Cities as platforms for progress: Local drivers of Rwanda’s success

Introduction

Rwanda has become a poster child for progress in Africa, against all odds. This small, agrarian country of 12 million people is land-locked, hilly and lacks mineral deposits. Rwanda experienced a notorious genocide in 1994, when nearly a million people were killed. This decimated an already fragile economy and poverty soared. There has been a stunning recovery since then, with GDP growing at between 6 and 8% a year since 2003, one of the highest rates in the world (World Bank, 2019). Gross National Income per capita has increased three-fold from 2000 to 2017, helping to uplift average living standards. Meanwhile, the share of exports in GDP has risen from 6% in 2000 to 18% in 2017. This is linked to the gradual diversification and transformation of the economy from traditional agriculture towards higher productivity agro-processing, manufactured goods (including cement, soap, furniture, shoes, textiles and plastic goods) and service industries, such as business and consumer tourism and logistics.

Rapid economic growth has been accompanied by impressive social progress and human development (Abbott et al., 2017). This is quite unlike the narrow, exclusionary growth path of many of Africa’s major commodity exporters (Turok, 2013). For example, the proportion of Rwanda’s population below the poverty line has fallen quite sharply from 57% in 2006 to 39% in 2017 (World Bank, 2019). Many broader, non-income dimensions of poverty have also been reduced. Child mortality has been cut massively from 181 per 1000 births in 2000 to only 38 in 2017, and life expectancy has risen steeply from 48 in 2000 to 67 in 2017. The prevalence of underweight children has been halved from 20% in 2000 to 9% in 2017. These striking health outcomes seem to have been matched by similar improvements in education. For example, the proportion of children completing primary school has risen from only 23% in 2000 to 76% in 2017 (World Bank, 2019).

The received wisdom is that Rwanda’s remarkable all-round development is attributable to a determined national government under visionary, single-minded leadership (Abbott et al., 2017; Cheeseman, 2018). Since 2000, President Kagame has provided central direction and built strong state institutions implementing rigorous performance disciplines (Allison, 2017; Booth, 2012). The focus has been on the long-term, collective interest, with zero-tolerance of corruption and mismanagement. A modernising agenda has encouraged the application of information and communication technologies and improved the climate for foreign investment by streamlining regulatory procedures. The state has invested directly in key economic sectors, while a Made in Rwanda campaign has nurtured home-grown businesses and encouraged the consumption of local products. President Kagame has promoted closer trade links with other African countries to surmount the continent’s small, fragmented markets. The government has also pursued an expansionary fiscal stance by borrowing heavily to invest in education, health and public infrastructure. Additional resources have been mobilised by the state social security agency investing in housing and property development. As a result, the country has reduced its previous heavy reliance on foreign aid and now funds about 84% of its budget from domestic sources, up from only 36% two decades ago (Mwai, 2018).

Yet, Rwanda’s resurgence has not been a one-dimensional story of centralised planning and top-down control. Sustained and inclusive development in any country cannot be driven exclusively from the centre. Progress is rooted in the capacity of individuals, communities and firms to continually adapt to their changing context and to develop supportive institutions that can overcome obstacles and unlock opportunities for growth and development. The existence of ‘bottom-up’ processes that respond to popular concerns and harness the energy of individuals and groups has been neglected in most accounts of Rwanda’s success. An enabling local environment has been created to support the national agenda and give it greater traction. Prosperity has been fostered in places that are most conducive to the creation of economic and social opportunities. Progress has also been pursued through participatory processes which encourage active citizenship and responsive governance. Recognition of the local dimension of Rwanda’s turn-around adds nuance to the dominant narrative of central direction. In effect, there have been efforts made to link urbanisation and community involvement to the national strategy for economic growth and poverty reduction. Other African countries have much to learn from this experience.

Community participation in development

For visitors to Rwanda, one of the most striking features of its cities and towns is the clean streets and tidy pavements. The neat, well-maintained central cities, suburbs and informal settlements are unusual in many other parts of the continent, where it is common to see litter lying around and sometimes piles of uncollected waste. Many African leaders have applauded the spotless appearance of public spaces in cities like Kigali and wondered how to replicate this achievement. It is often asserted that the clean environment reflects stringent laws and harsh fines for littering and other infringements (Van Schie, 2019). If so, it would be difficult to apply these methods in many other countries because the capacity to enforce state regulations is much weaker and there is often a culture of impunity.

