoccurring issue continually hampering development.
Attraction of colonial powers to Africa is perhaps testament to the existence of the ‘Paradox of Plenty’, whereby the abundant raw material reserves easily exploitable and profitable offered by Africa, provoked detrimental European attention, consequential impacts clearly visible in Sierra Leone and along the Gold Coast. Unsustainable mining practices have resulted in environmental degradation, accelerated expansion of the Sahara as a consequence of desertification and wide spread deforestation four times the global average, where it would take 260 years for reforms on par with Amazonian ones to be achieved. Political instability and corruption have escalated this as lack of recognised land ownership (only 2% of African forest is under community control), environmental laws and enforcement have enabled the oil industry, for example, in Nigeria to provoke large-scale environmental degradation, impeding development by exploiting the local people and destroying regularity in food sources. Presence of Lake Nyos and Nyiragongo continually pose a threat to countries whilst natural disasters have wiped out all withstanding development, such as the 2002 lava lake burst which consumed 15% of Goma, leaving 120,000 homeless. Constant threat, such as this, further restricts attractive powers of a country to TNCs, whose presence provokes cumulative causation, thereby accelerating development. 50 droughts over the past 50 years and the Horn of Africa currently experiencing the worst famine in 60 years, demonstrates how climate prevails to dictate development, with it linked to multiple influential factors. A recent study links 1/5 of conflicts since 1950 to climate, with a 6% increase in risk of conflict during an El Nino, with every year fighting has broken out in Sudan coinciding with the commencing of El Nino. Although climatic forcing cannot be solely blamed for conflict it is a contributory factor, with the extensive nature of the impacts that climate has allowing it to dominate with regards to determining development; a dominance overpowering colonialism apparent by equally low development in Ethiopia and Liberia, the two un-colonised countries. Africa is an uninhabitable land with climatic extremes occurring with detrimental frequency and unnerving unpredictability whilst absence of regularity in food, water and energy supplies make it practically impossible to settle in an area and kick start development. Restrictions on agricultural productivity, imposed by climate, are most destructive to sub-Saharan development as both the Demographic Transition Model and Rostow Model of Development (although both arguably out-dated and Eurocentric) indicate increased agricultural productivity is intrinsic to initiating development. Although not directly linked to colonialism, it can be argued that political fragmentation has reduced people’s ability, especially the nomadic tribes such as the Rendille, to adapt and deal with Africa’s naturally variable climate. Consequently, subsistence farming persists and without large-scale farming, accompanied by appropriate mechanization, progress will continually be restricted, unless they are able to establish a contemporary route to development. Global climate change threatens to accentuate already large-scale problematic effects of climate on Africa’s development, with as much as a 6C temperature increase, 15-95cm sea-level rise, drastic precipitation reduction and increase in magnitude and frequency of extreme weather events predicted, partially as a result of anthropogenic forcing from industrialised countries; the persistence of climate’s hindrance upon development making it detrimental to a degree beyond colonialism’s comparative contemporary extent.
Economic progression is intrinsic to development, thus by delaying and prevailing to restrict economic growth via siphoning of resource wealth continued by post-independence trade agreements, colonialism has hindered development. 29 of the 40 HIPCs are sub-Saharan with large debts, originating from ambitious development projects initiated by corrupt leaders following independence, rendering governments incapable of investing in health care and education – essential areas with both capable of diluting demographic constraints and provoking the ‘Girl Effect’. As seen by the 1970s oil crisis, increasing globalisation is amplifying Africa’s vulnerability to market fluctuations, initially generated by economic centralisation during colonialism. Attraction for TNCs is limited, due to the afore-mentioned, consequently casting doubts over whether Africa could be the next recipient of the global shift, making it difficult to reduce economic vulnerability currently preventing substantial progression. In some cases aid has been anti-developmental, with tied aid prompting recipients to spend funds inappropriately, such as the Pergau Dam, whilst 60% is considered ‘phantom’. European countries have since ‘untied’ their aid but 2/3 of American aid is still tied, with most recipients those posing national security threats. Imbalance and inconsistencies are hazardous with dependent countries suffering from aid reductions since the 1970s (50% reduction in 1990) and the export side of economies, arguably the most vulnerable, benefitting the greatest, meaning aid fails to directly address people’s quality of life.
