PAUL T. SHIPALE (with inputs by Folito Nghitongovali Diawara Gaspar)
Abstract
The question one must ask is; what is our conceptual framework as far as development is concerned? Should we determine the course of our actions based solely on the mantra of “no business as usual”? In his contribution to the appropriation bill, the Landless People’s Movement Leader Bernadus Swartbooi asked, how come in our public discourse there is no reference to words such as “Developmental State”, and “Industrialization”? In our view, he should have asked; What is the conceptual framework as far as our development is concerned?
Is it true that we shouldn’t rely on theories, concepts and ideologies but only address ‘real bread and butter’ issues? Let us analyze the conceptual frameworks of development in third world countries and place Namibia in its context. Thus, the article examines the significance of a developmental state in Namibia. Indeed, by offering the structure, direction, and assistance required to spur economic growth and guarantee that development initiatives are inclusive, egalitarian, and environmentally sustainable, a developmental state can play a significant part in accelerating sustainable development. Against this background, reviewing decades of thinking regarding the role of the state in economic development, this article posits the continued relevance of the concept of a ‘Developmental State’.
Keywords: Developmental State, Post-Neo-liberalism, New Developmentalism, Natural Resource Beneficiation-led growth, Namibia, Imaginative Institutionalism, Plasticity of Social Life, False Necessity, Empowered Democracy, Development as Emancipation:
I. Introduction: Framing the Problem
1.1 Discursive Silences and Ideological Vacuum
In his contribution to the appropriation bill, Bernadus Swartbooi has highlighted how in her budget speech the Minister of Finance did not mention words such as “A Developmental State”, “ Transformative Leadership”, “ Industrialization” etc. In this case, the Brazilian philosopher, legal theorist, and political thinker, Roberto Mangabeira Unger, whose work offers a rich intellectual arsenal for our analysis of postcolonial development and statecraft, would argue that this silence is not accidental but due to ideological – neo- liberalism which survives, not through persuasion, but through the suppression of alternatives. Without the language of structural change, the possibility of such change fades from the realm of the imaginable.
1.2 A Deficit of Transformative Leadership
Namibia’s political leadership maintains most of the economic structures it inherited from colonialism rather than transforming them. Indeed, Namibia’s post-independence era has been defined by relative political stability, rule of law, and democratic rituals. Yet beneath this surface lies a persistent structural malaise: deep socio-economic inequalities, economic dependence on raw resource exports with no value addition and beneficiation, an inflexible bureaucratic state apparatus, and a political imagination confined by neo-liberal orthodoxy.
This article therefore seeks to evaluate whether Namibia has achieved the vision of transformative leadership – leadership capable of unsettling inherited constraints and initiating deep structural reform – and whether it is constructing a developmental state, defined here not merely by its ability to foster growth, but by its commitment to inclusive, participatory, and sovereign development.
Visionary leadership, in Unger’s sense, is not about charisma or efficiency but about disruption – the willingness to break from inherited patterns and experiment with alternative models. It seems, from stalled land reform to elite – led green projects, Namibia’s leadership has preserved, not re-imagined, the post-colonial state.
II. THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS FOR STRUCTURAL TRANSFORMATION
2.1 Introducing Roberto Mangabeira Unger
Anchored in the philosophical and political thought of Roberto Mangabeira Unger, the article uses his theories of institutional plasticity, empowered democracy, and structural imagination as critical tools for analysis. Unger challenges us to recognize that “o real é apenas uma das possibilidades do possível” – that reality, as it is, does not exhaust what is possible.
