* Carol Dweck’s much-acclaimed book “Mindset: The New Psychology of Success’ published in 2006, introduced ideas of fixed and growth mindsets and how they can impact growth. In the last ten years, the Mindset Change concept has gained prominence in the African development discourse, with Rwanda and Uganda having carried out successful community-driven, self-help rural development programmes drawing from the model of the New Village Movement (Saemaeul Undong ) national campaign in South Korea from 1970.
The Malawi Vision 2063 identifies ‘Mindset Change’ as one of the enablers towards an Inclusively Wealthy and Self-reliant Nation. Since adopting Vision, mindset change has become a catchphrase that needs deeper reflection to clarify thoughts and pursue coherent action for good governance. Below are some practices deeply entrenched in our society and politics that the leadership and citizenry must address to pursue the course of growth and prosperity.
The Dependency Syndrome: The vision document rightly points out this- ‘As Malawians, we denounce our hitherto attitude of dependency on donors and handouts, materialism and self-accumulation through corrupt practices. We will instead embrace and commit to self-discipline, self-initiative and self-dependency.’ Realising the Vision of self-dependency requires breaking the vicious circle of dependency. The receivers of government support through programmes such as cash transfers must be aware that such measures are time-bound until they can fend for themselves. The government, too, needs to realise the same regarding its dependency on external donors and explore pathways for self-reliance.
Moving away from dependency syndrome requires introspection of political ideas, values and policies. Malawi needs to reflect on alternative political ideologies that will enable it to navigate the realisation of fair distribution of resources while securing fundamental civil and political rights. Such rigours were not possible during the one-party era. In the post-1990s, the global political environment limited the scope for debating ideological alternatives, and the newly democratising countries accepted the international monetary institution’s prescription of liberalism with the dawn of globalisation. Now is the opportune time for Malawi to undertake this introspection in the context of realising Vision 2063.
National development strategies require collective ownership of national resources and shared responsibility towards maintaining infrastructure. We often see medical clinics, schools and welfare centres turn semi- or non-functional shortly after they are opened and handed over to the government or the communities due to a lack of ownership and maintenance. Poor decentralisation has stalled many good development projects.
The Patronage System: Giving spoils to the one surrounding the Abwana – the ‘big man’. The patronage system does not auger with the demands of the 21st-century democratic system, which should give way to merit and competence in public appointments. Mindset change requires a shift from shady political compromises and backroom deals like the 19th century ‘Gilded Age’ practice, riddled with corruption as presidents awarded government positions to political supporters. In our context, it is the ‘big man’ syndrome. The prevailing political culture of the country tends to polarise attitudes and actions as either strongly anti-government or anti-opposition. Such polarisation also affects institutions like the Anti-corruption Bureau.
Personalised leadership: In public institutions, the leaders issue orders and directives, and the rank and file obey meekly regardless of professional merit. Personalisation has not paved the way for strengthening institutions. The history of the ACB is a case in point, which indicates that the institutional performance has been way below what it would have been with a more committed political leadership. It suggests a low level of institutionalisation. One of the study findings on ACB stated, “In Malawi, it is not likely for anybody to stand up for principles, as the system does not protect you; persons do.” Such a situation leaves the head of such an institution and, for that matter, the institution itself vulnerable.
Court Injunctions – It has become a culture to use (abuse) the courts to halt the implementation of policies or actions or settle disputes. Some would say that many such instances are tantamount to abuse of the law when parties ‘shop around’ for sympathetic judges willing to issue a particular injunction. Injunctions are regularly misused, undermining the government and scandalising the courts and the legal profession.
Finally, let us embrace a mindset to deliver our responsibilities diligently and be vigilant to ensure our governance institutions perform effectively with impartiality and effectiveness.
*Entry by Dr Nandini Patel
Executive Director, Institute for Policy Interaction
Associate Professor of Political Science (retired, Catholic University of Malawi).