Demographically, the impacts of the slave trade were substantially greater than the number actually enslaved (7-12 million) as the targeting of young men hampered agricultural progression, with social and political instability additional consequences. Clearly, the slave trade contemporarily hindered development, with the argument that it made way for colonialism, but in comparison to the colonial legacy and climate, its influence on modern day development levels is minimal, with similarly adverse bites in population pyramids repercussions of civil conflict and ethnic cleansing, as seen with the Rwandan genocide which claimed the lives of 20% of its population. Population growth, rapidly accelerating across Africa, is the greatest demographic constraint and, again, whilst not directly linked to colonialism, introduction of European lifestyles, principally religion, has only increased growth rate which is expected to exceed Asia’s over coming decades.
The ‘scramble for Africa’ saw 1/5 of the globe added to European overseas territories whilst the 1884 Berlin Conference witnessed the superimposition of colonial powers domains on Africa, condensing a previous 10,000 territories into 57. Fragmentation occurred without consideration of psychological or societal divisions and consequently has seen the continent torn apart by civil war, such as the 1994 Rwandan genocide which claimed 800,000 lives. Societal resonance of the ‘scramble for Africa’ has provoked civil conflict, such as the unresolved Darfur Crisis, therefore colonialism can be blamed in part for the low development levels in these countries with both considered one of the 33 classified as LDCs by the UN. The introduction of religion to African society was a secondary impact of colonialism and whilst not aiding unification of these greatly divided countries thus generating social tensions which heighten the probability of civil conflict, their greatest hindrance has been with regards to disease treatment. Religions such as Catholicism do not recognize or accept the use of contraception, making controlling the spread of HIV/AIDS incredibly challenging, with 68% of people with this disease living in Africa. This is proving to be a huge problem in Botswana where 38% of its population are infected and 1/3 of its working force. Appending demographic issues have been developmentally detrimental, with 10 million AIDS orphans in Africa alone and the wider demographic implications of religions introduction to Africa evident within Uganda’s youthful population; a factor that can be linked back to colonialism which has without a doubt de-accelerated African development. Disease, in general, is a huge social problem in Africa, greatly hindering development and whilst some diseases, such as malaria, are a result of Africa’s climate, the impacts that they have on society and thus development have been accentuated by the colonial legacy as in war torn nations aid is increasingly difficult to deliver to those in need, as currently seen in the Horn of Africa, whilst in countries such as DR Congo which has seen 111,971km of road disintegrate into 1000km following independence, the lack of infrastructure hampers aid distribution.
Civil conflict clearly has economic, social, demographic and environmental implications on a multitude of levels with its roots often lying within the political colonial legacy. Upon authorization of independence, power vacuums capable of overthrowing embryonic democracies fabricated by colonial powers led to the formation of dictatorships, with only 9% of sub-Saharan countries classified as democratic. Whilst democracy has often permitted development Botswana, who gained independence in 1966 and have sustained arguably the most stable democratic political system in Africa, have failed to rank significantly higher on development indicators, thus suggesting the dominating development hindrance lies elsewhere. Dictatorships have hindered the formation of stable and sustainable trade partnerships, thus limited export potential, thereby greatly restricting economic growth and therefore development. Inherent cultural differences, which have not be seen to such a degree elsewhere, are the complicating factor preventing not only peace but also preferential trade which permitted 8% growth for the past 5 years in South America and is possibly the best path for Africa to follow. Whilst the occurrence of civil wars cannot solely be blamed on colonialism, its legacy generated favourable conditions for conflict, making it a reoccurring issue continually hampering development.
