Topic 3: The Concept of Civil Society in Africa Seminar Question 5.

With reference to John Harbeson (1994) and Brandes Nikolai and Bettina Angles (2011), would you argue that the concept of civil society is relevant in Africa? How would you characterize civil society in Africa? For quality Discussions, students would necessarily need to consult Patrick Molutsi (2002), Mahmood Mamdani (1995), and David Lewis (2002). Introduction Africa has 55 states with different cultural orientations. However, they share some historical landmarks which bring them to a closely shared conception of civil society as well as state-society relations. All the states (except Ethiopia) have gone through colonial experiences. Most of the state and societal institutions developed during colonialism. Most of the countries are economically poor. In one way or another, the African states have not been able to develop unique ideological orientations; they have instead mirrored western ideological orientations (such as liberal democracy, socialism, communism, and free market). The concept of state as a form of political organization has evidences in Africa since the pre-colonial era. Buganda, Bunyoro, Mwenemutapa, Songhai, and Nyamwezi are some of pre-colonial state organizations. However, the historians have argued that there was no strong civil society in Africa during pre-colonial period. The relationship between the state and the rest of societal institutions depended on the economy, climate, and culture of a particular society. Since the pre colonial era, political historians have identified four types of state as in the box below.
Primary State: Primary state existed since the 1st century AD. A primary state rose not due to contact with other state, but a need for organizing primary production. It basically played a role of organizing groups which were engaged in primary economic activities such as agriculture and pastoralism. Leadership under primary state was in most cases based on charisma or control over material production in society. Leaders played hegemonic political role in society. The leaders were concerned with innovations and inventions necessary for economic advancement. It is believed that the primary state was democratic and had to stimulate economic growth for its people. Military- Merchant state: The military merchant state in Africa is believed to have emerged during the 8th century. The rise of the merchant state was associated with the emergence of tertiary economic activities, especially the trade such as the Trans-Sahara trade. Unlike the pastoralist, artisan, and agrarian primary state, the merchant state was characterized by struggle for power (which in some cases led to collapse of the primary states). The rise of long distant trade in West Africa led to the expansion of social base of the state. Unlike the primary state, the military-merchant state built its control through alliance among influential figures in society (merchants, spiritual leaders, rain makers etc). The agrarian groups were incorporated in the power systems so as to strengthen the military capacity of the newly expanding states. The military was important so as to facilitate expansion of the states. Predatory state: Predatory state in Africa emerged the 15th century. The introduction of slave trade was one of the main factors for the development of predatory state. The predatory state was characterized by the use of force; it was militaristic, expansionist and ruled through support of external powers. Rulers under a predatory state extorted wealth for their own benefit. The predatory state was characterized by a high degree of political power concentrated in personal rule, sustained through predator y coalition, without coherent customary or ideological justification or legitimacy. State uses this power to control economic resources and resources are used without observable developmental purpose. Transitional State: From the 19th century with the growth of industrial capitalism, where it begins and where it ends not clear.

Development of the Concept The concept of civil society in Africa became popular after the end of cold war in the late 1980. Scholars, activists and intellectuals were dominantly concerned with the need to secure the independence of civil society organizations from the state, with civil society functioning as the watch dog of t he state.

Scholars agree that the concept of civil society as used in Africa originate from the western tradition (liberal conception). Drah and Okuaye (1996) noted that the concept is used in a broad range of literature, but there is no consensus on what does the concept mean or when did civil society emerge in Africa. Scholars agree that the concept of civil society in western societies is clear. Both the theoretical and material explanation of civil society in western society is clear. The rise of civil society in western societies was associated with the rise of bourgeoisie economy that brought about the need for separation of private and public spheres. Civil society in the 18th century western philosophy was an important means for protection if individual economic freedoms (including private property). It was due to the rise of social classes and class interests. In the writings of Hegel, it is argued that the rise of a market society necessitated the need for means of protecting individuals rights and control the self interestedness of individuals that would endanger the common good. Adam Ferguson saw civil society as a necessary arrangement that emerged as a desirable alternative to the state of nature as well as the heightened individualism of the western capitalist society. In western societies, the concept of civil society was shaped by both philosophical (intellectual) and material environments of the 18th century (and early). The concept of civil society as currently used in Africa is to a large extent influenced by definitions that are promoted by the donors rather than African scholars. As the interest of donors has been democratization, the conception of civil society is closely linked with democratization process and good governance. It is thus after 1990s when civil society in Africa came to be perceived as constituting important actors for promoting democracy There is considerable debate about the meaning of civil society, its relevance, and its conceptual usefulness in the African context (Hutchful 1996; Mark Robinson 1998; Makumbe 1998). Surrounding the concept has been the notion of good civil society and bad state or good state and bad civil society. Sources of Debates and Disagreements on the concept While in the western tradition the concept of civil society presupposes the state-society relationship, in African studies it based on a wrong assumption of parallel state/civil society opposition while on the practical side of its use, the concept is used to refer to the NGOs, most of which are supported through bilateral programs. Institutional versus public sphere conception of civil society in Africa makes the definition lack a coherent conceptual basis.

