Africa’s Brain Drain: Hopeless to Hopeful

By: Samuel M. Gebru (@SMGebru)

May 25, 2012

This article is an abbreviated version of a keynote address the author delivered at the Minnesota State University, Moorhead’s African Night on February 25, 2012.

“What can I bring to Africa?” “How can I help Africa?” These are frequently asked questions by people who are concerned about the political, economic and social development of Africa. Once dubbed the “hopeless continent” by The Economist, ten years later, The Economist is now correcting itself calling Africa the “hopeful continent.”

All around the world, people are awakening their curiosity to learn more about Africa. Often mistaken for a country, the African continent is home to a rich, diverse and driven people. In this article, I will first examine the causes and consequences of a global phenomenon that has deeply affected Africa known as the “brain drain.” Secondly, I will discuss the importance of the “brain gain” as a reversal to the negative impacts of Africa’s brain drain. Thirdly, I will share why the new concept of “brain circulation” is Africa’s latest weapon for success. Lastly, I will attempt to answer my initial question: “What can I bring to Africa?”

The brain drain is a global phenomenon where large amounts of the highly skilled and talented population of a country leave and migrate to another country for better opportunities. The brain drain is a significant problem affecting many developing countries.

Since the 1960s, Africa has experienced at great numbers the massive exodus of its skilled and talented workforce to other parts of the world. The brain drain occurs in three settings: internally, regionally and globally. On the global level, Africa’s brain drain occurs in two major settings. First is where individuals complete their education in Africa and migrate overseas for various political, economic and social reasons. Second is where African students who study abroad stay abroad after graduation and permanently settle into their new lifestyles. 

In both settings, Africa looses because its skilled population is leaving. In my native Ethiopia, the United Nations Development Programme estimates that between 1980 and 1991 Ethiopia lost over 75% of its skilled workforce. Imagine in just about one decade loosing the overwhelming majority of your country’s talented scientists, engineers, physicians, entrepreneurs, educators and attorneys. Indeed, this is a loss for the continent.

Arguably, the main causes of Africa’s brain drain include economic inequality between Africa and the rest of the world; political instability that threatens the safety and freedom of a country’s skilled workforce; and the colonial legacy and postcolonial mentality of Africa.

Economic inequality between Africa and the rest of the world is perhaps the most obvious reason for Africa’s brain drain. In the internal setting, a brain drain occurs when skilled people move from one part to another, more developed and urban part of a country. Similarly, at the global setting, a brain drain occurs when skilled people move from Africa to more developed parts of the world, such as North America, Western Europe and now Southeast Asia. These people, escaping the poverty and lack of perceived or real opportunities in Africa, find life in their new settings. Because Africa is comparatively underdeveloped and less industrialized, it looses.

Political instability is another obvious reason for Africa’s brain drain. Africa has seen its fair share of political strife, civil wars, religious conflict, anarchy and blatant disregard for human rights and the rule of law. These series of political factors are intolerable to all Africans, but in particular to those that make up the skilled and talented workforce. Bloody wars in countries like Sudan, Liberia, Ethiopia, Rwanda and Angola speed the brain drain by forcing out skilled workers and social activists. 

Lastly, the colonial legacy and postcolonial mentality of Africa strongly contribute to Africa’s brain drain. Because of the hundreds of years that Africa was subjected to a Eurocentric vision of the world, it has now become internalized in many societies that Africa has no returns for the skilled, and that it is indeed a hopeless continent. African professionals want to offer their services wherever they can receive the highest value in returns instead of embracing the Afrocentric viewpoint, which includes service to one’s community, a community-oriented method of living and a strong embracement of spiritual values. This is, of course, not to say that the Eurocentric vision of the world does not include these viewpoints, but I would argue that these viewpoints are central to African societies. Because of the internalization of the Eurocentric vision, many African professionals view no opportunities for growth in Africa and thus leave.

The consequences of the brain drain are many, but most importantly, Africa looses its human capital—its brain. Africa is deprived of the cutting-edge advancements that its professionals are making abroad for overseas companies and countries. Ultimately, the political, economic and social development of Africa is greatly stalled because the driving force is nowhere to be found.

The brain gain is the other side of the story: where large amounts of the highly skilled and talented population of a country leave and migrate to another country for better opportunities. Does this sound like the brain drain? Yes, because it is the brain drain, but only from the perspective of the one who is gaining and not draining.

