Pak Sidqy dan FPK wan

Ini kisah yang sangat-sangat relevan untuk kita, orang Indonesia. Coba deh,
ganti semua kata "Africa" atau "African" dengan Indonesia. Anda pasti heran
betapa kita bernasib seperti Afrika. Betapa World Bank telah "berjasa"
memiskinkan kita dengan SAP yang terkenal itu! Sudah waktunya juga bahwa
Indonesia juga merapat ke Cina.

Salam
iww


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "sidqy suyitno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 9:05 PM
Subject: [Forum-Pembaca-KOMPAS] China�s Lessons for the World Bank (Jeffrey
D. Sachs)




China's
Lessons for the World Bank


Jeffrey D. Sachs





The China Daily recently ran a front-page story recounting
how Paul Wolfowitz used threats and vulgarities to pressure senior World
Bank
staff. The newspaper noted that Wolfowitz sounded like a character out of
the
mafia television show The Sopranos . At the same time, while the Wolfowitz
scandal unfolded, China
was playing host to the Africa Development Bank (ADB), which held its Board
meeting in Shanghai. This is a
vivid metaphor for today's world: while the World Bank is caught up in
corruption and controversy, China
skillfully raises its geopolitical profile in the developing world.


China's
rising power is, of course, based heavily on its remarkable economic
success.
The ADB meeting took place in the Pudong District, Shanghai's
most remarkable development site. From largely unused land a generation ago,
Pudong has become a booming center of skyscrapers, luxury hotels, parks,
industry, and vast stretches of apartment buildings. Shanghai's
overall economy is currently growing at around 13% per year, thus doubling
in
size every five or six years. Everywhere there are startups, innovations,
and
young entrepreneurs hungry for profits.


I had the chance to participate in high-level meetings
between Chinese and African officials at the ADB meetings. The advice that
the
African leaders received from their Chinese counterparts was sound, and much
more practical than they typically get from the World Bank.


Chinese officials stressed the crucial role of public investments,
especially in agriculture and infrastructure, to lay the basis for
private-sector-led growth. In a hungry and poor rural economy, as China was
in
the 1970's and as most of Africa is today, a key starting point is to raise
farm productivity. Peasant farmers need the benefits of fertilizer,
irrigation,
and high-yield seeds, all of which were a core part of China's
economic takeoff.


Two other critical investments are also needed: roads and
electricity, without which there cannot be a modern economy. Farmers might
be
able to increase their output, but it won't be able to reach the cities, and
the cities won't be able to provide the countryside with inputs. The
officials
stressed how the government has taken pains to ensure that the power grid
and
transportation network reaches every village in China.



Of course, the African leaders were most appreciative of
the next message: China
is prepared to help Africa in substantial ways in
agriculture, roads, power, health, and education. And the African leaders
already know that this is not an empty boast. All over Africa,
China is
financing and constructing basic infrastructure. During the meeting, the
Chinese leaders emphasized their readiness to support agricultural research
as
well. They described new high-yield rice varieties, which they are prepared
to
share with their African counterparts.


All of this illustrates what is wrong with the World Bank,
even aside from Wolfowitz's failed leadership. Unlike the Chinese, the Bank
has
too often forgotten the most basic lessons of development, preferring to
lecture the poor and force them to privatize basic infrastructure, rather
than
to help the poor to invest in infrastructure and other crucial sectors.


The Bank's failures began in the early 1980's, when, under
the ideological sway of President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret
Thatcher, it tried to get Africa and other poor regions to cut back or close
down government investments and services. For 25 years, the Bank tried to
get
governments out of agriculture, leaving impoverished peasants to fend for
themselves. The result has been a disaster in Africa,
with farm productivity stagnant for decades. The Bank also pushed for
privatization of national health systems, water utilities, and road and
power
networks, and grossly underfinanced these critical sectors.


This extreme free-market ideology, also called "structural
adjustment," went against the practical lessons of development successes in
China
and the rest of Asia. Practical development strategy
recognizes that public investments - in agriculture, health, education, and
infrastructure - are necessary complements to private investments. The World
Bank has instead wrongly seen such vital public investments as an enemy of
private-sector development.


Whenever the Bank's extreme free-market ideology failed,
it has blamed the poor for corruption, mismanagement, or lack of initiative.
This was Wolfowitz's approach, too. Instead of focusing the Bank's attention
on
helping the poorest countries to improve their infrastructure, he launched a
crusade against corruption. Ironically, of course, his stance became
untenable
when his own misdeeds came to light. The Bank can regain its relevance only
if
it becomes practical once again, by returning its focus to financing public
investments in priority sectors, just as the Chinese leadership is prepared
to
do.


The good news is that African governments are getting the
message on how to spur economic growth, and are also getting crucial help
from China
and other partners that are less wedded to extreme free-market ideology than
the World Bank. Many African governments at the Shanghai
meeting declared their intention to act boldly, by investing in
infrastructure,
agricultural modernization, public health, and education.


The Wolfowitz debacle should be a wake-up call to the
World Bank: it must no longer be controlled by ideology. If that happens,
the
Bank can still do justice to the bold vision of a world of shared prosperity
that prompted its creation after World War II.


** Jeffrey Sachs is Professor of Economics and
Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University.


Copyright: Project
Syndicate, 2007. http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/sachs129


Kirim email ke