This insight is foundational to the work at hand: Namibia’s current condition is not inevitable. It is one configuration among many, shaped by inherited choices, global pressures, and ideological limitations – but open to transformation. Through this lens, the article interrogates Namibia’s post-colonial trajectory across many thematic dimensions, among others, ideological evolution, economic paradigms, governance architecture, social transformation, political agency, etc. These lenses illuminate the possibilities, limitations, and contradictions within Namibia’s pursuit of transformation. Ultimately, the article aims not merely to critique, but to revive the politics of possibility – charting concrete, imaginative pathways for democratic reform, economic inclusion, and cultural sovereignty. It is a call to rethink what Namibia is, and re-imagine what Namibia could become. In this regard, the first challenge is to chart a course between overlapping – sometimes competing – conceptual frameworks that explore development processes rooted in localised experiences of capital accumulation while also considering the theoretical innovations within areas of studies.
In this context, conceptual debates offer new possibilities to expand the scope of the Developmental State framework (Hereinafter: DS). In particular, we would like to draw similarities and differences across four concepts: post-neoliberalism, neo-structuralism/neo-developmentalism, developmental patrimonialism, and neo-extractivism as there are shared assumptions across these frameworks and they provide fresh starting points for further elaboration. With the exception of developmental patrimonialism, most conceptual tools from these debates have rarely referenced the DS model, despite their shared interest in analysing state intervention and industrial policy – making. Rather than giving a long lecture, let us introduce who Roberto Mangabeira Unger is and why he matters for Pan-African Thinkers?
Roberto Mangabeira Unger is one of the most original political philosophers of our time, advocating for a radically democratic, participatory, and imaginative approach to social and institutional transformation. Unger’s vision resonates powerfully with the imperatives of African emancipation and nation-building in the 21st century. Among the Core Themes in Unger’s Work are: 1. Imaginative Institutionalism: where he rejects the idea that current political and economic institutions (like liberal democracy or global capitalism) are the natural or final forms of social organization. He insists that all institutions are contingent and can be reinvented to better serve human freedom and social inclusion; 2. Plasticity of Social Life: where Unger believes society is not fixed but “plastic”, meaning that human beings have the capacity to reshape the structures they live under. 3. False Necessity: In which Unger’s most famous philosophical attack is against what he calls “false necessity” – the belief that there is no alternative to existing systems. He argues instead for “structure-denying” thought that frees us from the illusion of inevitability; 4. Empowered Democracy: where he envisions a democracy that is not just about periodic elections but about continuous popular empowerment, where ordinary people have real access to power and participation in shaping their social reality and 5. Development as Emancipation: where for Unger, development is not just economic growth, but the enhancement of human powers, creativity, and collective agency. This last idea, among many others Unger’s ideas, aligns closely with the African developmental challenge – how to pursue modernization without mimicking the West.
2.2 Why Unger Matters for Africa and Pan – African Thinkers
For Pan-African thinkers, Unger’s framework is particularly powerful because it: Rejects fatalism about inherited colonial and neo-liberal structures; Provides intellectual tools for institutional innovation in governance, law, and economics; Supports a vision of transformative leadership anchored not in imitation of the West, but in creative adaptation to local realities; Emphasizes education, imagination, and political mobilization as pillars of national and continental emancipation.
2.3 The Conceptual Frameworks for structural Transformation
In Latin America, scholars have recently coined ‘post-neoliberalism’ as a reference to the return of state capitalism in the region while calling for a ‘new kind of politics that place citizenship, rights and inclusive politics’ in governance and development. Built on political economy and comparative area studies, this school reflects and critically explores how regional governments can deepen democratic engagement and practices to go beyond simply calling for state renewal and activist policies in economic governance.
Complementing this approach, political economy and development economics have a long-standing tradition of understanding Latin American (under)development from a structuralist point of view, whereby systemic factors and structural conditions that undergird regional and national political economies limit the capacity of states and firms to reposition themselves in a globally integrated economy. There appears to be less nuance between ‘new structuralism’ as applied to Spanish-speaking Latin America and ‘new developmentalism’ in Brazil, although recent attempts to connect these debates have begun.
By contrast, in Africa, recognising the pervasiveness of corruption, money politics and rent-seeking, David Booth, Tim Kelsall and others have utilised ‘developmental patrimonialism’ as a framework to explain the political conditions which can produce incremental state transformation and renewed growth strategies based on natural resource-industrialisation.
