It is not surprising that the opening markets in East Africa are filled with mitumba clothes. Mitumba is a Kiswahili word associated with Americans and Europeans’ castoffs clothes or second hand clothes. The inability of people to afford new clothes and the state of being poor due to the negative aspect of neo-liberal policies has forced people to purchase Americans and Europeans’ castoffs clothes. As a matter of fact, it is worth wearing Americans and Europeans’ castoffs clothes rather than wearing nothing at all. The neo-liberal policies in Africa have facilitated the import of mitumba/castoffs clothes. Hence, the cheap imported castoffs clothes have handicapped textile industries in East Africa. The least developed countries analysts would say that the neo-liberal policies have impacted Africa in varying degrees. It undermined the growth of local textile industries, reduces the state control over the national economy, and promotes unfair competition from import.
The import of Mitumba into East Africa has drastically undermined the growth of local textile industries and causes massive unemployment. In addition, the import of mitumba imposes barrier for local textile industry to compete with cheap imported clothes. According to Pietra Rivoli, “…the swells of mitumba not only shrink employment in the textile factories, the also keep Africa from putting its foot on the development ladder offered by textile manufacturing—a ladder, as we have seen, that has lifted China, the United States, Japan, and countless other countries into the industrial age” (199). In fact, the imports of cheap mitumba have not only shrunk the employment, it also forced greater obstacles toward the development of local textile industries. For instance, when the slavery was abolished in the United States, the cotton farmers in the southern states were left with no alternatives, but to find a solution to their plantations’ obstacles which have led to advance in technology. The availability of cheaper castoffs clothes has made it impossible to neither to invest in technology nor develop the textile industries. Innovation in cotton textile industries is the takeoff for the modern economy in which the economic will grow. The collapse of Tanzanian’s textile industries has been linked to cheap castoffs clothes, textile factories obstacles [such as corruption, low education levels, insecure property rights, bad governance, macroeconomic and political instability], and other obstacle imposed by neo-liberal policies such as trade barriers, reduction of tariffs, and subsidies.
According to Africa News Network, “In the early 1980s, the United States, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank used the debt stranglehold that they had over many African states to force them to adopt neo-liberal economic policies through Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAP)”. Under the structural Adjustment programmes, the least developed countries were forced to reduce their import tariffs and agriculture subsidies, privatize government held enterprises, liberalize trader, etc. The liberal free traders argue that the Structural Adjustment Programmes are essential to the development of country from crisis to economic recovery and growth. Hence, liberalizing the economic in the least developed countries while the United States and Europeans countries continued to subsidies their textile industries and maintain high tariffs on certain agriculture products is a suicide to least developed countries. For instance, the United States continued to subsidies the textile industries through agriculture subsidies programs such Step 2 Cotton Subsidies. Under the agriculture Subsidies program, the United States government compensates American textile mills to buy Americans cotton, aid farmers to export cotton, and subsidizes the purchase of crop insurance; these policies aims to excluded foreign cotton producers from the U.S. market while protecting the textile and agriculture industries. In addition, the government protects cotton farmers from variety of business risks such as bad weather, bad credit, bad luck, and taught competition through 2002 Farm Act. Pietra Rivoli states, “The Crop Disaster Program reimburses farmers for losses due to unusual weather or related conditions, while Farm Loan Programs provide financing to farmers who are unable to get credit from private sources” (40-51). The subsidies policies of the world's richest nations are destroying economic development in the poorest countries such as Tanzania and the rest of third world countries around the globe. It is difficult for cotton farmers in the least developed countries to compete with the subsidized famers in the developed countries. The subsidization to cotton farmers in richest countries has driven down the cotton price to extent in which farmers in least developed countries are incapable to produce. Hence, they analysts in the least developed countries would view practical of subsidies in developed countries as threat to economic growth in least developed countries.
The neo-liberal policies aims to remove all bureaucratic control over markets in favor of attracting foreign investors through privatization of government held enterprises, liberalization of trades, investments, and high interest rates. According to Africa News Network, “American and European companies have also used the 'free' trade regime to swoop into different countries in Africa to take over entire markets or set up export operations”. The neo-liberal policies in Africa are empowering foreign investors to take over the entire markets in least developed countries. Lowering tariffs and removing bureaucratic control would encourage corporations in the American and European to take advantage of economic through monopoly. Thus, they analysts in the least developed countries would reject neo-liberal policies. The least government intervention has contributed to the failure of textile industries in East Africa. For instance, the failure of Tanzanian government to provide subsidies to the local textile industries has led to the collapse of local industries. The government intervention is essential to economic growth and fair competition in least developed countries. Analysts in least developed countries would agree that there is a need for bureaucratic control on certain agriculture produces in order to compete equally, trade fairly, and takeoff for the modern economy.
Overall, enforcing the neo-liberal policies in the least developed countries is undermining their economic takeoff for the modern economy. It is unfair to enforce neo-liberal policies in least countries while the United States and Europeans countries continued to subsidies their textile industries and maintain high tariffs on certain agriculture products. The subsidies in the developed countries are destroying economic growth in the least developed countries.
No comments:
Post a Comment