Attraction of colonial powers to Africa is perhaps testament to the existence of the ‘Paradox of Plenty’, whereby the abundant raw material reserves easily exploitable and profitable offered by Africa, provoked detrimental European attention, consequential impacts clearly visible in Sierra Leone and along the Gold Coast. Unsustainable mining practices have resulted in environmental degradation, accelerated expansion of the Sahara as a consequence of desertification and wide spread deforestation four times the global average, where it would take 260 years for reforms on par with Amazonian ones to be achieved. Political instability and corruption have escalated this as lack of recognised land ownership (only 2% of African forest is under community control), environmental laws and enforcement have enabled the oil industry, for example, in Nigeria to provoke large-scale environmental degradation, impeding development by exploiting the local people and destroying regularity in food sources. Presence of Lake Nyos and Nyiragongo continually pose a threat to countries whilst natural disasters have wiped out all withstanding development, such as the 2002 lava lake burst which consumed 15% of Goma, leaving 120,000 homeless. Constant threat, such as this, further restricts attractive powers of a country to TNCs, whose presence provokes cumulative causation, thereby accelerating development. 50 droughts over the past 50 years and the Horn of Africa currently experiencing the worst famine in 60 years, demonstrates how climate prevails to dictate development, with it linked to multiple influential factors. A recent study links 1/5 of conflicts since 1950 to climate, with a 6% increase in risk of conflict during an El Nino, with every year fighting has broken out in Sudan coinciding with the commencing of El Nino. Although climatic forcing cannot be solely blamed for conflict it is a contributory factor, with the extensive nature of the impacts that climate has allowing it to dominate with regards to determining development; a dominance overpowering colonialism apparent by equally low development in Ethiopia and Liberia, the two un-colonised countries. Africa is an uninhabitable land with climatic extremes occurring with detrimental frequency and unnerving unpredictability whilst absence of regularity in food, water and energy supplies make it practically impossible to settle in an area and kick start development. Restrictions on agricultural productivity, imposed by climate, are most destructive to sub-Saharan development as both the Demographic Transition Model and Rostow Model of Development (although both arguably out-dated and Eurocentric) indicate increased agricultural productivity is intrinsic to initiating development. Although not directly linked to colonialism, it can be argued that political fragmentation has reduced people’s ability, especially the nomadic tribes such as the Rendille, to adapt and deal with Africa’s naturally variable climate. Consequently, subsistence farming persists and without large-scale farming, accompanied by appropriate mechanization, progress will continually be restricted, unless they are able to establish a contemporary route to development. Global climate change threatens to accentuate already large-scale problematic effects of climate on Africa’s development, with as much as a 6C temperature increase, 15-95cm sea-level rise, drastic precipitation reduction and increase in magnitude and frequency of extreme weather events predicted, partially as a result of anthropogenic forcing from industrialised countries; the persistence of climate’s hindrance upon development making it detrimental to a degree beyond colonialism’s comparative contemporary extent.
Economic progression is intrinsic to development, thus by delaying and prevailing to restrict economic growth via siphoning of resource wealth continued by post-independence trade agreements, colonialism has hindered development. 29 of the 40 HIPCs are sub-Saharan with large debts, originating from ambitious development projects initiated by corrupt leaders following independence, rendering governments incapable of investing in health care and education – essential areas with both capable of diluting demographic constraints and provoking the ‘Girl Effect’. As seen by the 1970s oil crisis, increasing globalisation is amplifying Africa’s vulnerability to market fluctuations, initially generated by economic centralisation during colonialism. Attraction for TNCs is limited, due to the afore-mentioned, consequently casting doubts over whether Africa could be the next recipient of the global shift, making it difficult to reduce economic vulnerability currently preventing substantial progression. In some cases aid has been anti-developmental, with tied aid prompting recipients to spend funds inappropriately, such as the Pergau Dam, whilst 60% is considered ‘phantom’. European countries have since ‘untied’ their aid but 2/3 of American aid is still tied, with most recipients those posing national security threats. Imbalance and inconsistencies are hazardous with dependent countries suffering from aid reductions since the 1970s (50% reduction in 1990) and the export side of economies, arguably the most vulnerable, benefitting the greatest, meaning aid fails to directly address people’s quality of life.
Demographically, the impacts of the slave trade were substantially greater than the number actually enslaved (7-12 million) as the targeting of young men hampered agricultural progression, with social and political instability additional consequences. Clearly, the slave trade contemporarily hindered development, with the argument that it made way for colonialism, but in comparison to the colonial legacy and climate, its influence on modern day development levels is minimal, with similarly adverse bites in population pyramids repercussions of civil conflict and ethnic cleansing, as seen with the Rwandan genocide which claimed the lives of 20% of its population. Population growth, rapidly accelerating across Africa, is the greatest demographic constraint and, again, whilst not directly linked to colonialism, introduction of European lifestyles, principally religion, has only increased growth rate which is expected to exceed Asia’s over coming decades.