The brain gain is most commonly witnessed in the United States. The United States has always been a destination for opportunity, a place where one has a real chance of claiming their piece of the American Dream.

In recent years, however, many skilled and talented Africans and non-Africans alike have started to migrate to the African continent. This phenomenon known as the brain gain reaps positive benefits for the continent because it is a reversal of the loss Africa has suffered. While the 1960s is typically known as the so-called start of the brain drain, Africa has suffered under the brain drain since the era of enslavement hundreds of years ago.

The brain gain offers new promise for Africa. Now being recognized as a continent of hope and opportunity, there is much to be said about Africa’s promise. Technological, political, economic and scientific advancements have placed Africa at a greater forefront than it ever was. Indeed, it is also known as “the last global frontier” in terms of its largely untapped reserve of natural resources. Unprecedented developments in information and communication technology (ICT) have completely overhauled the way Africa’s human capital operates and mobilizes. Investment in ICT allows for greater economic activity and development, attracting the attention of those living abroad that seek greater opportunities.

In the same manner that African professionals are leaving Africa and African students that study abroad are staying abroad, the process is now being reversed to where African students and professionals are returning to rebuild what was lost in their absence. The new generation of Africans is becoming aware of their modern history and of the triumphs and tragedies that Africa has faced in the past centuries. However, more important is that the new generation of Africans is awakening to the opportunities that lie ahead for Africa and is realizing that to make a positive and proactive difference, they must be the driving force behind those opportunities.

African governments are now realizing that not all students and professionals living abroad want to return. Some members of the African diaspora have settled comfortably for many years in their new adopted homelands, be it in the United States or elsewhere. Because of this, new incentives are being created and many governments in Africa have stared to open offices dealing directly with capturing the skill and talent of the diaspora. Correctly so, an increasing number of African countries consider their highly qualified nationals living abroad as an asset for national development.

The brain circulation is Africa’s latest weapon for success because one does not need to be in Africa to help rebuild Africa. Unlike the brain gain or the brain drain, the brain circulation is not a black-or-white phenomenon; it allows much room for creativity and innovation. The impact of the ICT sector is very evident in brain circulation. For example, Skype, Cisco Systems and other video and telephone conference services have allowed African and non-African professionals and students living abroad the opportunity to simultaneously connect with those who live in the continent. 

Advancements in tele-education have allowed professors from India the opportunity to teach courses in universities in countries like Ethiopia and South Africa without having to physically be there. Connected through video conferencing, these Indian professors are able to circulate their brain with students in Ethiopia and South Africa. 

Likewise, advancements in tele-medicine have allowed physicians in Kenya to diagnose patients with the medical help of physicians in the United States who are viewing these medical files through real time connection.

Virtual colleges and hospitals are just two examples of the advancements made through investing in the ICT sector in Africa...read the full article here.

The Role of Government in Economy: Japan, Nigeria and the United States

By: Samuel M. Gebru (@SMGebru)

May 23, 2012

Author’s Note: This is part one of a two-part series I am writing on the role of the state in economic affairs. In this article, I focus on Japan, Nigeria and the United States as three case studies. My next article will focus on Brazil, China, Ethiopia and Rwanda.

The role of the government in economic affairs is undoubtedly different for developed and developing states. Developing states typically lack the economic maturity that is attached to strong economic progress while developed states usually have high functioning economies and are associated with good and sometimes limited governance. The role of the state in the economy should be significantly larger in developing states because the foundations of economic development, including basic infrastructure development, trade regulation and political stability, require effective political will in the public interest. The state should always have a regulatory involvement in the economy, but once relative economic maturity and political stability has been met, a private-led economy with limited state involvement can allow for increased and healthy development. Developed states with greater political stability are also likely to have healthy economic growth compared to developing states.

Foremost, it is very important to establish that in economic matters the material and ideological interests of the state and private sector are often very different. The private sector is profit driven while the state, at least theoretically, serves the public interest. In the United States, for example, there is a prevailing political argument the U.S. Postal Service should either be privatized or cease to exist because it is both inefficient and unprofitable. While the USPS is indeed unprofitable, should this change occur, most if not all, national private postal carriers would never deliver to very rural areas because of its inefficiency. The profit driven market interest would mainly revolve around major economic centers and potentially immediate suburbs. In this instance, the USPS is a natural monopoly, controlling most of the postal sector in order to provide goods at a low cost. It behooves the state to provide postal services, even where unprofitable, because it is in the public interest and serves a basic economic function guaranteed to all people—a function that the private sector cannot truly fulfill in either a developing or developed state.

