Ideational approaches to change. A paradigm shift from neo-liberalism in African countries' economic policies to an African produced paradigm

Table of contents

1. Synopsis

2. Introduction

3. Methodology

4. Problem statement

5. Critical literature Review

6. Discussion

7. Conclusion

Bibliography

1. Synopsis

The concept of social learning by Peter Hall has created a wide scholarship which supports the fact that a paradigm shift in a policy change could successfully occur through the promotion of knowledge and new ideas instead of a focus on power relations of the influencers of policy. This research paper operationalizes the concept of social learning in the context of the relationship of Bretton woods institutions and African countries. The paper assumes that the failure of the paradigm of neo-liberalism which was imposed by the Bretton woods institutions in their focus on institutional power relations, hegemony and hierarchy to African countries means that the African continent needs a paradigm shift in its countries’ public policy, especially in its countries’ macro-economic policies. Scholars have published their dissatisfaction with neo-liberalism as they claim that it impacted the African countries negatively and further worsened their economic crisis instead of stabilizing it. The paper proposes the application of the concept of social learning in the process of policy formulation by African countries so as to reach a paradigm shift, replacing the paradigm of neo-liberalism with an African produced paradigm.

2. Introduction

The paradigm of neo-liberalism has been deemed as a failure in African countries. The Structural adjustment programmes imposed by the Western financial institutions such as; the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank as recommendations to the structuring of economic policies of African countries have been widely criticized for their negative impacts. This research paper seeks to examine how African countries can reach a paradigm shift in their policy formulation and policy change. The paper also seeks to enquire on how African countries can cut ties with the dominating, powerful, hegemonic countries of the West and their influence in African countries’ domestic policies.

This paper consists of 5 sections, with the first one being about the methodology that the paper follows. The second section delves on the problem statement which outlays the issue that the paper seeks to examine and the purpose of the study, with a subsection that outlines the research question. The third section is about the critical literature review which focuses on four elements, the typologies of social learning, the analysis of neo-liberalism and structural adjustment programmes. The third element that the literature review focuses on is the concept of social learning by Peter Hall as a method to reach a paradigm shift in a policy change. The last element of the critical literature review looks at the alternative regional institutions and other forces, drivers and influencers of policy. The fourth section delves on the discussion of the findings and also recommendations, with the last section concluding the paper.

3. Methodology

This research paper follows the qualitative research approach, as it deals with a complex phenomenon of a ‘paradigm shift’ and operationalizes the concept of ‘social learning’. The material collected by the author is highly interpretive and subjective; it is also inductive as it follows a ‘bottom-up’ approach instead of a ‘top-down’ approach. According to Bogdan and Bilken (n.d) this means that its intention is not to find data which can disapprove or approve a proposed hypothesis but rather to explore and build up a theory in a grounded manner. Bogdan and Bilken (n.d) also mention how researchers who are concerned with a process rather than an outcome mostly apply a qualitative research approach. In application to the research enquiry, this point is crucial, as the research purpose of this paper seeks to examine and analyse the process of a policy change using the concept of social learning in application to Africa, to find out how a ‘paradigm shift’ in the continent could be achieved through this process. Bogdan and Bilken (n.d) mention that qualitative research is considered as appealing by minority groups because of its ease in describing the complexities that are found in society. This research focuses on the social dimension in African countries that are affected by the imposition of neo-liberal policies and Structural Adjustment Programs by the Western financial institutions, such as the African domestic issues of widening poverty and underdevelopment. It focuses on the dissatisfaction of the African people and its Civil Society, therefore seeking to describe the reality of the African people under their states’ obligations to conform and abide by Western financial institutions’ instructions, requirements and standards in their public policy formulation, especially in macro-economic policies.