European colonialism has detrimentally hindered sub-Saharan development, leaving the political map of Africa a permanent liability resulting from the insatiable hunger of colonial powers for raw materials, thus constitutes a reason to lay some blame with Europe for current low levels of sub-Saharan development. Other factors, such as disease prevalence, environmental degradation, corruption, conflict, issues with aid and global market fluctuations have drastically slowed development and, in extreme cases, halted it all together for a period of time. Whilst many of these contributory factors can be linked to colonialism, thus increasing its influence on development, the impacts are likely to only have short-term affects, compared to those of climate, and with international guidance, investment and support along with appropriate technology, stimulating the economic growth required to accelerate the development so long anticipated in Africa is possible. Therefore, it is large-scale natural events such as failed monsoons, floods, droughts, significant natural disasters, sea level rise and global climate change that have played the most dominant role in dictating African development and continue to do so. Unfortunately, these climatic limitations are not evenly distributed around the globe and are likely to increase in severity and magnitude in the future; being concentrated in the areas lacking in the levels of development which enable countries to adapt and mitigate the impacts of natural variability and extremes. So intricately linked are factors affecting development that they formulated a lethal combination which presents on-going challenges to the resolution of Africa’s development issue; absence of peace, due to inherent cultural differences on a level not previously observed, and Africa’s unique environment, continually plagued by variability and extremes, are the greatest complicating obstacles preventing development. Whilst we cannot attempt to fully understand issues facing African development, perhaps combining knowledge acquired from European colonialism, a movement although unsustainable and exploitative saw some advancements, with our understanding of the process of development elsewhere and greater African independence, collectively a solution to their problems could be conceived; allowing sub-Saharan nations to arguably gain from colonialism for the first time.
Tuesday, 13 September 2011
Development and Colonialism - places to go if you are struggling for ideas...
This is only going to be a short post but I thought, seeing as I got the impression that some were perhaps struggling with linking development and colonialism, that I would try and point you in the direction of a few resources that may help you form you own opinions on the topic.
First up, I feel the need to clear up a bit of confusion that arised in my lesson on Monday and was a topic of much debate amongst a few in my class. Where is sub-Saharan Africa? So, for those of you who weren't quite sure, its the darker bit with all the labelled countries.....
Blogging!
Millie has started running these online workshop sessions on her blog on Tuesday evenings starting at 5:30pm. The first one was tonight and even if you missed it, like me, I would strongly recommend that you catch up on what she discussed. All you need to do is go along to her blog (if you look at the very end of this page, under the blogs I read bit, there will be a link directly to the relevant post unless she has written something since then!) and just listen to it and follow the text. It was very useful as an overview of the factors we will be expected to cover in our essay, she suggested some good case studies for us to research further, provided some links to places to look to for a basic introduction to colonialism and also covered structuring and essay writing technique for all A2 essays. It is definetly worth catching up on if you missed it - I really could not emphasise this enough!!!
Now I realise that I have not really written many relevant/useful posts about development over the holidays but my head has been filled with lots and lots of oceanography based stuff and pure physical geography and I suppose I have utilised this blog to expel some of my frustration about having to cut much of the wonderful and highly interesting science out of my EPQ - so I apologise, I will get back into the swing of blogging regularly once our lessons really get under way and I will try and write about lots more human geography stuff to balance it all out over the next few weeks as I realise that physical geography is perhaps not everyones favourite thing. Below will be a few links to some posts that are sort of relevant and should hopefully provide some extra knowledge:
Contemporary colonial carve-up??? This post is based on neo-colonialism, which is an issue that I suppose could be mentioned in up coming essay, and some of the impacts (both positive and negative) that it is having on countries at present are incredibly similar to those that colonialism had/has. There are a few references to the 'scramble for Africa' which is an issue that will have to be covered in the essay at some point! There are many other factors that have hindered development but I have mainly focused at the moment on climate....Is there a link between civil conflict and climate patterns? If I am being honest this post was an excuse to talk about a physical topic that really really interests me (ENSO) whilst also covering some human geography stuff and it is very relevant to the essay with a few case studies that could be mentioned. I don't think you really need to understand all the ENSO stuff and specifics of it but just the idea that climate has either helped or hindered development and, in the case of sub-Saharan Africa, greatly hindered it. Climate plays/played a huge role in development and writing this post made me think back to the stuff we have learnt about the DTM and the Rostow Model of Development as for countries to move through the stages of both, therfore to develop, changes in agriculture are one of the first to happen as they help to generate an active and growing economy, reduce CDR by securing food supplies and provide employment etc. and in much of Africa, and other less developed nations, the climate does not allow for this to happen - an issue that can be seen the Horn of Africa at present, UN officially declares a famine in Somalia.
