Sudanese telecoms billionaire Mo Ibrahim has launched the Ibrahim Index for African Governance, a new comprehensive ranking of sub-Saharan African nations developed in conjunction with the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
Rule of law and security will weigh heavily in the index, ahead of human development, economic development, democracy, transparency and empowerment of civil society. This is so because every other indicator is made possible by human and state security, argues Robert Rotberg, director of the programme on intrastate conflict and conflict resolution at the Kennedy School.
The index was developed under Rotberg’s direction and will be used to ‘measure and benchmark good governance in Africa on a country by country basisâ€.
The index will also support the selection of winners of the Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African leadership, which will honour African heads of state ‘who have demonstrated excellence in African leadershipâ€.
A prize of $5-million will be awarded, to be disbursed over 10 years, following which winners will get a $200 000 annual stipend for life. A further $200 000 will be made available annually for worthy causes identified by the annual winners.
When asked why the programme is targeted at sub-Saharan Africa Rotberg said Ibrahim, who is Sudanese, made his fortune in sub-Saharan Africa, and ‘it’s his way of giving back to Africaâ€.
He insisted that the index would not duplicate the African Union’s African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). ‘It’s entirely different,†he argued, pointing out that the APRM is subjective, as its outcomes are measured by focus groups and, public opinion and sentiment.
Rotberg added that the APRM ‘is not a strong instrument†and that in ‘some places the entire process has been hijacked by governmentsâ€.
Rotberg said the index will be measurable. ‘We are not interested in what governments say, but in the measurable results,†he insisted.
He dismissed the concerns of some analysts that the programme is focused on individuals, pointing out that ‘leaders make a difference and big leaders make a big differenceâ€. He said, for instance, a person such as Joaquim Chissano had a longer-term positive effect on Mozambique than any of his Cabinet ministers.
Rotberg said that the Ibrahim index would have a ‘diagnostic effectâ€, prompting states to ask themselves ‘how can we be better†and improve where they have shortcomings. He said the index has a comparative aspect and ‘will rank some countries higher than they are and some lower than then think they areâ€.
He said, for instance, that Uganda had the best road network in colonial Africa and the committee would want to see what has remained of it or if there have been improvements. ‘All 48 countries will be compared to each other,†he explained.
Addressing concerns that the Ibrahim Index could be seen as patronising, Rotberg pointed out that ‘we have done this throughout the world and not just in Africa†and explained that the index was not drawn up ‘according to Western standards†but standards that can be used in Africa. ‘We are not choosing indicators only suitable to the North and not the South,†he stressed.
He said the index is meant to be neutral and ‘context free†and without political bias. ‘It can be used in Moscow, Cambridge or Pretoria,†Rotberg concluded.
Mo’s way
Evaluation criteria for the Ibrahim Index for African Governance:
The ‘sustainable economic development†index will measure GDP, inflation, levels of income inequality, economic opportunities, the state of the banking industry and the strength of the currency measured over a certain period.
The ‘human development: health and education†index will be measured by literacy rates, pass rates, the number of people who proceed with their studies up to tertiary education, the state of infrastructure, mortality and life expectancy.
The transparency and empowerment of civil society index will look at how many parties exist and contest elections, how open the political environment is and how accountable government is.
The ‘rule of law and security†index will measure whether there is civil unrest or war and the level of crime.
The ‘democracy and human rights†index will look at political freedoms, freedom of expression and assembly including whether there are reporters in jail, whether the media is harassed and whether the state exercises any form of control over the media; the frequency of elections and the number of the parties that contest the elections.