The theory and lens that embodies this research paper is the Economic Structuralist approach and New Institutionalism. According to Missio, Jayme & Oreiro (2015) the focus of a Structuralist approach is on the roles that structures play in the developing countries’ economic growth. This paper narrows developing countries’ to the African continent. Structuralism’s basic focus is on the relationship of the centre and the periphery (Missio, Jayme & Oreiro 2015). In the context of the research paper, the centre refers to powerful Western countries, while the periphery refers to the weak and conforming African countries. According to Lecours (2005: 3-26) New institutionalism is based on the new focus that is given to institutions by political scientists which emphasises the theoretical importance of institutions, and giving institutions the primacy in analysis. New institutionalism is concerned with the relationship of structure and agency, the process of institutional change and the nature of institutions (Lecours 2005: 27-28). Using both the Economic Structuralist approach and new institutionalism theories to explain the research purpose, the relationship between powerful states of the West and the weaker African states is based on power relations, a hierarchical structure, and the exploitation of the African countries. Western powerful states exercise their rules, authority and power through their Western financial institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. These Western financial institutions have imposed the paradigm of neo-liberalism and the structural Adjustment Programs in the public policies of African countries.

This paper utilizes the Desktop study as a form of data collection method. This research paper is based on an extended literature review.

4. Problem statement

The imposition of the paradigm of neo-liberalism and the Structural Adjustment Programs as an attempt by Western financial institutions to recover and stabilize African countries has faced wide criticism as scholars claim that no stabilization and recovery was prevalent. Most scholars claim that these Western financial institutions engage in unfair trade practices and undermine the sovereignty of the African countries. These institutions are interested in power relations when interacting with African countries and lack an understanding of the African reality. They offer policy recommendations that promote economic growth while the social dimension of the African countries highlights that these countries instead seek economic development. The concept of social learning by Peter Hall (1993: 275 – 296) mentions that when a policy no longer reflects reality, new ideas should be formed in the process of a policy change, and there should be a restructuring in the policy network and community with states having the capacity to act independently. This research paper seeks to operationalize the concept of social learning by attempting to apply it in the African context and situation with the Western financial institutions. The African countries need to focus on acting independently from the influence of the exogenous factors such as the Western financial institutions in their public policy formulation. The paradigm of neo-liberalism together with the adoption of Structural Adjustment Programs no longer reflect the African reality, therefore African countries need to engage in the formulation of new ideas and reach a paradigm shift in their policies. African countries need to utilize their internal government departments, regional institutions, domestic interest groups as partisans of the policy network and community instead of the outside Western financial institutions. The research paper seeks to explore how African countries can achieve a paradigm shift in their public policies, which is more directed and focused on the African reality using; the idea of ‘Social learning’.

4.1 Research question

How can African countries eliminate the influence of Western financial institutions in their domestic policy formulation and reach a paradigm shift to an African produced paradigm?

