Africa’s Social Policy Trajectories The Case of Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Rwanda

Abstract

This is part of the research output of the GETSPA project to examine the trajectories, processes and outcomes of
education, health, employment and water, sanitation and hygiene social policies in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania and
Rwanda. The goal of this research was to recommend post-COVID-19 gender equitable and transformative social
policy in the said sectors. Methodologically, it was a trend, descriptive, analytical and qualitative research that
examined the said sectorial social policies from colonial time to the present day. The historicisation and
periodisation of the trends were generally structured thus: 1940-60; 1961-1980; 1981-2000; 2001-2018; and 2019
to date, and data collection was undertaken through literature reviews and interviews with key informants. This
report focuses on the following in each period: the key ideologies, norms and values; the interests and institutional
actors; the politics of how these ideologies, interests and actors interacted to produce the social policies of each
period; and the gender dimensions of social policy and other dimensions of inequality in the social policy pursued.
The analysis was thematically undertaken on the basis of the key dimensions of the research aforementioned. The
findings are thus: from colonial times (1940s-1960), the policies were colonial focused on developing East Africa
as a cash crop economy, thus the interests were colonial driven. The key values and norms prioritised was access to
basic services such as education and primary health care which was to provide labour and to meet basic health
needs, respectively. The actors were predominantly colonial based as policies were made from the colonial office.
Social policies were thus non-inclusive and biased against Africans. This led to gender blind policies in the sectors
under review. During the 1961-1980 period, the ideological orientation was nationalism and pan-Africanism, and
the interest was for socio-economic development of the economies. The values became broader, from access to
equality, inclusion, quality services and some semblance of human rights. This period witnessed the socialist
ideological orientation in Uganda and Tanzania. The actors were predominantly both the state and other nonstate
institutions. The politics of policy-making tried to be more inclusive to address the gaps created by the
colonists. However, by the 1980s, gender gaps and other inequalities were eminent due to issues of governance,
especially in a country such as Uganda under Idi Amin where human rights were violated. In the 1981-2000 era,
the dominant ideology was neoliberalism characterised by liberalisation and privatisation in the 1980s and the key
actors were the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. During this period, the interest was
economic development and reduction in social expenditure, which caused social problems, and women bore the
brunt in all the sectors under review. Though Social Development Adjustments in the 1990sattempted to address
all inequalities, gender and other forms of inequalities persisted. The period of 2001-2018 was a continuation of
the preceding periods, with a strong neoliberal stance but with a human face. This is a period that witnessed the
increasing influence of multi-levelled actors. In this period, the demands for democracy also influenced the space
for policymaking and implementation, with citizens becoming more aware of their rights and engaging in activism
and lobbying. This ideology and the impetus continued to the COVID-19 era, which witnessed an increase in
global partnerships in the policy-making and implementation realms. All these have had a great impact on gender
issues in the region. In conclusion, it can be said that, currently, due to the investments and changes made since
colonial times and with differences within cluster countries, the gender inequality index and the gender
development index are generally much more favourable compared to the previous periods since colonial times.
However, it is recommended that if gender equitable and transformative development is to be sustained by the
cluster countries beyond COVID-19, more deliberate actions still need to be undertaken and the extant
constraints addressed. For example, cluster countries need to increase their annual budgetary appropriations as a
percentage of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to provide basic social services. There is also a need to pursue
the strategic visions and plans of cluster countries meticulously instead of leaving them to remain in papers as
development blueprint documents. The cluster countries also need to be more committed to implementing the
extant regional and sub-regional development agendas. The global partnerships through Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) and other partnerships welded during COVID-19 should also be sustained. Fighting
brain drain and the endemic corruption, among other vices, must also be prioritised.