 The normative view of civil society as a set of positive values tend to crush with the mixture of traditional and modern institutions some of which are regarded to be civil while some uncivil (consider homosexuality in Kenya). Existence of locally-specific institutions, which are not voluntary (are kinship, ethnic, and based on African social cultural arrangements as opposed to the western assumptions of civil society (Uganda-Buganda) (Karlstrom, 1999). Relevance and Applicability of the concept Some scholars have argued that civil society as a concept has little meaning outside its western origin. They also look at the concept as being crudely exported by the donor community so as to fulfill its instrumental function, which is facilitating the importation of western democracy, good governance, and development. For Mamdani (1996), the debates are much concerned with the competing ideological notions about how to match governance universal ideal with the existing institutions (which are incompatible). For him, such conceptual discourses are completely unhelpful since they try to reply the dichotomous universal particular, of western democracy and colonial order which were created in their name. Lewis David (2002) suggests two dimensions that are to be used to affirm the relevance of the concept in Africa. 1. First, as a tool to think with (for analyzing social and political realities), i.e. institutions and processes. Civil society should be perceived as a framework for analyzing the current working framework for analyzing statesociety relations in the new era of democratization. 2. As a tool to act with (by helping to inspire action on ground). Under this dimension he suggests that one has to look at a concept in the way that it can accommodate multiple meanings as it is used by different users (policy makers, academics, development workers, political analysts, and researchers). However, for some scholars, the justification of the concept of civil society in Africa lacks both a philosophical and material basis. Approaches to the Analysis of Relevance There are three broad approaches; the prescriptive universalism approach, western exceptionalist approach, adoptive prescriptions approach, and the Historical Institutionalist approach. Prescriptive Universalism approach This perspective is based on the 18th and 19th European civil society history.

potentially a good thing that has to be encouraged. Prescriptive universalisms exclude non-western like institutions from the conception of civil society (like ethnic and kinship arrangements). They further argue that African civil society has been a missing key in the process of reforming political institutions, building and sustaining the economy, promoting good governance, and building positive and viable state-society or state-economy relationship (see Harbeson 1994 p.1-2). They argue that Africas development efforts are less practical if Africa does not strengthen civil society institutions. Scott (1998) supports this position that a prostate civil society (like that of Africa before 1990s) is dangerous since it builds the terrain upon which authoritarian states can then build. This argument justifies the concerted efforts of development partners to build capacity to civil society organizations through funding and financing. Western Exceptionalist Approach The western exceptionalist approach holds that the concept of civil society in Africa is superimposed. The concept holds meaning out of Western Europe and North American societies (Mamdani, 1993). Maina (1998) argues that the concept of civil society was made to order for western political reality. Thus, such a concept has little explanatory power when it comes to the complex realities of African associational life. The reason behind is that, such a concept cannot understand the domination of society by a predatory state, the informal character of social organization, and the role played by class and ethnicity. Sogge (1997) identifies three factors that make the relevance of civil society as a concept in Africa/Mozambique doubtable. Historical: that the colonial state had constrained the social space for associations strictly that mozambiquan ways of associating do not resemble civil society institutions of the west since they were not voluntary. During SAP, there were increasingly weak public services rendering little motivation to the citizens to organize themselves. The reason is basically perception of the citizens that power is exercised from outside. The ambiguity of private-public in Africa. The forms of associational activity that exist tend to do so in an obscure realm where informal social action is preferred compared to formal and where forms of associational activity constantly change as efforts to avoid co-option or capture. Adoptive Prescriptionist Approach Adoptive prescriptionists argue that there is a middle way between crudely imposing the concept from outside or rejecting/abandoning it outright as being inappropriate. They suggest that the concept can be amended to suit African realities.

 Maina (1998), that it can be amended to include activities, but not just organizations. -Move away from rights and advocacy-to self help, self organized, for economic ends. Lewis David (2002) give evidences of hometown associations in Nigeria have become part of the livelihood and survival strategies of Nigerians (also Honey and Okafor, 1998). Brehony (2000) shows an example of Munno mu Kabi- women group in Uganda, which was able to negotiate the way of being supported by international NGOs. Han and Dunn (1996) argued that the locally-specific traditional counterparts may interact with the export universal idea of civil society. Characteristics of Civil Society in Africa However made up of diverse entities, civil society in Africa has been characterized by both difference and similarities across the countries. Patrick Molutsi (2002) characterizes civil society in sub-Saharan Africa as falling under three broader categories. 1) Strong, vibrant, and resourceful Civil Society: found in countries which had prevalent history of struggles such as Zimbabwe, Namibia, and South Africa 2) Semi-strong civil society: in countries where one party rule and dictatorship were strong e.g., 3) Least Organized and Politically weak civil society: in countries with low level of economic difficulty, limited tension over land, as well as countries where liberal democratic openings have existed for longer period like Mauritius and Botswana. 4) Where there are exceptions in this classification: eg, Tanzania has been under one party experience, but its civil society behaves like that of Botswana. In Lesotho, Angola, and Mozambique, civil society has been at different times co-opted, politicized, and used to manifest interests of political elites. He generally characterizes civil society as commonly; Having unequal levels of social and political sophistication (heterogeneous) Highly concentrated and evident in urban areas Preoccupied with welfare aspects of members Predominantly ethnic and cultural (lack national focus) Entities in civil society are characterized by low levels of management, lobbying, and negotiation skills Low command of resources and dependent on state and external donors. Does the nature of state affect the conception of civil society?