5. Critical literature Review

The types of learning in the policy-decision making process

Dunlop and Radaelli (2013: 599 – 619) devise four comprehensive typologies to explain in a systematic manner; the process of policy formulation geared towards a policy change. They extend Peter Hall’s concept of social learning through an analysis of the influences, drivers and forces that affect a policy decision-maker in devising a policy. Their analysis is based on what they call the relationship between ‘teachers’ and ‘learners’ in the process of policy change, whereas ‘teachers’ represent the experts, such as the think-tanks, the interest groups and external or exogenous experts (Dunlop and Radaelli 2013: 599 - 619) . They then refer to the ‘learners’ as being the decision-makers in the policy formulation. They then break down their analysis to the different forms of learning. The first one being Reflexive learning, which describes learning as being a result of social interaction and relation in a community of networks and actors, therefore no previously identified roles of hierarchy as to who should learn from whom (Dunlop and Radaelli 2013: 599 -619). The second one they delve upon is learning through bargaining, in which there also does not exist a separation between the learner and the teacher, and learning comes as a form of a production of an unintended product or as a result of political negotiations and competitions (Dunlop and Radaelli 2013: 599 – 619). Dunlop and Radaelli (2013: 599 -619) mention that this particular category is founded on roots of ideas by Charles Lindblom concerning what is termed as a mutual agreement of partisans, meaning an agreement reached by the parties involved in the policy making process. Their third form of learning is epistemic learning, which they describe the ‘expert’ as being the ‘teacher’ whereas a mandatory consultation of these experts is required by decision-makers before any decision is made, and there exists the transfer of power to these expert communities (Dunlop and Radaelli 2013: 599 – 619). For the purposes of the research enquiry, this particular type of learning seeks to serve as a part of the problematization process. Therefore, when translated to befit the research, it then refers to the ‘teachers’ or ‘experts’ as being the outside, external and exogenous Western institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The ‘learners’ in this case become the African countries that have to consult these institutions in regards to their public policy formulation, with the power being delegated to these institutions to contribute to the policy-making process on behalf of the African countries. African countries then conform to the recommendations of these institutions. The current paradigm imposed to African countries by these institutions is ‘Neo-liberalism’, which comes in the form of ‘Structural Adjustment Programs’. This is problematic as Peter Hall (1993: 275 – 296) mentions that an appropriate policy goal should reflect the reality of the place it is intended to be executed to, while the type of policy recommendations by the Western financial institutions reflect the Western reality and not the African one. This means there is a lack of advocacy and a lack of the inclusion of African experiences in the policies recommended by these institutions, and their recommendations serve to benefit them, while they further under-develop African countries and weaken the power of their domestic regional institutions. Havnevik (1987: 1) who mentions that the conditions of the International Monetary Fund were felt hard in African countries like Tanzania and Zambia supports this line of thought. The last typology that Dunlop and Radaelli (2013: 599 – 619) touch upon is called learning in the shadow of hierarchy. This type of learning is the most crucial in understanding the research enquiry, as it explains how learning as a form of ‘shadow’ involves the interaction of the ‘learners’ with the veto powers/players, which ultimately lands the decision-makers in a situation they term as a ‘Joint-Decision Trap’ also abbreviated as the JDT. In this type of learning, when the learners (Decision-makers) disagree with the conditions given by the veto players, they reach a blockage in being flexible with their own policies as there exists an arbiter such as an International Court which often sides with the institutional rules (Dunlop and Radaelli 2013: 599 – 619). Therefore, as African countries are bombarded with conditions they cannot escape because they took financial aid from these institutions, and they now are faced with a burden of being unable to challenge the conditions as they are subject to the institutional rules of these Western institutions. According to Stewart (1987: 29), conditionality by Western institutions relates to macro-economic policies that countries have to abide by and meet the requirements in order to receive financial loans. He also specifically refers to the conditions imposed by the International Monetary Fund, which are associated with the issuing of major loans, and he mentions that ‘conditionality’ is also associated with the World Bank and other International Loans, including Structural Adjustment loans (Stewart 1987: 29).

The problems associated with ‘Structural Adjustment Programs’ and the paradigm of ‘Neo-liberalism’ in Africa