Books and films
I have a few book/film reviews to try and find the time to write over the next few weeks, to add to those that I have already written, and there are loads of great books/films out there to read/watch, based in Africa, that will allow you to gain so much more understanding of this topic.
- Blood River, Tim Butcher I have reviewed this one so follow the link if you want to know more but, in summary, this book is mainly set in DR Congo and is perhaps one of the best books I have read regarding this topic as the detrimental impacts that colonialism has had on this country and the way in which it has hindered development and, agruably, provoked the country to under-develop are very clear to see.
- The same guy has also written another book called Chasing the Devil, On Foot through Africa's Killing Fields which is based in Sierra Leone and Liberia. Again much of the above is covered but I havent got round to writing the review for it yet so the link is to one that I got online.
If I am being honest there are loads and loads of books that would be good if you got the chance to read so I don't think I really need to list them all but basically any book about an African country would give you an insight/understanding it their development - even a book I read for the energy module, The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind, would help you to understand factors effecting development.
I realise that this EPQ is probably taking up a lot of your time and involving a lot of reading so watching some related films may be a good way to ease yourself back into this Geography module and there quite a few out there..... some suggestions are (see links for my reviews along with links to this current module):
- Blood Diamond
- Darfur
- Invictus
- Goodby Bafana
- Cry Freedom
- Constant Gardener
I have yet to watch/ reading something that takes a more positive view to colonialism and development but there are some, which are often easy to forget! All of these are set in African countries and perhaps it is important to remember that other parts of the world were colonised too, with some case studies showing the benefits of colonialim, and so reading/watching stuff about them too could be quite a beneficial think to do.
The afore-mentioned are just a few things that I found really helped me extend my knowledge of the topic over the summer holidays; if you have any suggestions let me know!
"To what extent are the low levels of development in much of sub-Saharan Africa a result of European colonialism"
First up, I feel the need to clear up a bit of confusion that arised in my lesson on Monday and was a topic of much debate amongst a few in my class. Where is sub-Saharan Africa? So, for those of you who weren't quite sure, its the darker bit with all the labelled countries.....
Blogging!
Millie has started running these online workshop sessions on her blog on Tuesday evenings starting at 5:30pm. The first one was tonight and even if you missed it, like me, I would strongly recommend that you catch up on what she discussed. All you need to do is go along to her blog (if you look at the very end of this page, under the blogs I read bit, there will be a link directly to the relevant post unless she has written something since then!) and just listen to it and follow the text. It was very useful as an overview of the factors we will be expected to cover in our essay, she suggested some good case studies for us to research further, provided some links to places to look to for a basic introduction to colonialism and also covered structuring and essay writing technique for all A2 essays. It is definetly worth catching up on if you missed it - I really could not emphasise this enough!!!
Now I realise that I have not really written many relevant/useful posts about development over the holidays but my head has been filled with lots and lots of oceanography based stuff and pure physical geography and I suppose I have utilised this blog to expel some of my frustration about having to cut much of the wonderful and highly interesting science out of my EPQ - so I apologise, I will get back into the swing of blogging regularly once our lessons really get under way and I will try and write about lots more human geography stuff to balance it all out over the next few weeks as I realise that physical geography is perhaps not everyones favourite thing. Below will be a few links to some posts that are sort of relevant and should hopefully provide some extra knowledge:
Contemporary colonial carve-up??? This post is based on neo-colonialism, which is an issue that I suppose could be mentioned in up coming essay, and some of the impacts (both positive and negative) that it is having on countries at present are incredibly similar to those that colonialism had/has. There are a few references to the 'scramble for Africa' which is an issue that will have to be covered in the essay at some point! There are many other factors that have hindered development but I have mainly focused at the moment on climate....Is there a link between civil conflict and climate patterns? If I am being honest this post was an excuse to talk about a physical topic that really really interests me (ENSO) whilst also covering some human geography stuff and it is very relevant to the essay with a few case studies that could be mentioned. I don't think you really need to understand all the ENSO stuff and specifics of it but just the idea that climate has either helped or hindered development and, in the case of sub-Saharan Africa, greatly hindered it. Climate plays/played a huge role in development and writing this post made me think back to the stuff we have learnt about the DTM and the Rostow Model of Development as for countries to move through the stages of both, therfore to develop, changes in agriculture are one of the first to happen as they help to generate an active and growing economy, reduce CDR by securing food supplies and provide employment etc. and in much of Africa, and other less developed nations, the climate does not allow for this to happen - an issue that can be seen the Horn of Africa at present, UN officially declares a famine in Somalia.