The underlying condition here, as Kelsall notes, is not only the presence of long-term development visions (or developmental roles in Vu’s language) but the state capacity to make autonomy decisions over how economic rents can be transformed into productive assets. These debates have advanced our understanding of localised capital accumulation and the importance of the changing bases of production in a globalised world economy. However, one emergent debate in the political economy of development involves the extent to which new forms of capital accumulation – principally through natural resources – can generate sustained, rapid industrialisation.
III. Philosophical, Political, and Ideological Grounding
3.1 From Liberation Ideals to Neo-liberal Conformity
Namibia’s early political discourse was saturated with the language of anti-colonialism, Pan-Africanism, and social justice. Yet, within two decades of independence, this emancipatory rhetoric gave way to market liberalization and privatization policies. What Unger describes as intellectual dependency – the passive adoption of dominant global ideas – explains this ideological drift. The nationalist imagination succumbed to managerial logic.
3.2 The Collapse of Political Imagination
The notion of a developmental state – central to East Asian success stories and Latin American experimentation – is strikingly absent from Namibia’s policymaking lexicon, including in NDP6’s Plan, which is currently under review to be soon implemented. There is a silence around terms like industrial policy, structural transformation, or endogenous innovation. Unger’s call for empowered democracy, which demands experimentation and the radical reshaping of institutions, finds no expression in Namibia’s political imagination. What remains is a procedural democracy layered over an extractive and colonial economic logic.
3.3 Slogans Without Substance
Namibia’s political leadership frequently deploys aspirational slogans – “Harambee,” “Green Hydrogen Revolution,” “Business Unusual.” But Unger would argue that slogans do not substitute for structural reinvention. Without transforming the operating principles of institutions – how power is shared, how policy is formulated, how inclusion is achieved – such rhetoric is performative. The developmental state requires more than policy tweaks and catch phrases; it demands a new blueprint for governance and participation. Currently, Global Examples of Elections Won with Slogans are copious. We have seen Donald Trump with his quote; Make America Great Again, the (MAGA), USA (2016). The outcome: Trump’s nationalist, anti-establishment slogan resonated with voters disillusioned by globalization, leading to his 2016 victory. On the flipside however; the results were tax cuts, deregulation, and heightened polarization. Unmet promises (e.g., failed border wall funding) and divisive policies caused fatigue, and contributed to his 2020 loss.
As far as African countries with Election Slogans are concerned: We have seen in Nigeria;”Emilokan”; (2023): Bola Tinubu’s Yoruba phrase (It’s my turn) leveraged his political legacy to win the presidency. Critics called it a symbol of entitlement, but supporters viewed it as a reward for his role in forming the APC. In Kenya; “Tuko Pamoja”; (2022): William Ruto’s ”We Are Together” slogan targeted grassroots economic struggles, helping him defeat Raila Odinga. Critics argue it masked elite power struggles. In one word, catchy slogans remain powerful tools for electoral wins but often fail to sustain public trust without tangible results. African examples like “Tuko Pamoja”, “Otoge” a Yoruba phrase meaning “Enough is Enough” and “Emilokan” mirror global trends, where initial enthusiasm gives way to demands for accountability. For new leaders, balancing aspirational messaging with concrete action is critical to avoiding ‘ business unusual” fatigue.
IV. Progress made in achieving a Developmental State in Namibia
Professor Joseph Diescho, in his column in the New Era Newspaper (December 16, 2014), emphasized that Namibia’s post – independence journey has been marked by noteworthy change and political stability. The introduction of Vision 2030 alongside successive National Development Plans reflects a governmental commitment that combines economic growth with social development.
“Central to Namibia’s strategy has been the mobilization of state resources to tackle systemic poverty, expand economic opportunities at the regional level, and ensure that development initiatives extend beyond the caprices of an unfettered market. In this model, the government’s fiduciary responsibility to its citizens necessitates that economic governance is integrally linked to social redistribution. More fundamentally, the developmental state paradigm requires that a nation remain competitive by embracing technological innovation, research, and development”, Diescho said.
