Afr.j. polit. sci. (2000), Vol. 5 No. 1,29-45 
Negotiating Space for Rural 
Communities? Market Orthodoxy 
and The Changing Concept of Social 
Welfare Services in Africa 
Said Adejumobi * 
Abstract 
The paper examines how market reforms are reconstituting the notion of social 
welfare services in Africa within the context of the rural-urban divide. Market 
reforms in the social welfare sector seek to reverse this divide and negotiate anew 
consensus in the rural-urban equation. Priority and funding re-adjustment by the 
state, decentralisation, deregulation, and commercialisation are new elements in 
theprovision of social welfare services in Africa. The objectives, among others, are 
to facilitate equity andaccess to those services, especially by the rural population. 
But the extent to which those objectives have been realised remain questionable. 
Introduction 
The rise of neo-liberal economic orthodoxy has led to a radical transformation of 
the nature of the issues, policy orientations and the discourse on the state, economy 
and society in Africa. Market rules constitute the new basis on which economic and 
social policy reforms are constructed. Indeed, market logic as John Mihevc (1995) 
describes it has become a fundamentalist economic ideology. The market is 
believed to be an infallible elixir for the problems of economic backwardness, long 
years of misguided domestic policies, and the crisis of the state and social welfare. 
The notion of the market as a conceptual and instrumental tool in the neo-liberal 
economic framework feeds on a spatial, but dualistic concept of development. 
Rural-urban differentials in income, wealth and social services constitute the 
1027-0353 © 2000 African Association of Political Science
30 Said Adejumobi 
background to and a major factor in Africa's economic malaise, and its vicious 
cycle of underdevelopment. To achieve economic recovery, the bountiful energies 
and creativity of the rural population must be released through the intervention of 
the market, while the delivery of social welfare services must be reconceptualised 
in terms of their focus and essence, in order to address the disadvantages suffered 
by rural people. The empowerment of rural communities is viewed as a sine qua 
non of national development. Market reforms in the social welfare sector, especially 
of education and health, seek to negotiate space for the rural communities, 
against the forces and interest of urban dwellers, who have been the major 
beneficiaries of state investment in the sector. Terms such as access, equity and 
efficiency dominate the discourse on reforms. 
The paper examines how market orthodoxy is redefining the object and essence 
of social welfare services including its patterns of allocation, within the context of 
rural-urban dichotomy. Our arguments are twofold. First, that the theoretical and 
underlying assumptions of the neo-liberal reforms in the social welfare sector are 
tenuous. Second, these reforms are likely to provoke complex, but mostly 
deleterious effects on both the rural and urban population, and inhibit national 
development. 
The paper comprises five parts. Part one focuses on the conceptualisation of 
Africa's economic crisis in the neo-liberal discourse, approached from the ruralurban 
divide. This is necessary because the policy measures prescribed by this 
perspective follow logically from its diagnosis of the crisis. Part two is a reflection 
on state involvement in the social welfare sector in Africa, why and to what extent 
did such policy orientation widen the rural-urban gap, with respect to access to 
social services. Part three examines the new orientation and policy thrust in the 
social welfare sector arising from the new paradigm of neo-liberal economic 
orthodoxy. How are the philosophy, object and provision of social welfare services 
being reconstituted under market reforms and how are these factored into the 
prevailing rural urban disparity? Part four, is a critique- of the logic of market 
reforms in the social sector and the limitations evident in the claim to defend rural 
communities. The final part of the paper is the conclusion, where we seek to tie the 
threads of all the arguments together. 
Neo-Liberal Orthodoxy and The Spatial Conception of 
Africa's Economic Crisis 
Amongst the regions of the world, Africa has demonstrated considerable instability, 
followed by a decline in her economic performance in the post-independence 
era. Although, the immediate post-independence era witnessed some notable and 
positive changes in the areas of agriculture, industry and export, all these still 
compare quite poorly with the other parts of the developing world. For example, 
while sub-Saharan Africa recorded a growth rate of 3,0% in the GDP per capita
Negotiating Space for The Rural Communities? 31 
between 1965 and 1973, falling to -0.3% in 198 8. East Asia recorded a growth rate 
in GNP per capita of 5.4% between 1965-1973, increasing to 8.7% in 1988 (World 
Bank, 1990: 160). Similarly, the rate of growth of export and terms of trade also 
worsened significantly in the case of Africa, so also, did the external debt profile. 
For example, in sub-Saharan Africa, while the growth of primary exports was 
15.4% between 1965 and 1973, this had fallen to 0.8% by 1988. The average 
growth rate of the GDP, which was 5.9% between 1965-1973, plummeted to 2.5% 
between 1973 and 1980. Growth rate in manufacturing dropped from 10.1% in 
1960-73 to 8.1% in 1973-80, while the terms oftrade which was 4.8% in 1973-80, 
went down to -4.4% in 1988. The debt profile deepened significantly. For sub- 
Saharan Africa, the debt burden, which stood at $56 billion in 1980, rose to $161 
billion in 1990. For the whole of Africa, the figure was $272 billion in 1990, which 
was two and half times that of 1980 (Adejumobi, 1996:419). Evidently, by 1980, 
Africa was on the verge of a very serious economic crisis. 
