A new institutional economics (NIE) perspective on institutional change and leadership in Rwanda, from pre-history to post-genocide

[摘要] ENGLISH SUMMARY : This dissertation uses development theory and principles of New Institutional Economics (NIE) as points of departure to study the role of leadership and other aspects of institutional change in Rwanda's history. Alston, Melo, Mueller and Pereira's (2016) critical transitions framework, which emphasises the role of leadership in institutional change, serves as a conceptual framework for the analysis. This framework identifies shocks to economic and political outcomes as the sources of opportunities for individuals or groups to show leadership, change the dominant network and their beliefs, and implement institutional change.The study applies the critical transitions framework to Rwanda's history to identify five epochs of institutional change: (i) the 'Golden Era' (pre-history to 1894); (ii) colonial period (1894-1961); (iii) First Republic (1961-1973); (iv) Second Republic (1973-1994); and (v) the post-genocide period (1994 to the present). The most recent period followed the genocide in 1994 that was spurred by a recurrent theme in the country's history, namely ethnic tension between Hutu and Tutsi. Since then, Rwanda has displayed one of the most impressive examples of post-conflict reconstruction in human history.Amongst Rwanda's achievements was being named by the World Bank's Doing Business project as the country that made the largest number of reforms to improve its business environment during the past decade and a half. This study uses Doing Business data to quantify pro-business institutional change from 2002 to 2013. The bases for this choice are the associations between the data collected by Doing Business and key concepts in NIE, as well as the theoretical underpinnings of the Doing Business project.This dissertation employs fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), a set-theoretic technique that allows for equifinality (various routes to an outcome), to analyse the determinants of pro-business institutional change in Rwanda and in Sub-Saharan African countries more generally. The analysis attempts to explain such institutional change in terms of combinations of five causal conditions: transactional leadership, state fragility, the strength of the business environment prior to the reforms, and the democratic and autocratic features of the polity.The results for Rwanda indicate that effective transactional leadership, a governance style with few democratic features and many autocratic elements, and an already-supportive business environment at the start of the period influenced pro-business institutional change from 2002 to 2013. The country's leaders established structures for dialogue and engagement with stakeholders outside of the ruling party and for coordination of actions by different state departments and other stakeholders. They also created an environment of stakeholder commitment to implementation of projects and policies.Nsanzabaganwa's (2012) connectedness model explains the policymaking processes behind institutional change in Rwanda. It describes policymaking in the country as a product of the interaction between the politician, policy expert, private sector and change manager. Political scientists now know that autocracies frequently establish the same economic institutions that academics historically viewed as typical hallmarks of democratic governments. The co-existence of an inclusive policymaking process and a relatively autocratic political regime in Rwanda is consistent with this phenomenon.This dissertation has a strong focus on change in formal institutions, but also highlights the role of informal institutions (like trust) in change processes. The main suggestion for future research that emanates from this dissertation is that analyses of institutional change should give more attention to the interplay between leadership and informal institutions. However, complex measurement problems would have to be overcome before informal institutions can receive more prominence in such analyses.

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University