President Netumbo’s Vision, which prioritizes Key sectors for job creation such as industrialization, the beneficiation of mineral resources, youth empowerment, and a reinvigorated fishing and agricultural sector aimed at generating high value-added products, as well as the creative industries and sports, based on the SWAPO Party Election Manifesto of 2025 – 2030, exemplifies this strategic orientation, although challenges persist – such as the notable omission of agro-processing initiatives from the national budget – these key priority sectors, buttressed by a strong electoral mandate, indicate a trajectory toward a model of a developmental State.
VII. Conclusion & Recommendations
Namibia’s future depends on reclaiming the power of possibility, on seeing the world not as it is, but as it could be. Liberation was the beginning – not the end – of the journey. Namibia’s experience represents an ambitious and measured attempt to construct a developmental State that is both democratic and transformative. While significant policy strides have been made through intentional state intervention and inclusive growth strategies, persistent structural challenges underscore the urgent need for continued reform. To fulfil its promise, Namibia must transcend colonial legacies, resist neo-liberal fatalism, and embrace structural creativity. Transformation will not emerge from elite circles alone. It must be cultivated from the ground up to re-imagine institutions. Unger’s vision – democratic renewal, economic solidarity, and imaginative governance – offers a radical alternative. In his words: “The future is not a place we are going to, but one we are creating.”
VIII – References
- Swartbooi, B. (2020). Land reform and social justice in Namibia. Journal of Southern African Studies, 46(3), 45–60.
- Mkandawire, T. (2001). Thinking about Developmental States in Africa. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 25(3), 289–314.
- Johnson, C. (1982). MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925–1975. Princeton University Press. (1999). The Developmental State: The Odyssey of a Concept. In: M. Woo-Cumings (Ed.), The Developmental State. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Burger, P. (2014). How Suitable is a Developmental State to Tackle Unemployment, Inequality and Poverty in South Africa? Cape Town: SALDRU. De Wee, K. (2016). Is South Africa Ready to Be a Developmental State? Africa’s Public Service Delivery and Performance Review, 4(3), 488–502.
- Diescho, J. (2014, December 16). Diescho’s Dictum. New Era Newspaper.
- Evans, P., & Heller, P. (2019). The State and Development. In: Asian Transformations: An Inquiry into the Development of Nations. Oxford University Press. Karaoğuz, H. E. (2022). The Developmental State in the 21st Century: A Critical Analysis and a Suggested Way Forward. PANOECONOMICUS, 69(1), 55–72. Pereira, L. C. B. (2019). Models of the Developmental State. CEPAL Review, 128(8), 35–47. Ricz, J. (2014). Developmental State in Brazil: Past, Present and Future. Institute of World Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, University of Parma.
- Tshishonga, N., & De Vries, M. S. (2011). The Potential of South Africa as a Developmental State: A Political Economy Critique. African Journal of Public Affairs, 4(1), 58–69.
- World Bank. (2022). Namibia Poverty Assessment Report.
Key Books and Ideas of Unger: False Necessity: Anti-Necessitarian Social Theory in the Service of Radical Democracy (1987), A foundational text in which Unger presents his vision of society as a human construct that can be redesigned for greater justice and freedom; Democracy Realized: The Progressive Alternative (1998) Proposes a practical and radical vision for democratic reform – calling for decentralization, economic inclusion, and participatory experimentation; The Left Alternative (2009) Argues that the left must abandon nostalgia for the postwar welfare state and instead reimagine institutions to meet the demands of economic inclusion and democratic deepening in the modern era; Free Trade Reimagined: The World Division of Labor and the Method of Economics (2007) A profound critique of globalization and trade orthodoxy, offering insights relevant to Africa’s position in the global economy; The Self Awakened: Pragmatism Unbound (2007) Advocates for a form of “existential empowerment”, where individuals become more than recipients of structure – they become its shapers.