According to Simutanyi (2006: 2) the economic crisis that has been facing Africa has been the main reason why most African countries embrace neo-liberalism. At the core of assumption is the idea that the economic crisis can be solved through understanding the role of the state and the functioning of markets (Simutanyi 2006: 2). Therefore, neo-liberalism argues that the reason for the economic crisis in the African states has been the excessiveness of government regulation within the markets of these states (Simutanyi 2006: 2). Simutanyi (2006: 2) argues that the Western financial institutions which are considered to be international have become the major instruments of implementing the agenda of neo-liberalism in Africa. This then applies to the idea of ‘shadowing’ and ‘epistemic’ learning when viewed in the lens of typologies posited by Dunlop and Radaelli (2013: 599 – 619). The implementation of these neo-liberal policies have been performed by veto players, and have followed the institutional hierarchy of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, with the Western countries being the ‘experts’ at devising African policies using the paradigm of ‘Neo-liberalism. They used what Stewart (1987: 29), Dunlop and Radaelli (2013: 599 – 619) term as ‘conditionality’, as they offered relief to the economic crisis of the African states through financial aid and loans. This gave the Western institutions an access in influencing the structuring of African policies, through diagnosing the root of the African economic crisis and then coming up with solutions to those crises which were Western bias. Simutanyi (2006: 2) supports this type of argument as he acknowledges the worsening condition of the economic crisis in Africa after the imposition of the neo-liberal recommendations of the Western financial institutions. Simutanyi (2006: 2) highlights the problem of the debt burden, which has become unsustainable by African countries, which gives the Western institutions an opportunity to continue imposing neo-liberal policies in order to obtain loans, reach stabilization, and obtain debt forgiveness. Simutanyi (2006: 2) mentions the negative impacts of neo-liberalism in Africa such as the unfair trade practices by the Western countries, the unequal terms of trade which benefit the Western states while being detrimental to the African states, and also the protectionist tendencies of the Western states while they open the economies of the African states, making them vulnerable to the bombardment of the dominance of transnational corporations, foreign direct investment, and also the exploitation of the African resources by the Western states. This form of argument goes along the lines of Structuralism and Marxism. Simutanyi (2006: 2) emphasises that the majority of the African states especially in the South of the Sahara have been ‘forced’ to embrace the paradigm of ‘neo-liberalism’ as a panacea to their economic problems. Aime (2008: 1) agrees with Simutanyi (2006: 2) on this point by elaborating that attempts are being made by the International community to ‘guide’ the internal administration and organisation of the African states which are considered to be fragile or ‘failed states’ through promoting certain standards and a way to have these states restructured. This then evidences the fact that there has been external, outside and exogenous involvement in the internal, domestic and public policies of the African states by Western countries using Western institutions and the International Community which is triumphed by the control of the status of the Western countries who have a major influence in the hierarchy of such institutions. Aime (2008: 4) further argues that the paradigm of neo-liberalism in the African states has not only turned the marginalisation of these countries more acute but have also perpetuated polices which are based on clientelism. Meaning that the African states have become consumers of paradigms produced by the Western-states, with a consultation taking place by African countries to Western institutions when devising their domestic or public policies. According to Dunlop and Radaelli (2013: 599 – 619) this is considered the delegation of power to the epistemic community or experts (teachers) who then decide and determine what is to be included in the domestic policies of the ‘learners’ (decision-makers).

According to Ibhawoh (n.d) a discussion has been brought forth about the ‘Structural Adjustment Programs’ by the Western financial institutions, concerning the problems of the readjustment of the countries of the African continent in accommodating and assimilating the paradigm of ‘neo-liberalism in their public policies. Ibhawoh (n.d) mentions that the imposition of neo-liberalism as a paradigm in African states has created tensions between the economic goals of the Structural Adjustment Programs and the negative social implications they cause in the countries that have to implement them. According to Waddock (2016) the consequences of neo-liberalism have not only been felt by African states but also by the Western states, as they also faced financial crises recently, with a growing gap in the levels of inequality pertaining to income, and to support Ibhawoh’s (n.d) point regarding social implications, there has been a growing number of populist movements which Waddock (2016) mentions that these movements not only threaten free trade and open markets but also the essence of freedom it was meant to safeguard. This raises a concern as to why the Western states would impose a paradigm to African states as a solution to their economic crises while that same paradigm has been deemed a failure in their own states. According to Tsikita (1995) development and economic issues, especially the ones related to Structural Adjustment Programs have been dominating the concerns of the African women, as being the cause of the rise of poverty, with a major impact felt by the women of Africa. Tsikita (1995) mentions that the existence of the Structural Adjustment Programs in the policies of the South has been there since the beginning of the 1980s. Perhaps, the most notable point by Tsikita (1995) is the one where he mentions that there has been an opposition of these programs which gained attention and ground during the Copenhagen summit, which required the programs to be reformed as to be more in tune with the people in development. This means that the Structural Adjustment Programs were created with the intention of- and geared towards- economic growth. This is because they reflected the realities of the Western states, while these states were already past the development stage. Therefore, they did not take into account the reality of the African states; which are still underdeveloped and therefore not suitable for such policy recommendations.