In trying to understand and explain Africa's economic crisis, various positions 
have emerged. Some emphasize external variables, particularly Africa's dependence 
on external factors. (Onimode, 1988, Amin, 1981,Bangura, 1990,Olukoshi, 
1990). Others view the crisis as a dialectical twist between domestic and external 
factors (Weeks, 1992); while to some, internal factors are the most decisive in the 
continent's economic decline. The neo-liberal orthodoxy, which informs the 
Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP), shares the third perspective. According 
to this perspective, distortions in domestic pricing, income, trade and general 
economic activities, arising primarily from the intervention of the state in the 
economy and at the heart of Africa's economic crisis. The problems of stagflation, 
unemployment, decaying social services, balance oftrade and payment disequilibria, 
and the debt peonage are all the result of the state's excessive control of the 
economy in the form of fiscal and monetary regulations, restrictions on free trade, 
bloated government expenditure, and protection of inefficient and wasteful 
public agencies and parastatals. This resulted in pervasive resource misallocation 
and economic inefficiencies, which adversely affected economic growth 
and development. 
One of the shortcomings of the post-colonial model of development is the issue 
of the rural-urban di vide. It is argued that state involvement in the economy and the 
distortions it engenders favour, especially political leaders and bureaucrats in the 
policy-making bureaucracies. Furthermore, urban groups, like labour, various 
professionals and factions of the bourgeois class, have disproportionate access to 
the state. Given their ability to organise, they are able not only to influence and 
often determine public policies at the expense of the rural population who are 
atomised, geographically dispersed, uninformed and unorganised, and can rarely 
articulate their demands and pressurise the state (Adesina, 1994; Lipton, 1982). 
The spatial inequalities between rural and urban areas perpetuated by the state,
32 Said Adejumobi 
therefore facilitated in a systematic, but complex way, the economic crisis. The 
neo-liberal interpretation of the African crisis is summarised by Vali Jamal and 
John Weeks: 
The essential ingredient of that view was the belief that sub-Saharan 
African societies were characterised by large and widening inequalities 
between town and country, that these inequalities were caused by government 
interference in markets, and that these inequalities overwhelmed all 
others, with implications not only for income and wealth distribution, but 
also for resource allocation and productive efficiency (Jamal and Weeks, 
1993: 2-3). 
Neo-liberals argue that the "rent-generating", "rent-seeking", "urban bias" 
policies and institutions of the post-colonial model of development worked to the 
benefit of a legitimacy-hungry political elite (and its largely urban based clients) 
and to the detriment of the rural majority (Olukoshi, 1996: 56). 
According to this school of thought, there are four specific areas in which state 
policies favoured the urban population while undermining economic progress. The 
first is fiscal policy. In this area, the exchange rate was administratively controlled, 
leading in most cases, to overvalued currencies. A state-controlled exchange rate 
regime, subsidised imports for urban consumers who have an insatiable appetite 
for imported goods. On the other hand, this policy penalised the primary producers, 
whose incomes from produce sale in the external market was partially appropriated 
by the state to finance this urban consumption. In other respects, the administrative 
control of food prices, generated rent transfer and subsidy for the urban population^ 
while penalising the peasantry. On the whole such physical measures resulted in 
adverse terms of trade for the peasantry. 
The second area of urban-based state policy is that of government expenditure. 
Government expenditure, which remains bloated partly because of persistent 
demand for wage increases by urban workers, the majority of whom are government 
employees, and partly because of the colossal state investments in the 
parastatals and agencies. In both cases, the beneficiaries are mostly the urban folks. 
High wage increases fuel inflation, which further aggravates the purchasing power 
especially of the non-wage earning rural population. Also, parastatals and agencies 
are made to provide employment and social services mainly for the urban 
population. Indeed, parastatals account for a large chunk of the debt profile of 
African states. For sub-Saharan Africa, for example, the share of public enterprises 
in external debt was 6.9% in 1992(WorldBank, 1995:265). The third is the urbanoriented 
industrial enterprise that dominated the development policy of most 
African states. The post-independence industrial policy adopted by most African 
countries was import-substitution-industrialisation (ISI). These industries were
Negotiating Space for The Rural Communities? 33 
sited mostly in the urban centres, were capital intensive, did not provide intersectoral 
linkages in the economy, and produced mainly goods and service for the 
urban population. Even when the inadequacies of this industrialisation strategy 
were realised, the state could not divest itself of them primarily because of the vest 
interest of urban groups in securing employment and income. In effect, the state 
subsidised a wasteful and expensive consumption habits of the urban population, 
both workers and the middle class. 
The fourth and final urban-based policy, is that of export promotion and 
development. The state's centralised control over the export trade in primarily 
products, through marketing boards, ensured the expropriation of fanners and the 
transfer of accumulated resources to subsidise urban consumption leaving farmers 
with very poor returns on their produce. This policy discouraged productivity in 
primary agricultural export sector and affected the state's foreign exchange 
earnings and balance of payment position. 
