![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/The-Conversation-e1535448713758.jpg?resize=166%2C17&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/Japan.jpg?resize=640%2C426&ssl=1\")
<\/em><\/span>East Asian countries have looked up to Japan as a model of success.<\/span><\/h5>\nThe remarkable economic transformation of Asia in recent decades has attracted global attention. It has ignited scholarly and policy debates about the region\u2019s development models and strategies.<\/span><\/p>\n The remarkable economic transformation of Asia in recent decades has attracted global attention. It has ignited scholarly and policy debates about the region\u2019s development models and strategies.<\/span><\/p>\n African policymakers have not been immune to the worldwide fascination with the \u201cAsian miracle\u201d. African leaders and officials have these past few years undertaken a constant stream of study visits to countries such as China, Singapore, South Korea and Vietnam.<\/span><\/p>\n What lessons can African countries glean from Asia\u2019s successes and failures? And how can they emulate those successes and avoid the mistakes made by their Asian peers? These are the two key questions the book\u00a0\u2018The Asian Aspiration \u2013 Why and How Africa Should Emulate Asia\u2019<\/em>\u00a0seeks to answer. Co-authored by\u00a0Greg Mills,\u00a0Olusegun Obasanjo,\u00a0Hailemariam Desalegn\u00a0and\u00a0Emily van der Merwe, the book is divided into two parts.<\/span><\/p>\n The first part showcases the \u201cgrowth stories\u201d of 10 East Asian and South-East Asian countries. They are Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea, the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, China and Vietnam. It analyses the developmental paths of these countries, pointing out what they did well to power their rise as well as their policy missteps. The second section discusses five lessons for success from Asia and illuminates these with comparative examples from both Asia and Africa.<\/span><\/p>\n The book notes the differences between Asia and Africa, and the importance of differentiation. But it concludes by asking what\u00a0Lee Kuan Yew\u00a0might have done had he found himself at the helm of Africa. Lee was the formidable statesman who presided over the change in Singapore\u2019s fortunes from 1959 to 1990.<\/span><\/p>\n Not a miracle, but deliberate steps<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The book identifies some parallels between Africa and East Asia. These include a colonial heritage, a complex make-up of ethnic groups as well as human and institutional under-development.<\/span><\/p>\n The book also draws attention to differences between the two. These are rooted in how the political economy of Africa evolved after independence. This was typified by clientelism, the management of elite access and preferences in exchange for support, leading to \u2018rent-seeking\u2019 \u2013 the creation of wealth not by investment but by the connections of organised groups.<\/span><\/p>\n In contrast, the East Asian development tale has been defined by the unity of purpose among leaders in several countries. It has also been characterised by the deliberate use of institutional and constitutional means to broaden opportunities beyond a tiny elite. This does not suggest that these countries were insulated from or spared the ills of poor governance. The experiences of Indonesia and the Philippines, for example, demonstrate the baleful influence of corruption, cronyism, fragile institutions and populism on governance.<\/span><\/p>\n The authors emphasise the importance of differentiating between \u2013 and within \u2013 the East Asian countries, based on factors such as language, religion, economic wealth, governance systems and urban-rural divides. They argue, using 10 case studies, that the phenomenal changes that have taken place in East Asia are not the product of a \u201cmiracle\u201d. They are the result of calculated policy actions.<\/span><\/p>\n They identify the vital principles of leadership, the policy choices and trade-offs that need to be made, and the policy execution that is required.<\/span><\/p>\n The case of Japan<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n East Asian countries have looked up to Japan as a model of success. Japan represents the power of example and innovation. The country\u2019s industrialisation process borrowed from a mixture of American, British and German industrialisation models.<\/span><\/p>\n Japan\u2019s technocracy, led by the\u00a0Ministry of International Trade and Industry\u00a0(MITI), played a key part in the country\u2019s extraordinary rise in the post-war period. At the heart of the country\u2019s development was strong collaboration between government and business, facilitated and guided by MITI.<\/span><\/p>\n This government-business prototype was later copied by Taiwan and South Korea.<\/span><\/p>\n Taiwan\u2019s success can be attributed to its ability to modernise its economy through macro-economic stability, careful planning and institutionalisation. For its part, South Korea managed to accomplish a transition from an agrarian to high-tech society. In both countries, the business sector was central to industrialisation efforts.<\/span><\/p>\n In the case of China, the authors acknowledge the impressive strides the country has made. But they argue that its development experience does not offer a flawless model for African governance. This might disappoint several African policymakers who are enamoured with China\u2019s development model.<\/span><\/p>\n Singapore\u2019s meritocracy<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Singapore\u2019s success is venerated across Africa. The city-state used the crisis arising from its\u00a0separation\u00a0from the Malaysian Federation in 1965 to focus relentlessly on national growth and development.<\/span><\/p>\n