Limpach and Michaelowa (2010: 1) analyse the impact of the interference by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund in the domestic politics of the developing countries, by how there has been a change in the power balance between anti-democratic and pro-democratic forces. They argue that there is an impact in the recipient countries who adopt the programs of these Western financial institutions concerning the African countries’ democratization (Limpach & Michaelowa 2010: 1). Limpach and Michaelowa (2010: 2) mention that in the 1990s there was a rise in the criticism of the Structural Adjustment Programs by the civil society as these programs produced negative economic and social conditions for the marginalized people. Furthermore, not only did it produce negative impacts but it also undermined democracy in these recipient countries (Limpach & Michaelowa 2010: 2). Limpach and Michaelowa (2010: 2) argue that the programs failed to lever critical economic and political reforms. They warrant what is called ‘Poverty reduction strategies’ which they claim is suitable for replacing the Structural Adjustment Programs as these strategies are concerned with good governance, poverty reduction and also the involvement of civil society (Limpach & Michaelowa 2010: 2). This means that these strategies seek to respond to societal pressures, include advocacy and community relations and involvement in structuring effective policies. Furthermore, these strategies do not undermine the power and sovereignty of the developing countries in structuring their own policies without the interference and imposition of solutions by the veto players such as the Western financial institutions. Limpach & Michaelowa (2010: 2) consider these strategies to be more favourable and idealistic to replace the Structural Adjustment Programs. This type of strategy can also be applied in the typologies of Dunlop & Radaelli (2013: 599 – 619) concerning informal learning, where the learner or ‘decision-maker’ has control over what to learn instead of having an ‘expert’ or ‘teacher’ choosing for the learner. In application to the African context this means then that the process of the policy formulation will be under the control of the decision-maker. This then means that the country’s (recipient’s) democracy and sovereignty will not be undermined by Western institutions and the content of the policy will be purely decided by the decision-maker who will then make it reflect the reality of his own country as per Peter Hall’s (1993: 275 – 296) model concerning social learning. The decision-maker will not be spearheaded by external experts and will in fact consult with an internal policy network such as the civil society, interest groups, different government departments within the country and also the domestic think-tanks as being the advisors.

Siddiqui (2012: 1) mentions that despite the failure of neo-liberalism in Latin America and African countries, there still exists an imposition of these policies by International institutions to developing countries. He mentions that the lack of a change in this behaviour means that little has been learned from the past (2012: 1). The ignorance of these previous outcomes in regards to neo-liberal policies signal avoidance of what Peter Hall (1993: 275 – 296) mentions as the previous experience and new information. Therefore, if a policy outcome is considered a failure then new ideas should be sought out instead of focusing on power relations, as the Western institutions do without considering ‘knowledge’ as a basis for a policy change but only consider power. Siddiqui (2012: 1) mentions that numerous Latin American countries have abandoned these neo-liberal policies, and have adopted alternative policies, which are quite suitable for their national interest instead of policies that please the owners of foreign capitals. This means that instead of adopting solutions from the external environment such as from the Western financial institutions they rerouted their focus to the internal environment. The author of this research paper suggests this to also be considered by African countries. Siddiqui (2012: 1) makes a crucial point when he illustrates that the international economy is very ungovernable and therefore, policy formulation on a national-level should be considered as central.