To correct the structural problems of the economy predicated on such ruralurban 
imbalance, the neo-liberal perspective advocates immediate stabilisation 
measures meant to reduce demand and stem economic decline through fiscal and 
monetary policies. The centre-piece of these policies is Structural Adjustment 
Programmes, which among other things, seek to shift resources: (a) from the nontradable 
to the tradable goods sector and from import competing activities to export 
activities (in a sense, from the urban- centered, state economic policies, to a ruralbased 
economic policy); and (b) from the government sector to the private sector 
(Bhaduri and Nayyar, 1996: 33). Openness in the economy through economic 
deregulation and a structure of incentives are to be encouraged, which would 
promote industrial growth and export oriented development. All these are to be 
achieved through reliance on market forces, which get the "price right". 
Structural Adjustment policies, which include market determined exchange and 
interest rates, withdrawal of subsidies from essential services, wage freeze and 
wage control, trade liberalisation and the removal of institutional and administrative 
control on external and internal trade, and the privatisation and 
commercialisation of public enterprises, are designed to remove the existing 
incentives,rent and subsidies enjoyed by the urban population and substitute a 
regime of incentives for improved rural and agricultural production. In particular, 
currency devaluation and the scrapping of marketing boards are designed to raise 
agricultural productivity as well as rural income. In some countries like Nigeria, 
specific rural development measures were taken to complement the adjustment 
package. For example, an extra-ministerial agency, the Directorate of Foods, 
Roads and Rural Infrastructure, (DFRRI) was established, to facilitate the provision 
of essential infrastructural facilities like feeder roads, electricity and farm 
equipment for the rural areas. 
In summary, it is important to emphasize that while the concepts of "rent
34 Said Adejumobi 
seeking", "rent behaviour", "urban bias" and "urban coalition" are not new in 
analysing the structure and policy processes of African economies,1 what is new 
in the present conjuncture, is the elevation of these concepts by neo-liberal policy 
analysts and intellectuals to the level of global economic dogma. A spatial 
dimension of rural - urban dichotomy is factored into the processes and dynamics 
of economic malfunctioning and economic decline, which forms the basis of policy 
options to lift African countries from the economic morass. 
Back to the Past: The State, Social Welfare Services and 
The Rural-Urban Sectors 
Historically, the state has always played a crucial role in the provision of social 
welfare services in both developing and developed countries. Indeed, as Oliver 
Letwin (1988:1) has observed, the origin of state owned and state run services are 
lost in the mists of time. As long as there have been rulers, there have been state 
owned lands and buildings as well as services. However, in most countries, the 
state does not enjoy an exclusive monopoly in the provision of such services. 
Private participation in the provision of educational, health and other social 
services like water supply are not unknown. This notwithstanding, responsibility 
for the provision of those services for the majority of the people lies with the state. 
Various state departments and agencies are established to handle such tasks. 
The involvement of the state in the provision of social welfare services like 
education, health care and water supply has been facilitated by two major factors. 
The first, is the philosophical conception of the state as grounded in both the liberal 
and Marxist theories. The state in the liberal theory is a form of a negotiated "social 
pact", which compels obedience from the people, but has primary responsibility 
for their security and social welfare. The relationship between the state and the 
people is one of reciprocity and exchange. According to Jean Jacques Rosseau, the 
basic values which the state must strive to protect are life, liberty and social welfare 
(Rosseau, 1913). Even Adam Smith, the ultimate exponent of a laiss£-faire 
economy, acknowledged the responsibility of the state in the social welfare sector 
(Smith 1936: 650-51). 
In Marxist theory, the state is viewed quite differently in terms of its origin and 
purpose. It is an organ which evolved in the process of class struggle, and as such 
an instrument of class domination. Nonetheless, the whole essence of the struggle 
of the working class to capture state power, is to transform it to serve the interest 
of the majority of the people, by ensuring access, equity and the uniform provision 
of social welfare services. This is the reason why the socialist states, before the 
collapse of the East European countries, placed tremendous emphasis on, and 
invested enormous state resources, in social welfare services, like education, 
health, water supply, etc. The objective was to improve human capital and raise the 
standard of living. In both the liberal and the Marxist theories of the state, there
Negotiating Space for The Rural Communities? 35 
seem to be a consensus that poverty and income inequalities can be mitigated 
through the public provision of social welfare services. 
The second factor is the continued struggle between the dominant classes. That 
is, the struggle between labour and capital often mediated by the state, through 
legal codes and constitutional norms, and through which labour has been able to 
wrestle some concessions from capital and the state in the form of state investment 
in and provision of social welfare services for itself and the rest of society. This has 
characterised the evolution of the social welfare and security systems in most 
developed countries. The demand by labour for full employment, fair working 
conditions, reasonable standard of living, and the protection of their social and 
economic rights, which include, the right of the citizens to education and good 
health services has characterised the class struggles. In an important sense 
therefore, the struggle between classes and between other social forces within 
nations, has influenced the state's concern for, and investment in, the social sector 
(Adejumobi, 1998: 9). 
In Africa too, the state has play ed a pivotal role in the provision of social welfare 
services. The reasons for this are numerous. They include the colonial antecedent. 
