The tragedies of a state dominated political economy: shared vices among the imperial, Derg, and EPRDF regimes of Ethiopia

Q2 Social Sciences
Wassihun Gebreegizaber Woldesenbet
{"title":"The tragedies of a state dominated political economy: shared vices among the imperial, Derg, and EPRDF regimes of Ethiopia","authors":"Wassihun Gebreegizaber Woldesenbet","doi":"10.1080/21665095.2020.1785903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Conventional accounts of the Ethiopian political economy either neglect the combined effects of shared political vices across various regimes or treat them separately. This essay, based on informed analytical tools of power and property, tends to explore the basic anatomy of the Ethiopian political economy by exploring the shared vices across the three regimes in Ethiopia: Last Empire, first republic and second republic. Seen in this light, the study identified that, though different regimes come up with varied official policy statements and appear to be better than the other, the empirical realities speak of an opposite story. In shaping the nature, structure, power, and principle of economic development, the three governments have been taking a draconian position, suppressing the private sectors and intervening in the rural economy exploitatively. The shared vices of state domination overall development matters have brought the society under the converging tragedies of poverty, Neo-Malthusian crisis, migration, de-peasanization through dispossession and displacement. Based on this, the study argues that people have to own development narratives and ultimate decision-making power to better design the development skeleton and to guarantee themselves a positive teleological development discourse.","PeriodicalId":37781,"journal":{"name":"Development Studies Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21665095.2020.1785903","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Studies Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21665095.2020.1785903","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

ABSTRACT Conventional accounts of the Ethiopian political economy either neglect the combined effects of shared political vices across various regimes or treat them separately. This essay, based on informed analytical tools of power and property, tends to explore the basic anatomy of the Ethiopian political economy by exploring the shared vices across the three regimes in Ethiopia: Last Empire, first republic and second republic. Seen in this light, the study identified that, though different regimes come up with varied official policy statements and appear to be better than the other, the empirical realities speak of an opposite story. In shaping the nature, structure, power, and principle of economic development, the three governments have been taking a draconian position, suppressing the private sectors and intervening in the rural economy exploitatively. The shared vices of state domination overall development matters have brought the society under the converging tragedies of poverty, Neo-Malthusian crisis, migration, de-peasanization through dispossession and displacement. Based on this, the study argues that people have to own development narratives and ultimate decision-making power to better design the development skeleton and to guarantee themselves a positive teleological development discourse.
国家主导的政治经济的悲剧:埃塞俄比亚帝国、德格和EPRDF政权之间的共同罪恶
埃塞俄比亚政治经济的传统描述要么忽视了不同政权共同政治恶习的综合影响,要么将其单独对待。本文基于权力和财产的知情分析工具,倾向于通过探索埃塞俄比亚三个政权(最后帝国、第一共和国和第二共和国)的共同弊端来探索埃塞俄比亚政治经济的基本解剖。从这个角度来看,该研究发现,尽管不同的政权提出了不同的官方政策声明,而且似乎比其他政权更好,但经验现实却恰恰相反。在形成经济发展的性质、结构、权力和原则方面,三届政府一直采取严厉的立场,压制私营部门,剥削性地干预农村经济。国家统治整个发展事务的共同弊端使社会陷入贫困、新马尔萨斯危机、移民、剥夺财产和流离失所导致的去泥炭化的悲剧之中。基于此,研究认为,人们必须拥有发展叙事和最终决策权,才能更好地设计发展框架,并保证自己拥有积极的目的论发展话语。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Development Studies Research
Development Studies Research Social Sciences-Development
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Development Studies Research ( DSR) is a Routledge journal dedicated to furthering debates in development studies. The journal provides a valuable platform for academics and practitioners to present their research on development issues to as broad an audience as possible. All DSR papers are published Open Access. This ensures that anyone, anywhere can engage with the valuable work being carried out by the myriad of academics and practitioners engaged in development research. The readership of DSR demonstrates that our goal of reaching as broad an audience as possible is being achieved. Papers are accessed by over 140 countries, some reaching over 9,000 downloads. The importance of the journal to impact is thus critical and the significance of OA to development researchers, exponential. Since its 2014 launch, the journal has examined numerous development issues from across the globe, including indigenous struggles, aid effectiveness, small-scale farming for poverty reduction, sustainable entrepreneurship, agricultural development, climate risk and the ‘resource curse’. Every paper published in DSR is an emblem of scientific rigour, having been reviewed first by members of an esteemed Editorial Board, and then by expert academics in a rigorous review process. Every paper, from the one examining a post-Millennium Development Goals environment by one of its architects (see Vandermortele 2014), to ones using established academic theory to understand development-imposed change (see Heeks and Stanforth 2015), and the more policy-oriented papers that contribute valuable recommendations to policy-makers and practitioners (see DSR Editor’s Choice: Policy), reaches a multidisciplinary audience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信