In fact, there is another, more important aspect to the cleanliness of Rwanda’s cities and towns. The notion of places being clean and hygienic isn’t just an end in itself – a kind of fetish for cleanliness. It has been an essential mechanism for mass participation as part of a drive for socio-economic reconstruction (Rwanda Governance Board, 2017). Widespread involvement in regular clean-up campaigns has become a notable social custom. Once a month every adult is expected to contribute to communal projects, from repairing roads to clearing choked ditches, improving the environment and building and maintaining public facilities and infrastructure. Everyone from top politicians and senior officials to ordinary citizens don their overalls and pitch in. Traffic comes to a halt and shops are closed to make time for people to work together. Projects are organised and monitored by local neighbourhood committees. Funding for any materials and equipment required often comes from residents who can afford to make a contribution. This kind of home-grown self-reliance is invaluable in a context where state resources are stretched.

President Kagame has built on a long tradition of ‘Umuganda’ to forge a sense of national cohesion and solidarity through this form of community service (Republic of Rwanda, 2013). Umuganda literally means people coming together for a common purpose. The idea is to foster a spirit of collective responsibility and civic pride by working hand-in-hand on practical local schemes. The initiative stems from the genocide, when so many people were wiped out over a three-month period. During that disastrous episode, Umuganda became a weapon of propaganda as leaders mobilised ethnic Hutus and exhorted them to kill minority Tutsis and Hutu sympathisers. Repurposing the concept is helping to undo the legacy of social division and motivate citizens to offer mutual assistance and get involved in collective actions that promote unity and a sense of belonging.

Community participation is also part of a process of building social trust and understanding, i.e. norms and values of cooperation rather than self-interest. Information is shared, public policies are explained and there is two-way dialogue between members of the community and civic leaders. This gives people a voice in decision-making and sensitises policy-makers to everyday concerns on the ground. Citizen involvement fosters social obligations and puts pressure on government to respond to people’s needs and aspirations. The President outlined the idea in a recent interview:

(W)e need to govern our people properly … (to create) a conducive environment for them to play their part … Leaders must allow people to participate. Once there is participation, there is benefiting, there is the feeling that what they have is what they wanted; at least they have hope, they are sure that things are moving in the right direction even if they do not have what they wanted now, they can have it tomorrow. (Kagame, 2018)

Rwanda’s community projects are also supported by other measures to increase safety and hygiene in public spaces, such as a ban on single-use plastics. There are indeed fines for infringing municipal bylaws, although most citizens seem to be unaware of them (Yee, 2018). Consequently, such penalties may not be necessary if people have absorbed the message and are more careful about how they dispose of their refuse. In addition, street traders are encouraged to operate from serviced premises in dedicated markets, rather than busy pavements, and there are restrictions on disruptive kerbside activities, such as prostitution and begging.

A pro-active approach to urbanisation

There is a second feature of Rwanda’s push to make its urban areas more functional and liveable. The focus is on strengthening city authorities and boosting investment in urban infrastructure. The government has embraced urbanisation as a vehicle to accelerate Rwanda’s transformation from an impoverished rural society to a prosperous modern economy. In 2012 it set an ambitious target for the level of urbanisation to reach 35% by 2020 (Republic of Rwanda, 2013). Such an objective is almost unheard of in Africa, where most governments want to stem urbanisation because of the strains it puts on society and the environment (Turok, 2015, 2016). The Rwandan government believes that enabling people to move from the countryside to the cities makes it easier to provide hospitals, training colleges and other costly public services. The potential for more productive enterprises that generate decent jobs and livelihoods is also greater in urban areas, given the economies of scale in production and consumption.