Although colonial regimes initiated the provision of infrastructural and social 
welfare services like roads, railways, education and health, these were grossly 
inadequate and sub-standard. Thus by independence, Africa ranked very low in the 
provision of social welfare services. For instance, Africa's educational structure 
was the worst among all regions of the world (Lall, 1992). A major challenge for 
post-colonial regimes, therefore, was how to bridge the gap in the provision of 
social welfare services, and also meet the aspirations of the people for better living 
standards. This prompted massive state investments in the expansion of the 
education, health care services, employment, and water supply. The provision of 
such services was considered a sine qua non and a major catalyst of economic and 
social development. Therefore, in the immediate post-colonial era, up to the early 
1980s, most African governments made massive investments in the social sector. 
For example, in Nigeria, the percentage of public expenditure on social services 
allocated in the First National Development Plan (1962-8) was 59.1%: it was 
57.4% in the Second National Development Plan (1970-4) and 54.4% in the Third 
National DevelopmentPlan(1975-1980)(Onokerhoraye, 1984:5). In Cote'd'Ivoire, 
while the social sectors of education and health were allocated 28.4% of the state 
current expenditure in 1965, this increased to 33.4% in 1975 (Tuinder, 1978). In 
Sierra-Leone, the social sectors of education, health and water supply received 
13% development expenditure between 1963 and 1964 increasing to 20% between 
1970 and 1971 (Sierra Leone Government, 1975). 
The result of such huge investments was a great expansion in the social service 
base of most African countries. In Nigeria, while the number of primary schools 
in 1960 (at independence) was 15,703 and primary school enrollment was
36 Said Adejumobi 
2,849,500, by 1980, primary school enrollment had increased to 15,607,505 
(Sambo, 1998). In 1976, the state introduced the Universal Primary Education 
Scheme (UPE), which made primary education free, in order to create better 
education access and opportunities for all Nigerian children. At the tertiary 
education level, while Nigeria had only one University in the colonial era, this had 
increased to 6 by independence in 1960, to 17 in 1980, and to 30 in 1983. Student 
enrollment in tertiary institutions also rose sharply- from 1000 in 1959 to 113,158 
in 1983 and 250,000 in 1994. In C6te d'lvoire, only 33% of children of school age 
were enrolled in schools at independence in 1960. By 1975 about 55% of this age 
group were already enrolled. For secondary education, enrollment grew from 
15,000 at independence in 1960 to nearly 90,000 in 1975. And the University of 
Abidjan, which was established in 1959 with less than 1000 students, had an 
enrollment of 6,000 by 1975 (Tuinder, 1978: 74-5). In Sierra Leone, the number 
of primary, secondary and technical/vocational schools in 1960 was 583,36, and 
3 respectively. This jumped up to 1,023,91 and 4 respectively in 1970 and further 
to 1,952, 213, and 18 respectively in 1987. Student enrollment also took an 
astronomic jump. While student enrollment was 81,881,7,097 and 950 in primary, 
secondary and technical schools respectively in 1960, this increased to 389,937, 
97,995, and 2,752 respectively in 1987 (see, Beckley, 1993: 69). A similar 
expansion took place in the health sector and in the provision of clean water in 
many countries. In Nigeria, for example, between 1975 and 1986, the number of 
doctors in the public health sector increased four fold, the number of hospital beds 
doubled, and the number of nurses and midwives tripled (Odumosu, 1996: 128). 
In spite of such huge investments in the social welfare sector, marked disparities 
continued to exist between the rural and the urban areas regarding the provision of, 
and access to such services. As Ben Turok has observed "social services have been 
established in a highly unbalanced way, generally favouring rich rather than the 
poor, the urban over the rural" (Turok, 1987: 16). According to Bade Onimode, 
rural areas have been mute victims of appalling social oppression and a "culture of 
silence" imposed by the urbanised elite, who deny them the basic social facilities 
of education, health care services, electricity and water supply. This situation arises 
largely from the powerlessness of the rural dwellers (Onimode, 1988: 158). A 
national study by the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Nigerian Institute of Social 
and Economic Research (NISER) on agriculture and rural life in Nigeria between 
1976 and 1985, confirmed these observations. The study concluded that "rural 
infrastructures such as roads, water, health and medical services, electricity and 
schools which constitute the substance of rural welfare were grossly lacking 
throughout the country during the review period" (CBN and NISER, 1991: 18). 
The foregoing seems to lend credence to the urban bias thesis in the provision 
of social welfare services in Africa. Although the capital outlay, which went into 
social welfare services in the post-colonial era was colossal and these services were
Negotiating Space for The Rural Communities? 37 
considerably expanded, they were concentrated in urban areas. Market reforms 
were intended to correct such imbalances and inequalities in the distribution of 
social services. How this is to be done is the subject of the next section. 
Negotiating Space for Rural Communities? 
Market Reforms and Social Welfare Sector Restructuring 
There are two levels at which market reforms affect the social sector, prompt social 
sector restructuring, and reconstitute the nature, conception and orientation of 
social welfare services, with implications for both rural and urban areas. The first 
is through the SAP, and second is through the social sector reform policies, specific 
to the sector. 