Books and films
I have a few book/film reviews to try and find the time to write over the next few weeks, to add to those that I have already written, and there are loads of great books/films out there to read/watch, based in Africa, that will allow you to gain so much more understanding of this topic.
- Blood River, Tim Butcher I have reviewed this one so follow the link if you want to know more but, in summary, this book is mainly set in DR Congo and is perhaps one of the best books I have read regarding this topic as the detrimental impacts that colonialism has had on this country and the way in which it has hindered development and, agruably, provoked the country to under-develop are very clear to see.
- The same guy has also written another book called Chasing the Devil, On Foot through Africa's Killing Fields which is based in Sierra Leone and Liberia. Again much of the above is covered but I havent got round to writing the review for it yet so the link is to one that I got online.
If I am being honest there are loads and loads of books that would be good if you got the chance to read so I don't think I really need to list them all but basically any book about an African country would give you an insight/understanding it their development - even a book I read for the energy module, The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind, would help you to understand factors effecting development.
I realise that this EPQ is probably taking up a lot of your time and involving a lot of reading so watching some related films may be a good way to ease yourself back into this Geography module and there quite a few out there..... some suggestions are (see links for my reviews along with links to this current module):
- Blood Diamond
- Darfur
- Invictus
- Goodby Bafana
- Cry Freedom
- Constant Gardener
I have yet to watch/ reading something that takes a more positive view to colonialism and development but there are some, which are often easy to forget! All of these are set in African countries and perhaps it is important to remember that other parts of the world were colonised too, with some case studies showing the benefits of colonialim, and so reading/watching stuff about them too could be quite a beneficial think to do.
The afore-mentioned are just a few things that I found really helped me extend my knowledge of the topic over the summer holidays; if you have any suggestions let me know!
Saturday, 3 September 2011
Contemporary colonial carve-up???
It is becoming increasingly common for wealthy countries and corporations to acquire huge expanses of arable land in developing countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, for use in industrial agriculture. These multi-billion-dollar deals have led to many farmers and families being stripped of the land they have occupied for generations...... Does this echo the 'land grabs' of the colonial era and are there actually any benefits for the local people?
In what has been described by the top ranks of the UN as a new neocolonialist trend, land is now frequently changing hands between developing countries and buyers who range from national governments to huge food producers and speculators on the international stock exchanges. Instead of buying, or leasing, this land with the aim to preserve its environmental value the influential organisations appear to only be interested in turning these marginal lands into profit. Critics of this neo-colonialist trend are worried that it parallels the infamous 'scramble for Africa' by colonial powers during the late 19th century; with many of these land acquisitions coated with humanitarian considerations to shroud the fact that they are instigated by cash-rich resource-poor countries who are desperately seeking to secure reliable food supplies and reduce their dependency on the vulnerable global market. These 'land-grabs' seem popular with countries with large populations (e.g China and India) who see 'offshore' food production as the most sustainable and affordable way to support their expanding populations and secure not only food but also water.