Heidhues (2011: 55-64) details the harsh lessons brought forth by the Structural Adjustment Programs and their effect in Africa. He mentions that there were high hopes and anticipations regarding rapid growth and development by the African states upon their independence in the 1960s (Heidhues 2011: 55-64). He further mentions that the Africans states as a form of response to their new independent status attempted to channel economic growth using investments which were state-led, and also using strategies of import-substitution industrialisation which were unsuccessful (Heidhues 2011: 55-64). This then gave the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and other Western donors an opportunity to advocate and develop the Structural Adjustment Programs which were themed under Macro-economic policies for the purpose of economic stabilization, non-government intervention in the free market, and also privatisation of corporations, enterprises and free ownership of resources and property by private individuals (Heidhues 2011: 55-61). This then he claims resulted in less attention being paid to the social dimension when taking development into consideration, and also the weakness of the institutions of the developing countries as Western Institutions were privileged above them (Heidhues 2011: 55-64). Heidhues (2011: 55-64) argues that the Structural Adjustment Programs influenced the programmes and strategies for food, nutrition and agricultural security in African countries and their overall economic development. These SAPs were a response to the economic crisis of the African states in the 1970s, and they were introduced in Africa in the 1980s, and continued to operate throughout the 1990s (Heidhues 2011: 55-64). Wynne (2016) also supports the redirection of the focus of public policy formulation to the internal for African countries as the Latin American countries did. He mentions that a collective action by the poor people and the working class of Africa, in addressing the issues surrounding the redistribution of wealth and income could be essential and effective in reducing poverty in Africa (Wynne 2016). Wynne (2016) mentions that the Western recommended policies for Africa fail when it comes to being crafted to meet the realities of the continent.

According to Bond and Dor (2003: 1), Globalisation marginalized Africa and that the policy recommendations by the Bretton woods institutions did not produce neither recovery nor stabilization as they had intended. They mention that alternative regional institutions were proposed for the domestic focus on public policy formulation especially in the dimension of the economy such as the ‘New Partnership for Africa’s Development’ (Bond & Dor 2003: 1). They argue however, that this alternative institution has been criticized as further strengthening the paradigm of neo-liberalism of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund as its goals include: flows of direct investment, an increase in trade and neo-liberal ideas regarding finance. They highlight the advantage of this regional ‘Home-grown’ institution as its vision in promoting good governance (Bond & Dor 2003: 1).

The concept of ‘Social learning’ in reaching a paradigm shift in a policy change: The case of the African countries

Peter Hall (1993: 275 – 296) mentions that in order for there to be a policy change, it has to be based on past experience and new information, therefore past experience in the case of the African states concerns the Structural Adjustment Programs being the failure as a policy recommendation, the widening poverty and debt burden and also increasing underdevelopment, with the new information being a rerouting of what Peter Hall (1993: 275 – 296) terms as a ‘policy network’ from the external experts (Western institutions) to the internal experts such as African regional institutions, interest groups and academic think-tanks to better address societal issues in an insider perspective instead of the Western outsider perspective. Peter Hall (1993: 275 -296) mentions that when a state is at the level of policy change it means that the paradigm it uses no longer reflects and explains that state’s reality, therefore new ideas are needed, he calls this process the ‘Third-order change’ in his systematic and scientific theory of social learning, which it seeks to explain how a ‘paradigm shift’ could be reached. His theory then serves to explain how African policy makers can move away from the paradigm of neo-liberalism and consult their own think tanks and internal experts to reach a paradigm shift, into a paradigm that will better reflect and explain their own realities instead of applying a Western paradigm to their African policies.

Peter Hall (1993: 275-296) mentions that the ideas of social learning in reaching a policy change have been inspired by neo-Marxism and have gained attention and interest among scholars due to the persistence of capitalism in the International community. His stance about the idea of social learning is that the state should be the focus when it comes to the creation of public policy, emphasising the independence of the state from other interests considered as the drivers of policy (Hall: 275-296). In the case of the research purpose, the interests that tend to drive the process of domestic policy formulation in Africa are the external Bretton wood institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. In order for a paradigm shift to occur in African policies that operate under the paradigm of neo-liberalism, the state has to act independently from these outside ‘experts’ and avoid their influence in the state’s public policy.