SAP induced policy measures that affect the social welfare sector including the 
reduction in state expenditure and the withdrawal of subsidies on essential social 
welfare services. Neo-liberals argue that state expenditure should be significantly 
curtailed in order to bring down inflation. Hence, there has been a significant 
reduction in budgeting allocation to the social sector during the current adjustment 
era. The social sector is one of the first major victim of shrinking state expenditure 
(Adejumobi, 1995, 1997; Ghai, 1991; Bijlmakers, Basset and Sanders, 1995; 
Weisner, 1992). Between 1980 and 1985, social spending in sub-Saharan Africa 
fell by 26% in real terms as compared to 18% in Latin America (Weiss, 1995:121). 
In Nigeria, Federal Government expenditure on education and health, which was 
5.2% and 1.9% respectively in 1986 (when SAP was commenced) shrank to 2.3% 
and 1.1% respectively in 1991. In Zimbabwe, recurrent real expenditure on the 
social sectors of education and health declined by about 12% and 8% respectively 
in 1990-1, and further by 15% and 11% respectively in the 1992-3 fiscal year 
(Mhone, 1995: 114-5). The trend is the similar in most African countries. 
Under the SAP regime, the emphasis has shifted from "social development", to 
"efficiency" and "cost recovery" with a new pricing policy of "fee for service" 
approach. Two assumptions drive this policy on so-called social welfare sector 
reforms. First, massive state investment in the social sector has engendered 
"artificial excess demand", with consequences for resource wastage and misallocation 
(Adejumobi, 1999: 13). According to a former World Bank Researcher, 
Batician Tuinder, in the Cote d'lvoire, for example, there was rapid increase in 
enrollment and costs at all levels of education, simply because education was free 
for private individuals (Tuinder, 1978: 286). This has to be redressed if the 
economy is to achieve relative equilibrium. Second, huge state investment in the 
social sector subsidises private consumption by urban dwellers to the disadvantage 
of the rural population. In the case of Ghana, the World Bank pointed out in 1989 
that urban residents received on the average, a public health subsidy of 2,223 cedis 
(Ghanaian currency) compared to 1,459 cedis received, on the average by rural 
dwellers. In 1992, the gap increased to about 91%. The urban population received
3 8 Said Adejumobi 
a subsidy of 5,808 cedis, while the rural population received just 3,039 cedis 
(World Bank, 1995"). Curtailing state expenditure through, among other methods, 
the removal of subsidies on social services would correct such distortions and 
ensure equity and fairness between the rural and the urban areas. 
The reform agenda also entailed the reconceptualisation of social welfare 
services and the specific policy measures which flow from it. Henceforth, social 
welfare services are no longer "public" goods they become "private" goods, and 
change from being "institutional" to "residual" services. This is what I have 
described elsewhere as the "private good" theory (Adejumobi 1998,1999) in social 
sector reforms. This theory affirms that social welfare services are essentially 
private goods, for which charges were imposed. Education and health services are 
considered to be private goods, which yield direct and greater benefit to the 
individual, and less to society. The users of such services must therefore be made 
to pay. To further buttress this new policy thrust, it is argued significantly by the 
World Bank that, in all strata of education in sub-Saharan Africa, the private rate 
of return is far higher than the social rate. For primary education, the social rate of 
return is 24.3% compared to a41.3% private rate of return. The social rate of return 
for secondary education is 18.2%, while the private rate of return is 26.6%. For 
tertiary education, the social rate of return is the lowest-11.2%, while the private 
rate of return is 27.8% (World Bank, 1995": 22). The implication is that for all 
layers of education private benefit accruable is more than the benefit accruing to 
society. In the light of such calculations, it is argued that in the education sector, 
for example, emphasis should be placed on the area, with a higher rate of social 
return, which is primary education. 
The social sector reforms involves disagregation, decentralisation, deregulation 
and commercialisation. Disagregation suggests that it is important to classify and 
distinguish between segments or layers of a particular social service and concentrate 
on the segment or layer of such sector, which confers greater social returns and 
benefits to the majority of the people. The distinction is between primary/ 
secondary education on the one hand and tertiary education on the other; and rural 
and primary health care services versus modern and urban based health services. 
The preference in both cases is for the former which, it is argued, would benefit the 
rural areas more. It is an attempt to negotiate space for and skew state investment 
in the social sector in favour of the rural population who are disadvantaged (World 
Bank, 1995: 65). John Weiss puts the issue thus: 
Currently, much emphasis is given to reallocation of expenditure under 
education and health budgets to ensure that the services, which are more 
significant to the poor, are protected. In education, this involves a focus on 
primary rather than higher education (rural schools, rather than urban 
colleges and Universities) and in health, a focus on basic preventive, rather
Negotiating Space for The Rural Communities? 39 
than more elaborate curative treatment (rural clinics and water sanitation 
facilities, rather than urban hospitals) (Weiss, 1997: 120) 
Decentralisation and deregulation entail a greater opening of the social welfare 
sector to encourage private participation by non-governmental organisations 
(NGOs) and private commercial agents that might be disposed to invest in the 
sector. This is expected to increase efficiency and accountability, as competing 
private producers are assumed to have greater incentives than state bodies to 
respond to new policy demands and initiate changes in the services provided 
(Vivan, 1995:18). This will also dismantle bureaucratic rigidities and corruption 
in the social sector. It is further argued that rural areas, with a rich culture of 
cooperative societies and community organisations, would be in a position to tap 
this new opportunity. Hence, the state is now placing greater emphasis on welfare 
and donor agencies to support rural community based efforts in the provision of 
social welfare services like education, (usually primary education), health and 
water supply. 
