Search

One influential view blames Nigeria's failure to translate its oil wealth into national prosperity on the country's social, political and institutional fragmentation, which provides little incentive for technocratic planning or policies based on shared growth or the public good. This article explores an alternative theory: that at certain periods Nigeria's development trajectory has in fact been influenced by technocratic planning and that the strategy followed typically neglected agriculture, subjected markets to excessive regulation, and involved exchange-rate policies which discouraged exports. These propositions are argued with reference to the contrasting case of Indonesia, which has pursued market-friendly, export-promoting policies, and a pronounced rural-agricultural bias in development spending. Five possible areas of explanation for the contrast are explored: differences in the political interests of the policy-makers, in their social origins, in their intellectual backgrounds, in their experience of economic management and mismanagement, and in their exposure to inclusive, egalitarian political movements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]