The emphasis on tidiness and organisation signals a concerted agenda for urban restructuring and development. Large-scale investment in high quality roads and other hard and soft infrastructure means laying the foundations for more efficient cities. Leaders know from experience elsewhere in the world that carefully planned urbanisation can spur investment in economic activity and generate higher incomes, whereas haphazard, poorly managed urban growth is a recipe for congestion, contagion and serious environmental problems. Urbanisation was one of five priorities identified in Rwanda’s 2013–18 economic strategy:

While the urbanisation rate is growing, the level remains relatively low. This is a unique opportunity for Rwanda to avoid mistakes made by other middle income countries by pro-actively managing the urbanisation process and mitigating risks of urban sprawl, divided cities, high urban unemployment and high urban poverty. (Republic of Rwanda, 2013: 13)

In order to prevent an over-concentration of activity in Kigali, the government is also actively supporting a network of six secondary cities. These are intended to function as growth poles with strong linkages to the rural hinterland. They will absorb some of the population pressures that might otherwise overwhelm Kigali. The secondary cities benefit from substantial public investment in improved roads, education and health facilities, and public transport. Affordable housing is another policy priority, including encouraging the banks to expand the provision of mortgages in order to accelerate house-building.

Informal settlements were not mentioned in the 2013–18 economic strategy because of the traditional policy ambivalence towards these unauthorised areas. However, attitudes are changing and there is now active policy endorsement for upgrading many of these neighbourhoods and recognising that they are here to stay. This involves installing water and sanitation networks, storm-water drains and local access roads to enhance the quality of life for low income communities. Better schools and clinics are other neighbourhood priorities. The scale of investment taking place is impressive, as is the commitment of local communities themselves to maintain their public amenities in a fit and proper state.

To plan and manage rapid urban development, city governments are being strengthened with enhanced powers and resources. Competent officials and energetic young mayors are being appointed to boost the capabilities of municipal authorities, although there are still many shortages of technical and administrative skills at the local level. The government is clearly taking the decentralisation agenda seriously in recognition that national departments cannot substitute for coordinated local action and grassroots problem-solving. Strong local institutions are vital to respond effectively to popular concerns, to coordinate and connect separate sectoral investments, and to unleash the energy and ideas of citizens and groups in ways that are dynamic and self-sustaining.

Consistency between top-down and bottom-up processes

Understandable enthusiasm for Rwanda’s evolving development model is tempered by certain reservations. A recurring theme is the need for greater consistency and alignment between top-down and bottom-up processes. The governance regime would function more effectively if there was greater accountability and coordination between national and local planning and administrative systems. Bottom-up pressures on performance would improve the adaptability and responsiveness of national policies and practices, resulting in more durable and popular social and economic outcomes. One could envisage a hybrid approach that combines the benefits of central direction and concerted sectoral policies with greater scope for local initiative, practical experimentation and active participation by communities and firms.

For instance, there appear to be limits to the local flexibility available within the Umuganda programme. Some urban communities want to engage in a wider variety of communal projects to match their neighbourhood needs more closely. Higher-skilled, middle class participants would also like to see greater scope for activities that go beyond manual labour (Rwanda Governance Board, 2017). People believe that greater local ownership and control over the programme would improve the quality of project management, boost civic pride in many community schemes, and thereby ensure their impact was even more worthwhile.

Second, there is a continuing tendency for autocratic decision-making in urban development and other domains. This undermines human rights and fosters insecurity. For example, during the last decade several informal settlements and informal markets were relocated to the urban periphery without consulting or compensating the residents and traders. Street vendors, beggars and homeless people are also periodically rounded up for ‘rehabilitation’. Interviews with some senior officials reveal insensitivity towards the plight of poor people who are merely trying to earn a living (Allison, 2017; Van Schie, 2019). They criticise hawkers for creating mess, petty crime, obstructing traffic and avoiding taxes. There is a better way of managing informality than trying to eradicate it. This involves building people’s capabilities incrementally through education, skills enhancement and creating an enabling environment.

Third, sometimes the modernising zeal from the centre is also overdone. A few years ago the government declared that thatched roofs on people’s homes were obsolete because they gave the wrong impression to outsiders about the state of the country’s development. Households were obliged, and offered a subsidy, to replace them with corrugated iron. Yet thatched roofs have superior insulation properties and are much quieter during heavy rains. The recent housing boom has also focused on the upper end of the income spectrum, raising concerns about a potential property bubble (Goodfellow, 2017).

Summing up, there appears to be a need to strengthen feedback and dialogue between national and local spheres of government and to incrementally develop both systems of decision-making so that there is greater interaction and mutual responsibility. More countervailing checks and balances would reduce the likelihood of arbitrary and flawed decisions, wherever they are made. Determined efforts to enhance the knowledge and capabilities of public servants at all levels are also important to ensure enlightened, democratic leadership, and to help officials to perform their functions in a competent and socially just manner.