Finally, the logic of partial commercialisation, which we have earlier touched 
upon, emphasizes "cost recovery" in the provision of social welfare services, 
which are to be discriminatory and 
differentiated. The poor and rural population are to pay less for social welfare 
services, while the rich and the urban people, are to pay more. In Ghana, this policy 
is referred to as the "cash and carry" system (Brown and Kerr, 1997: 73-4). 
The Limits of Market "Uhuru"? 
A Critique of Market Orthodoxy in the Social Welfare Sector 
The application of market principles to the social welfare sector has generated 
considerable criticism in Africa (Cornia, 1992,1994; Ihonvbere, 1993; Gibbon, 
1993,1995; Brown and Kerr, 1997; Bijlmakers Bosset and Sandars, 1996,19%; 
Adejumobi, 1995, 1997). My attempt here is not to repeat these views, but to 
present what I consider to be new perspectives, which flow from the foregoing 
discussions. I identify three areas for criticism, which I characterise as the fallacies 
and myths of the market. These are, the "fallacy of private good", the "fallacy of 
cost-recovery" and the "fallacy of rural support". I shall discuss them in this order. 
The Fallacy of Private Good 
It is true that social welfare services can be construed as "private goods", for which 
the principle of exclusion could be applied and user-charges imposed. However, 
this classification is misleading. It blurs the social and national importance of such 
services, which qualify them as public good. For example, while health care or the 
access of people to pipe-borne water may be considered as a private good, for 
which individuals could be excluded if they cannot pay for those services, its
40 Said Adejumobi 
importance for the good health of the population, which is vital to the socioeconomic 
development of the country, far out weighs its cost. As Anthony Gjddens 
(1982: 167) has rightly observed, the classification of social welfare services as 
private and residual goods and services works against the advancement of the 
"social dimensions of citizenship", which concerns "the rights of everyone to enjoy 
a certain minimum standard of life, economic welfare and security". In other, 
words, the social sector reforms impinge on the larger question of citizenship and 
the foundation of the state. In addition, the terms social and private rates of return, 
and they way they have been calculated for social welfare services by the World 
Bank are dubious. Social welfare services generate enormous externalities, which 
cannot be easily calculated, or quantified. 
The Fallacy of Cost Recovery 
The notion of cost recovery brandished by neo-liberal orthodoxy obscures the 
reality of who pays for the public provision of social services. The impression 
being created is that free social services are a "gift" by the state, which the latter 
can no longer afford. To the extent that it is the citizens who pay directly or 
otherwise, for the services provided by the state, through various forms of taxes, 
such services cannot be considered free. They are services whose costs are borne 
by the citizens howbeit indirectly. Therefore, the policies of cost recovery are 
designed to impose additional costs on the population. 
We might also ask why the social sector is often the first and perhaps major 
victim of state financial adjustment and austerity measures? Why not defence, 
which is less productive? Why has defence and security expenditure remained 
quite high in most African countries even under the SAP regime?. It would seem 
that the policy of cost recovery is more a political, rather than, economic issue. 
The Fallacy of "Rural Support" 
The rigid urban-rural dichotomy made by the neo-liberal theorists is tenuous. 
There is in reality constant interaction between the two sectors, via rural-urban 
migration and urban-rural remittances. Most urban dwellers, usually relate to, and 
maintain their rural identity. They are also involved in urban-based social networks 
that maintain strong rural loyalties and norms. Such urban-based networks provide 
solidarity to their members in times of need and link them to their rural communities. 
In addition, available data do not suggest that rural communities have derived 
any significant benefit from SAP-inspired social sector reforms. For example, a 
study of seven villages in the Volta region of Ghana, revealed quite clearly, that 
access by the rural populace to health and education services has shrunk considerably 
in the adjustment era. The imposition of user fees on social services 
(however small) has forced the population to resort to traditional medical systems.
Negotiating Space for The Rural Communities? 41 
And some parents are withdrawing their children from school and putting them in 
informal training programmes [Brown and Kerr, 1997: 73-93] As such, cases of 
preventable diseases like malaria, diarrhoea and dysentery, cholera, stiff necks, 
dizziness, headache and high blood pressure have worsened significantly, leading 
to a high mortality rate. 
Conclusion 
There has been a reconceptualisation of the nature and essence of social welfare 
services under current market reforms. The purpose of this shift is primarily to 
redress rural-urban imbalance in the provision of social welfare services. The catch 
phrases of social sector reforms are: access, equality and efficiency, all of which 
are designed to emphasise the need to address the disadvantages suffered by the 
rural population in the enjoyment of such services. 