The majority of the recent land deals have been characterised by long-term leases; most 99 year renewable agreements that effectively hand the land over in perpetuity at a rate that reflects the historical tradition of establishing plantations in European-owned colonies. Despite the clear parallels between these deals and events in Africa during the late 19th century, there are some fundamental differences with, perhaps, the largest being the driving force. Back in the 19th century, the colonial powers were grabbing territory but the contemporary land acquisition is driven by market forces. Many of these deals are being triggered by the search for food security, biofuels and minerals which has been instigated by food and energy price hikes that have occured over the past 5-10 years. The 2007-2008 food price hike was one of the most signficant and recent and many feel that it was this event that has highlighted just how vulnerable food-importing nations are to fluctuations in the global market (seems to have a similar effect as fluctuations in the price of oil). On the other hand, others feel that because the world food production has stabilised at 50% above what we need (when you consider how many people in the world go hungry everyday surely that only emphasises how much the developed world wastes!) that a move to biofuels is the largest driving force. To a certain extent, statistics support this as the World Bank estimates that 21% of the land deals in 2009 were for biofuel production. With the land extremely cheap there is no shortages of investors and, although not neccessarily proven in reality yet, in theory there should be some benefits for the countries leasing the land. Leasing the land should generate more jobs, lead to better and newer technology, improve infrastructure and attract extra tax revenues, whilst the World Bank agrues that it could also 'jump-start' agricultural growth via large-scale farming - all factors that could kick start cummulative causation and help accelerate development. On the other hand, across Africa, rural dwellers, pastoralists and herdsmen have been forced off of the land they have occupied for generations. Although there is disagreement as to the exact amount of land purchased by international organisations, the epicentre of this trend is, without a doubt, located in Africa. In 2009 alone, the World Bank estimates that 70% of the 45 million hectares of land deals were struck over were in Africa. The International Land Coalition suggests that this figure should be much higher. They estimate that 80 million hectares of land was exchanged, with 64% (so around 50 million hectares) being located in Africa.
Although this seems to be focused in Africa, it is occuring elsewhere and here are a few current case studies:
I think I have focused slightly more on the negatives but there are some positives to such deals and not only for the investors. A lack of money is one of the main factors that restricts countries from developing (i.e think about comparisions in transition speeds of countries through the DTM...) and so the injection of money as a result of the presence of rich countries/companies can allow for the execution of government ambitions to improve health care, education, infrastructure etc and so the quality of life for its people. It can also led to an injection of knowledge into local communties regarding better farming practices, amongst other things, which could eventually lead to mechanisation of farming - a move that was incredibly significant in accelerating the development of those nations considered to be developed today.
Is this an example of modern-day colonialism? Well, I think it is hard to argue that this isn't but hopefully, if managed and controlled accordingly (and better than at present!) it can be colonialism with a difference, colonialism that can benefit both sides. Neocolonialism is an interesting idea, which presents positives and negatives and is, understandably so, a debated topic that I am guessing is going to come up at some point during our current module. What do you think? Can these land grabs every truly benefit everyone? Can they every be both environmentally and socially sustainable? How closely does this echo the 'scramble to Africa' by colonial powers in the 19th century? Do you think Neocolonialism is a good idea - should it be encouraged? Is this the future for countries with growing populations and limited resources? Will this help or hinder Africa's development? Let me know what you think!
 |
| With many African nations already struggling to feed their own population can they afford to lease out much of their limited fertile land to other countries so that they can secure food supplies? |
 |
| Is the increasing need for food and water in the developed world driving the 'land grabs'? |
The majority of the recent land deals have been characterised by long-term leases; most 99 year renewable agreements that effectively hand the land over in perpetuity at a rate that reflects the historical tradition of establishing plantations in European-owned colonies. Despite the clear parallels between these deals and events in Africa during the late 19th century, there are some fundamental differences with, perhaps, the largest being the driving force. Back in the 19th century, the colonial powers were grabbing territory but the contemporary land acquisition is driven by market forces. Many of these deals are being triggered by the search for food security, biofuels and minerals which has been instigated by food and energy price hikes that have occured over the past 5-10 years. The 2007-2008 food price hike was one of the most signficant and recent and many feel that it was this event that has highlighted just how vulnerable food-importing nations are to fluctuations in the global market (seems to have a similar effect as fluctuations in the price of oil). On the other hand, others feel that because the world food production has stabilised at 50% above what we need (when you consider how many people in the world go hungry everyday surely that only emphasises how much the developed world wastes!) that a move to biofuels is the largest driving force. To a certain extent, statistics support this as the World Bank estimates that 21% of the land deals in 2009 were for biofuel production. With the land extremely cheap there is no shortages of investors and, although not neccessarily proven in reality yet, in theory there should be some benefits for the countries leasing the land. Leasing the land should generate more jobs, lead to better and newer technology, improve infrastructure and attract extra tax revenues, whilst the World Bank agrues that it could also 'jump-start' agricultural growth via large-scale farming - all factors that could kick start cummulative causation and help accelerate development. On the other hand, across Africa, rural dwellers, pastoralists and herdsmen have been forced off of the land they have occupied for generations. Although there is disagreement as to the exact amount of land purchased by international organisations, the epicentre of this trend is, without a doubt, located in Africa. In 2009 alone, the World Bank estimates that 70% of the 45 million hectares of land deals were struck over were in Africa. The International Land Coalition suggests that this figure should be much higher. They estimate that 80 million hectares of land was exchanged, with 64% (so around 50 million hectares) being located in Africa.