Feindt (2010: 296-314) cites Schmidt and Radaelli (2004: 189) who argue that social learning has elevated to a concept which is mostly utilized by social scientists who are concerned with the explanation of the adjustment of a policy, which is caused by an existence of a crisis and also the past solutions to the policy having been deemed a failure. Feindt (2010: 296-314) argues that the policy learning theories have sought to challenge the older models that perceived a policy change as direct response to exogenous or outside events, power relations and also societal pressure. In terms of the research enquiry context this then means that social learning when applied to African countries’ scenario, seeks to challenge the structuring of these countries’ policies by outside ‘experts’ such as the Western financial institutions. Social learning also challenges the power relations between these institutions and the African states, in regards to the imposition of the Structural Adjustment Programs that perpetuate the paradigm of ‘neo-liberalism’ in these countries. Feindt (2010: 296-314) cites Grin and Loeber (2007: 201) who argue that the theories of social learning seeks to address complicated relationship between knowledge and power in the process of policy formulation, and to also consider the change of ideas being the central factor when it comes to understanding a policy change. This means instead of power playing a major factor in the process of a policy, knowledge and the changing of ideas should be the ones prioritized.

Feindt (2010: 296-314) further elaborates; by using the model of social learning by Peter Hall (1993: 277), which consists of three elements: the first one being that ‘a policy change should build on the past policy’s experiences’. The second element being ‘the key agents are given the status of experts in a given policy field and are referred to as a policy community’, and the last one being the ‘the capacity and ability of states in acting independently from the pressures of society’ (Hall 1993: 277). When applying the research purpose in these elements, the first two crucial. The first element translates to African countries’ having to reflect on their past ‘neo-liberal’ policies, and their failure with these policies as an experience with it. Therefore, a consideration to reflect back at these policies, for revisions and alterations is required. Alterations could include alternatives from the Structural Adjustment Programs such as what (Limpach & Michaelowa 2010: 2) refer to as the ‘Poverty reduction strategies’. Another example of an alternative is the ‘New Partnership for Africa’s Development’ as mentioned by Bond and Dor (2003: 1). The problem with these strategies is that, the “Poverty reduction strategies’ although being much more suitable for African countries, are still exogenous as they were introduced by the Western institutions. Furthermore, the ‘New Partnership for Africa’s Development’ is suitable because it is domestic and bases a focus on good governance; it still promotes neo-liberal policies instead of shifting to a paradigm that best fits the African reality. The second element is also important as it signals a change in the holders of the status of ‘experts’, with key agents being different domestic government departments, think-tanks and also certain interest groups who build the policy network or community instead of Western institutions. However, the last element is conceived in a different manner by the author of this research paper than its original context by Peter Hall. The author is convinced that societal pressure such as an aggravated civil society is the main reason for the attention given to the issues associated with the revision of Structural Adjustment Programs and ‘Neo-liberal’ policies in Africa. Therefore, African states would are not acting independently from the pressures of society, but would be in fact engaging in the process of a policy change as a form of response to those societal dissatisfactions. This then means that the African states are not acting separately from societal pressure, as societal pressure is the major influence for the reasons behind the considerations of a policy change. Feindt (2010: 296-314) further validates Peter Hall’s concept of social learning as he cites him arguing that; social learning is considered to be a deliberate attempt to change and adjust the goals and methods of policy, as a form of response to previous experience and new information. He further extends his elaboration of Peter Hall’s (1993: 278) concept of social learning by mentioning that learning is then prevalent when the result of such a process brings about a policy change. To conclude Feindt’s (2010: 296-314) arguments concerning social learning, he notes that Oliver and Pemberton (2004: 418-420) consider the introduction and assimilation of new ideas to a policy change constitutes what they term as a ‘paradigm evolution’ instead of a ‘paradigm revolution’. This means that the policy change will occur in a gradual or incremental manner, which will transition and transform the policy peacefully instead of drastically.

[...]