A global picture of the impact of these reforms on the rural population is yet to 
emerge fully. But the evidence from preliminary studies suggests that any claim of 
a successfully negotiated space for rural communities as a result of those reforms 
may be illusory, and the beneficial effects of reforms on rural inhabitants less than 
expected. 
Notes 
* Department of Political Science, Lagos State University, Lagos, Nigeria. 
1. Scholars like Robert Bates and Micheal Lipton have articulated the concept 
of urban bias, especially in relation to the agricultural sector. See M. Lipton, 
Why Poor People Stay Poor; Urban Bias in the World [London; Temple 
Smith, 1977], M. Lipton, "Rural Development and the Retention of the Rural 
Population in the Countryside of Developing Countries" Canadian Journal 
of Development Studies. Vol. Ill, No. 1. Roberts Bates, Markets and States 
in Tropical Africa: The Political Bias of Agricultural Politics (Berkeley; 
University of California Press). 
References 
Ade Ajayi, J.F., Gana, L.K. and Ampah Johnson, G. (1994). The African 
Experience with Higher Education. Accra, Association of African 
Universities. 
Adejumobi, S. (1999). "Economic Globalisation, Market Reforms and the Changing 
Concept of Social Welfare .Services in Africa; A critique". Paper 
presented at the international conference on "Globalisation and Local 
Development: Experiences from Africa and Latin America", organised by 
CLACSO and CODESRIA, April. 
, (1998). Economic Globalisation, Market Reforms and the Delivery of Social 
Welfare Services in Africa" Preliminary Research Report Submitted to the
42 Said Adejumobi 
Multinational Research Working Group of CODESRIA on "Globalisation 
and Social Policy" November. 
, (1997). Marketing Public Welfare? A Theoretical Critique of the Logic of 
Privatisation in the Social Sector. Journal of Economic and Allied Studies. 
Vol. l,No. 1. 
, (1996). Structural Adjustment, Privatisation Policy and Infrastructural 
Services in Africa; With Examples from Nigeria and Ghana". Research 
Report Submitted to the CODESRIA Project on "African Perspectives 
on the Structural Adjustment Programme in Africa". Dakar, 
CODESRIA. 
, (1995). "Adjustment Reforms and its impact on the Economy and Society in 
Nigeria" in S. Adejumobi and A. Momoh (ed.) The Political Economy of 
Nigeria Under Military Rule; 1984-1993. Harare, SAPES. 
Adesina, J. (1994). Labour in the Explanation of an African Crisis. Dakar, 
CODESRIA. 
Aina, T. (1997). Globalisation and Social Policy in Africa; Issues and Research 
Directions. CODESRIA Working Paper Series. 6196 
Amin, S. (1981). "Underdevelopment and Dependence in Black Africa; Origin and 
Contemporary Forms" in D.L. Cohen and J. Daniels (eds) Political Economy 
of Africa. Selected Readings. London, Longman. 
, (1987). "The Crisis: The Third World, North-South, and East West" in E. 
Hansen, African Perspectives on Peace and Development. London, Zed 
books. 
Bangura, Y. (1990). "Overcoming Some Basic Misconceptions of the Nigerian 
Economic Crisis" in A. Olukoshi {ed.) Crisis and Adjustment in the Nigerian 
Economy. Lagos, Jad Publications. 
Bates, R. (1981). Markets and States in Tropical Africa; The Political Basis of 
Agricultural Politics. Berkerly, University of California Press. 
Beckley, S. (1993). "State Sponsored Educational Services in Sierra-Leone" in 
M. Fyle (ed.) The State and the Provision of Social Services in Sierra-Leone 
Since Independence, 1961-1991. Dakar, CODESRIA. Berneria, L. and 
Mendoza, B. (1993) "Structural Adjustment and Social Emergency Funds: 
The Cases of Honduras, Mexico and Nicaragua". European Journal of 
Development Research. Vol. 17, No. 1, June. 
Bhaduri, A. and Nayyar, D. (1996). The Intelligent Person's Guide to Liberalisation. 
New Delhi, Penguin Books. 
Bijlmakers, L., Basset, M. and Sanders, D. (1995). "Health and Structural Adjustment 
in Rural and Urban Settings in Zimbabwe: Some Interim Findings" in 
Peter Gibbon (ed.) Structural Adjustment and the Working Poor in Zimbabwe. 
Uppsala, Nordiska Afrika Institute. 
Brown, L.R. and Kerr, J. (1997). "Ghana: Structural Adjustment Star Pupil?" in
Negotiating Space for The Rural Communities? 43 
L. Brown and J. Kerr (ed.) The Gender Dimensions of Economic Reforms in 
Ghana, Mali and Zambia. Ottawa, North-South Institute. 
Central Bank of Nigeria and Nigerian Institute of Social and Economic Research, 
(1992). The Impact of SAP on Nigerian Agriculture and Rural life. A CBN/ 
NISER National Study. Lagos, Page Publishers Services Ltd. 
Gayi, K.S. (1995). "Adjusting to the Social Costs of Adjustment in Ghana: 
Problems and Prospects". The European Journal of Development Research. 
