Homegrown solutions to various country development challenges is a good idea, participants at the just concluded 12th national dialogue locally known as Umushyikirano said.
Homegrown solutions to various country development challenges is a good idea, participants at the just concluded 12th national dialogue locally known as Umushyikirano said.
Dr Carlos Lopes, Executive Secretary of Uneca, told the forum that the countries that show resilience in transforming their economies cannot wait for "favourable winds.”
Often, he said, they generate their own winds to sail through, sometimes, stormy weather, in order to change the course of their economic and social history.
Dr Lopes acknowledged that most of the country’s current successes hinge on Rwanda’s belief on the power of its ideas, self-reliance, resilience, as well as embracing homegrown and innovative solutions such as the widely acclaimed Gacaca, Imihigo, Abunzi, Ubudehe, and Girinka.
Though the winds may not be favourable, he said, the national dialogue offers a unique opportunity to fully explore possibilities for a dynamic and resilient Rwanda.
Rwandans were, among others, reminded of the essence of home grown solutions such as Umuganda, or community work.
Dr Lopes cited Finland – a Nordic country in Northern Europe – which he said seized the opportunity in the global electronics industry and the process of European integration to accomplish a significant structural change of its economy.
He noted that Finland remained relatively poor and agrarian until after World War II but at the beginning of the 19th century, the semi-autonomous Grand Duchy, a dependency of the Russian Empire observed the benefits of industrialisation in Britain.
Finland, he said, was not equipped with the financial, infrastructural or entrepreneurial resources to follow the British example but through a concerted political process, it transformed from an agrarian to an industrial society despite all odds.
Rwanda’s creativity
Dr Lopes said Rwanda’s creativity can be its ability to create hives of collaboration and innovation between public, private and research and development institutions.
In other words, dynamic clusters around its natural resource based economy is a lesson Rwanda can learn from, he said.
"Your new National Science, Technology and Innovation policy and the establishment of the Rwanda Innovation Endowment Fund (RIEF) create an environment in which government policies and institutions as well as corporate strategies mutually shape each other to support the country’s economic and institutional transformation,” Dr Lopes said. Foreign solutions
Dr Alphonse Muleefu, a lecturer at the University of Rwanda (UR), told The New Times that solutions from other places can work in Rwanda just as solutions initiated in Rwanda can work elsewhere, "so long as those solutions are contextualised.”
"Solutions developed in Rwanda make more sense for Rwandan problems bacause they are easily understandable, and are less costly such as the use of local knowledge and expertise,” Dr Muleefu said.
"The success of home grown solutions requires a dynamic leadership willing to change according to prevailing circumstances,” he added.
During the Dialogue in Parliament, Andrew Mwenda, a Ugandan journalist and founder of The Independent magazine, made a presentation on why the country should rely on homegrown solutions.
A good illustration, he noted, is best captured by how the international community failed Rwanda during the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi, 20 years ago, but Rwandans stopped it and moved on.
"I do not know how I can capture for you the scale of disaster that would have befallen this country had an international force, let me call it an American army, come here and stopped the Genocide,” Mwenda said.
"The international community would have dictated the terms of a political settlement in this country and this would have been disastrous,” he added.
Mwenda said he could not imagine the resultant state of affairs, perhaps the international community would have forced a ceasefire with the genocidal regime, or a government of ‘national unity’ comprising killers and the victims, or organised multi-party elections immediately after the Genocide.