Yes, it is possible to have sustainable development in Africa. It begins at the microeconomic level. Sustainable development implies that an economy can be grown without compromising our natural resources. That means that waste, duplication, corruption and conflict over those same resources have to be reduced. It has been estimated that we have sent over $500 billion in direct cash payments to Africa over the years. However these cash payments have had little effect because the money essentially has not been put to work. Indeed, most of the money didn't go into capital investments, but rather it was pocketed by the individual governments, politicians, contractors hired by the donor's country, and others who managed to send the money back to Europe or the United States. Additionally the West spends a lot on aid to Africa, but not nearly enough considering the investment that's needed to lift an entire continent out of poverty. In addition, many of these nations are in deep in debt because they have borrowed lots of money. Most of this borrowed money was used to buy weapons, a commodity that provided no benefit to the locals in Africa, being that most of the money went to benefit producers in the West, who sold the weapons. This was especially the case in Ethiopia, which was caught up in a protracted civil war for many years during the 1980's. In some cases, the loans were misappropriated by corrupt and totalitarian governments. Nascent democracies many times are saddled and subsequently crushed under large piles of debt incurred during dictatorships. A high debt ratio means that little can be spent on basic social services that we take for granted here like water, electricity and education. To top it off, most of the money that is owed is based on only the interest side of the debt. The actual number which is owed is much higher than that, although this is the case with most countries outside the 3rd World. But all of this isn't really the central problem as I see it. Debt can be negotiated. At the end of the day, these countries need to make investments that yield long term results. Countries like Nigeria and Ghana, two nations with lots of natural resources, have in a past invested in big ticket items that were largely vanity projects like expressways to nowhere and silos for crops that cannot be stored for long periods. Critical investments have to be made in education, health care, and infrastructure like electricity, potable water and small-scale industry. However, countries have to take the plunge. IMF and World Bank loan guarantees many times come with the caveat that trade has to be liberalized and capital controls keeping money in the country have to be relaxed. All of that leads to multinationals coming in to those countries, taking their agricultural and natural resources, and not investing it back into the country. Coincidentally, two countries that have managed to avoid these conditions, South Africa and Botswana have the strongest economies in the region. Each country needs capital to develop industry and new agricultural methods that suits the needs of the local economy. That means that capital has to be preserved inside the continent and invested properly. I don't agree with some, I believe that Africa can be saved at the end of the day.