Vol., No. 1, 
Galbraith, J.K. (1996). The Good Society: The Humane Agenda. Boston, New 
York, Houghton Mifflin Company 
Giddens, A. (1982). Profiles and Critiques in Social Theory. Berkeley. CA; 
University of California Press. 
Ghai, D. (1991). (ed). The IMF and the South; The Social Impact of Crisis and 
Adjustment. London, Zed Books. 
James, V. and Weeks, J. (1993). Africa Misunderstood: Or What Happened to 
Rural-Urban Gap? London, Macmillan. 
Lall, S. (1992). "Structural Problems of African Industry" in F. Stewart and S. 
Wangwe (eds.) Alternative Development Strategiesfor Sub-Saharan Africa. 
London, Macmillan. 
Letwin, O. (1988). Privatising the World: A Study of International Privatisation 
in Theory and Practice. London, Lassell. 
Lipton, M. (1997). Why People Stay Poor; Urban Bias in World Development. 
London, Temple Smith. 
, (1982). "Rural Development and the Retention of Rural Population in the 
Countryside of Developing Countries." Canadian Journal of Development 
Studies.- Vol. m, No. 1. 
Logan, B. and Mengisteab, L. (1989), "The Potential Impact of Privatisation in 
Health Care Delivery in Sub-Saharan Africa" Scandinavian Journal of 
Development Alternatives. Vol. 8, No. 1. 
Mbane, G.C. (1995). The Social Dimension of Adjustment (SDA) Programme in 
Zimbabwe: A Critical Review and Assessment. The European Journal of 
Development Research. Vol. 7, No. 1. 
--—, (1996). "Foreword" in Welfare States in Transition: National Adaptations 
in Global Economics in Gosta Esping — Anderson (ed.) London, 
Seye. 
Mihevc, J. (1995). The Market Tells Them So; The World Bank and Economic 
Fundamentalism in Africa. London, and New Jersey, Zed Books. 
Odumosu, O. (1996). "Structural Adjustment, and Its Impact on Social Services" 
in A. Fadaunsi and T. Babawale (ed.) Nigeria: Beyond Structural Adjustment- 
Towards Popular Democratic Alternative. Lagos, Fredrich Ebert 
Foundation.
44 Said Adejumobi 
Onokarhoraye, A.G. (1984). Social Services in Nigeria: An Introduction. London, 
Kegan Paul. 
Olukoshi, A. (1990). Crisis and Adjustment in The Nigerian Economy. Lagos Jad 
Publishers. 
, with Gibbon, P. (1996). "Structural Adjustment and Socio-Economic Change 
in Sub-Saharan Africa: Some Conceptual, Methodological and Research 
Issues." Nordiska Afrika Institute. Research Report No. 102. 
Onimode, B. (1988). A Political Economy of African Crisis. London, Zed 
Books. 
Rosseau, J. (1913). The Social Contract and Discourses. (Translated with an 
introduction by G.D.H. Cole). London, Everyman's Library. 
Sambo, A. (1998). (An interview conducted by Mobolaji Aluko on "The State of 
Primary Education in Nigeria" with A.A. Sambo, Executive Secretary, 
National Primary Education Commission, Nigeria) (Internet Information by 
Mobolaji Aluko, October 12, 1998). 
Sierra Leone Government, (1995). National Development Plan, 1974-75, 1978- 
79. Freetown:" Government Printer. 
Sleeman, J.F. (1979). Resources for the Welfare State; An Introduction. London, 
Longman 
Smith, A. (1936). An inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. 
New York: Modern Library. 
Tuinder, B. A. (1978). Ivory Coast; The Challenge of Success. Washington, World 
Bank. 
Turok, B. (1987). Africa; What Can Be Done? London, and New Jersey: Institute 
for African Alternatives, and Zed Books Ltd. 
Vivian, J. (1995). How Safe are 'Social Safety Nets'? Adjustment and Social 
Sector Restructuring in Developing Countries. The European Journal of 
Development Research. Vol. 7, No. 1, June. 
Weeks, J. (1992). Development Strategy and the Economy of Sierra Leone. New 
York, St. Martins Press. 
Weiss, L. (1997). Globalisation and the Myth of the Powerless State. New Left 
Review. No 225, September-October. 
Wisner B. (1992). "Health of the Future/ the Future of Health" in A. Seidmem and 
F. Anang, 21st Century Africa: Towards a New Vision of Self-Sustainable 
Development. Trenton and Atlanta: Africa World Press and Africa Studies 
World Bank, (1997). The State in a Changing World: World Development Report 
Association. 
1997. Washington, DC: World Bank. 
, (1995). African Development Indicators, 1994-95. Washington D.C, World 
Bank. 
, (1995a). Ghana: Growth, Private Sector and Poverty Reduction. A Country
Negotiating Space for The Rural Communities ? 45 
Economic Memorandum. Country Operational Division, West-Central 
Africa Department. Washington, DC: World Bank. 
(1995b). Priorities and Strategies for Education: A World Bank Review. 
Washington, DC: World Bank. 
(1994). Adjustment in Africa; Reforms, Results and The Road Ahead. 
Washington, DC: World Bank.