Although this seems to be focused in Africa, it is occuring elsewhere and here are a few current case studies:
- January 2011 - A large Chinese rice and soya producer acquired thousands of hectares of soya beans, wheat and oilseed rape in Argentina's Rio Negro province and then shipped the produce back to China. The same organisation have also been reported to have signed an agreement to develop 200,000 hectares of land in the Phillippine province of Luzon. China has also been granted the rights to grow palm oil on 2.8 million hectares of Congolese land. It has been suggested that China operates 80,400 hectares in Siberia, which it purchased for US$21.4million. With China's rather large population, a forever increasing hunger for energy, lack of water security, lack of fertile land and a climate that hinders agricultural growth it probably does not come as much of a surprise that they are one of the main countries involved in the purchasing/leasing of land in developing countries.
- Not 100% sure if this plan is still going ahead but earlier in the year, it was proposed that South African farmers would take over failing state farms in Libya.
- Before Sudan split it leased 376,000 hectares of land to Saudi Arabia to grow wheat and rice. Saudi Arabia have also suggested that Saudi businesses groups should take control of 70% of the rice growing regions in Senegal. Leasing land in Sudan has continued, even after it split and prior to the offical split, South Sudan issued leases on 9% of its land.
- Qatar leased 20,000 hectares of land for fruit and vegetable cultivation in exchange for funding for a US$2.3billion port in Kenya.
- India has invested US$4billion in agriculture, including flower-growing and sugar plantations, in Ethiopia. Again, to most of you, this wont be much of a surprise. India's population is predicted to exceed that of China by 2030, they have even less water security than China, rising sea-levels threaten to claim much land and provoke mass migration from neighbouring Bangladesh and, as they continue to develop, they are consuming more and more energy.
- Madagascar are in negotiations with Daewoo Logistics Corporation, negiotations which are believed to have played a significant role in the political conflict that provoked the overthrow of the government in 2009, to lease 1.3 million hectares of land for maize aand palm oil plantations - a figure that is practically half the country's arable land!
- Countries such as China and Saudi Arabia have shown lots of interesting in leasing land in Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine and parts of post-Soviet Central Asia. China have been involved in negotiations to lease a million hectares of Kazakhstan farmland for rapeseed and soya production whilst Saudi Arabi are also interested to land there for grain production and cattle raising. It is reported that a British hedge fund, known as Dexion Capital's Global Farming fund, are in the process of trying to raise US$280million to purchase around 1.2million hectares of land in Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukrainie along with parts of Latin America and Australia.
 |
| Do the positives outweigh the negatives? |
I think I have focused slightly more on the negatives but there are some positives to such deals and not only for the investors. A lack of money is one of the main factors that restricts countries from developing (i.e think about comparisions in transition speeds of countries through the DTM...) and so the injection of money as a result of the presence of rich countries/companies can allow for the execution of government ambitions to improve health care, education, infrastructure etc and so the quality of life for its people. It can also led to an injection of knowledge into local communties regarding better farming practices, amongst other things, which could eventually lead to mechanisation of farming - a move that was incredibly significant in accelerating the development of those nations considered to be developed today.
Is this an example of modern-day colonialism? Well, I think it is hard to argue that this isn't but hopefully, if managed and controlled accordingly (and better than at present!) it can be colonialism with a difference, colonialism that can benefit both sides. Neocolonialism is an interesting idea, which presents positives and negatives and is, understandably so, a debated topic that I am guessing is going to come up at some point during our current module. What do you think? Can these land grabs every truly benefit everyone? Can they every be both environmentally and socially sustainable? How closely does this echo the 'scramble to Africa' by colonial powers in the 19th century? Do you think Neocolonialism is a good idea - should it be encouraged? Is this the future for countries with growing populations and limited resources? Will this help or hinder Africa's development? Let me know what you think!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)