The founding of the United States Government in 1781 and the proceeding century can be seen as an example of why a strong government is necessary in a developing state. Few states can claim to have been truly created by design such as the United States of America. The initial limited economic and political scope of the U.S. Government, from the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation (as these united states) to the start of the Civil War, eventually became a weakness. The federal government was unable to effectively pass and enforce legislation, particularly trade and taxes because of greater sovereignty given to states rather than the federal government. It became apparent that the federal government, through the Constitution, had to increase its powers. Politically, after President Abraham Lincoln’s signing of the Emancipation Proclamation, the federal government had to use Union soldiers to enforce the abolishment of enslavement. This was the first major increase, albeit politically-militarily, of the state. With the freeing of slaves, the Emancipation Proclamation included economic damage to the South since African free labor mainly fueled the agriculture-led region. Economically, the second industrial revolution in the late 1800s posed new challenges to the federal government. While the second industrial revolution allowed for greater efficiency in sectors such as agriculture, it became clear that the political sector needed to respond accordingly. Rampant political corruption, especially in economic matters, led to the establishment of a merit-based civil service, thereby increasing the modern bureaucracy. The Federal Reserve Board was formed to control the U.S. Dollar and a national income tax was created as the federal government’s main source of revenue. These new legislations were relatively revolutionary, considering a century prior, the state’s economic and political powers were low to none. 

Notable was the continued increase of U.S. Government’s role in the economy following the victory of World War I. Because the United States on many accounts would have still been classified as a developing state in the early 20th Century, the New Deal in the 1930s under President Franklin Roosevelt tremendously expanded the economic and sociopolitical role of the state. President Roosevelt, a political liberal, ideologically believed that an expanded government could pioneer economic development and safeguard basic human rights. An expanded government allowed many Americans, who previously enjoyed little to no economic freedom and protections, to become employed in safe workplace conditions (i.e. new labor laws), receive better healthcare (i.e. Medicare and Medicaid) and become financially secure while working, retired, disabled or unemployed (i.e. safety-net programs). The role and size of the American bureaucracy for the most part was responsive to the size of the population and the economic and sociopolitical demands of the day. By being positioned as the world’s superpower and Europe’s economic and political underwriter, the United States Government and its economic scope had to increase to meet its domestic challenges while also being responsive to international needs. The American experience today is still that of a strong government heavily involved in economic affairs. Perhaps a most recent example is following the 2007 economic crisis: the subsequent government bailout of major companies led to an increase in the state’s regulation of and direct involvement in the economy. The Bush-Obama policy of government bailout effectively blurred the line between the state and market, further consolidating the role of the U.S. Government in the economy. However, now that major infrastructure has been developed, mainly during the early and mid-20th Century, and basic economic rights are guaranteed, the vast power and scope of the state in economic affairs should be unnecessary and viewed as overbearing.

Japan, a pioneer of the developmental state model, provides for an interesting and natural progression to liberal democracy and a vibrant economy. Unlike the United States, which was largely a state by design, Japan had existed as a centuries-old monarchy and shogunate prior to shifting towards liberal democracy in the late 1800s to early 1900s. While the early to mid-1990s were rocked by volatile military rule and Japan’s involvement in World War II, which led to the devastating impact of the two atomic bombs, Japan rebounded with the help of the U.S. and a stronger government in Tokyo. The developmental state model, essentially state-led capitalism, has been used in other Southeast Asian states and is now prevalent throughout the developing world, particularly in Africa. This model included the overwhelming increase of the role and power of the Government of Japan in the economy and the effective fortification of the bureaucracy. While Japan’s developmental state model would be a nightmare for an American conservative, it has undoubtedly served to the state’s interests in the latter part of the 20th Century: a period of extremely rapid economic growth making Japan the world’s second largest economy. Japan’s remarkable growth continues today, of course with challenges. Japan has entered the G8/G20, has become viable as a serious contender for a United Nations Security Council permanent member seat and continues to increase its foreign investments (particularly in Africa and Latin America). While the size of Japan’s government is not as large as the United States’, the role of the state in the economy is much greater. This, however, has caused problems particularly in the 1990s as Japan’s bureaucracy seemed unable to restart economic growth due to corruption and other indicators. As in the case of the modern United States, the modern Japan might want to consider limiting the role of the state in economic affairs so as to spur private growth and healthy competition. Also similar to the United States, Japan has also achieved on many levels basic infrastructure and economic rights, particularly for the poor and rural. The role of government in a developed Japan, as in the United States, should solely be that of permanent economic referee.

The neoliberal model of very limited state involvement in the economy in developing states ultimately led to a massive failure in regions like Latin America and Africa. Namely through the requirements of Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, postcolonial developing states were not able to secure financing until fiscal austerity programs and massive privatization requirements were met. SAPs eventually failed throughout the developing world and in many cases put states in much worse economic conditions. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund failed to recognize the importance of key financial and political institutions that should have been created before any SAP was implemented. Additionally, another prerequisite to SAPs should have been the basic development of infrastructure and other key political goods. Because neoliberals failed to realize these issues prior to requiring developing states to decrease the role of the state in economic affairs, the ultimate result was financial devastating and included political consequences. Another case study is postcolonial Nigeria. A set of robust state institutions was absent and ultimately gave way to crooked political leaders with ulterior motives. Nigeria suffered greatly due to massive corruption, its colonial legacy as well as improperly managed oil wealth. Had the Government of Nigeria had robust political and economic institutions to oversee the market and natural resource management, the postcolonial state could have been at a better political and socioeconomic footing today.

As in the case with Japan, the United States and Nigeria, it can be witnessed that a robust state role—if not dominance—in a developing economy, with the gradual liberalization of the economy, will produce favorable long-term results. The United States Government, while very large, has maintained in large a liberal order of limited government involvement in economic affairs. In Japan, despite the economic and demographic hurdles of the 1990s, the economy still stands as one of the world’s most robust markets. The failed case of Nigeria lends credence to the prevailing viewpoint that stronger institutions and initial state involvement can lead to better handling of the economy. Allowing a large state role will, theoretically, ensure that the public interest is being served while the economy is growing through basic infrastructure development.

Ethiopia at 2012 G8 Summit: Abebe Gellaw Only Embarrassed Himself

By: Samuel M. Gebru (@SMGebru)

May 21, 2012

Ethiopia’s Prime Minister was recently in Washington, D.C. as part of his participation in the annual summit of the Group of Eight (G8). 

Mr. Meles Zenawi was speaking at an agricultural forum moderated by the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development, Dr. Rajiv Shah. During the session, Mr. Meles was asked to elaborate on the priorities of Ethiopia and Africa when it came to agriculture and aid commitments by donor countries (see video time 03:30:30). As the Prime Minister was answering the question, Ethiopian American Mr. Abebe Gellaw disrupted the forum by yelling at the Prime Minister to free the jailed Mr. Eskinder Nega and boastfully declared that Ethiopians need freedom not food (see video time 03:31:35).

Even while Mr. Abebe was yelling, Mr. Meles kept on talking over him (see video time 03:31:46). Dr. Shah of USAID essentially told Mr. Abebe to shut up and called security on him (see video time 03:32:01). The Ethiopian Prime Minister continued answering the question posed by Dr. Shah.

I know Mr. Abebe and was extensively quoted in a critical article he wrote on the Endowment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray (EFFORT). 

Although I agree with Mr. Abebe that Ethiopia needs a free and functioning private press and political environment, his actions were in all respects immature, insane and quite unprofessional. Professional journalists—which Mr. Abebe claims to be—would know that their job is to professionally report the news without jumping up and disrupting events and meetings. Forget protocol and the fact that this was a high-level panel—Mr. Abebe’s actions served no purpose. If his goal was to embarrass the Prime Minister of Ethiopia then he terribly failed.

Again, if you see the actual video, while Mr. Meles looked shocked, he continued to talk over Mr. Abebe and when that proved difficult, he waited and let Mr. Abebe have his moment. If Mr. Abebe actually wanted to embarrass the Prime Minister, he would have waited and used his press credentials as an opportunity to ask hard questions on freedom and democracy that could have challenged Mr. Meles and his policies. However, the Prime Minister was not embarrassed—and keep in mind, he got what we wanted: a renewal of G8 commitment to food security in Africa through the opening of a new fund of $3 Billion. 

Time and again, Ethiopian Americans miserably fail to seize the opportunity to challenge senior Ethiopian government officials. Many senior Ethiopian government officials visit North America and Europe frequently on what I essentially call propaganda tours. That being said, a reasonable person should be able to attend these meetings and ask hard questions that challenge the Ethiopian government’s policies. Instead of that, many in our diaspora community choose to protest and disrupt meetings. This serves no purpose beyond giving the ruling party more reason not to trust or cooperate with the diaspora.

I am truthfully not surprised by the actions of Abebe Gellaw. I just hope that Ethiopian Americans understand that there is another and much better way of challenging senior Ethiopian government officials who visit the United States.

On Coptic Pope Shenouda's Passing

His Holiness Shenouda III in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Today is a very sad day for Christianity and Christians worldwide. His Holiness Shenouda III, Pope and Patriarch of the Coptic Orthodox Church of Egypt has passed away. Pope Shenouda III, born Nazeer Gayed to a devout Christian family, was 88 years old.

Pope Shenouda was a defender of the Orthodox faith. I have read and saved many of his numerous publications and e-books and am continuously amazed at his inspiring messages of repentance, forgiveness, tolerance and peace.

In these daring times, Egyptians worldwide are worried about the future of their homeland. Pope Shenouda worked very hard to minimize the tensions between the Muslims and Christians of Egypt. His successor will have to continue the religious coexistence work Pope Shenouda started and also find means to inspire the Orthodox youth to continue in their faith.

Pope Shenouda III's passing is a huge loss for Christianity but I take solace that he is now at rest with Our Lord.

Samuel M. Gebru

17 March 2012

Salute Women by Improving Maternal Health

Click to enlarge.

By: Samuel M. Gebru (@SMGebru) and Zewdy Awalom (@Zewdy)

March 8, 2012

Today is International Women’s Day, an opportunity for us to celebrate the women worldwide making a positive impact to our families and communities. A United Nations-recognized political awareness holiday, International Women’s Day is aimed at giving attention to the political, economic and social struggles women in our world still face while also celebrating their vast achievements.

Dedicating a day for women reminds us of the challenges women endure and the strength they have. On the occasion of International Women’s Day 2012, we would like to focus on the urgent necessity of our world to focus on improving maternal health.

One third of all births take place at home without the assistance of skilled birth attendants. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), over 536,000 women die annually due to the lack of proper maternal healthcare. Over 3 million stillbirths and 3.7 million newborn deaths occur each year. Tragically, 99% of these maternal and child deaths occur in developing countries like Ethiopia and the vast majority of these deaths are preventable...read full article here.

Keep the International Criminal Court Away from Africa

ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo

By: Samuel M. Gebru (@SMGebru)

March 3, 2012

The Solidarity Movement for New Ethiopia (SMNE) and various other Ethiopian diaspora civic organizations have continuously over the past few years petitioned the Governments of the United States and the United Kingdom, and other Western states, to bring to the International Criminal Court's (ICC) attention various human rights abuses in Ethiopia.

Whether these human rights abuses are real or perceived is another matter. For the record, no one in Ethiopia or elsewhere should be deprived of their human rights, particularly basic ones: food, shelter, health and education. This is not a matter of democracy or not, but a matter of human dignity. Violations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which Ethiopia is a signatory, should be taken very seriously--and of its own Federal Constitution.

The International Criminal Court, and its chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, who, by the way has allegations of rape on his hand, have an established reputation of misguided approaches to justice. The ICC seems to be very biased and only approaches what I prefer to call easy targets, leaders of weaker states. While I applaud U.S. President George W. Bush for his development work in Africa, the atrocities in Afghanistan and Iraq under his watch have gone unnoticed. Consequently, we spend more time prosecuting folks like Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir than we do about the powerful President of the United States. Certainly, who would actually prosecute an American President of human rights violations?

Make no mistake, this is not an excuse for human rights abuses in Ethiopia, documented and perceived. I do not think that the ICC, however, should be the correct mechanism for ensuring justice, particularly in Africa. Let Africans create their own mechanism that is suitable to the local customs, cultures and values, and unbiased by hidden agendas. 

I fear that we, as diaspora Africans, may be barking up the wrong tree. I meet the ICC with much skepticism and it has lost any credibility it had in Africa long ago.

March 2012 is Ethiopian Canadian Heritage Month

On the occasion of March 1 being the 116th commemoration of the Battle of Adwa, the City of Toronto, Canada declared March 2012 Ethiopian Canadian Heritage Month. Congratulations to Ethiopian Canadian community organizer Samuel Getachew for having accepted the proclamation on behalf of the Ethiopian Canadian community.

Click here to see the proclamation by the Honourable Mayor of Toronto.