Facing the Conundrum: How Useful Is the “Developmental State” Concept in South Africa?

Developmental states are often associated with high economic growth. J apan, S outh K orea, C hina and B razil are all examples, most of which grew at phenomenal rates. The N ational D evelopment P lan in S outh A frica sets out the intention of the S outh A frican government to transform the government into a “capable and developmental state able to intervene to correct our historical inequities …” However, what the S outh A frican government means by the term “developmental state” is not entirely clear. To help bring some clarity, this paper distinguishes between the East Asian developmental state and the S candinavian developmentalist welfare state. The paper furthermore draws on Bernard and Boucher's distinction between a “social investment state” and a “transfer welfare state.” The former is a more precise description of the S candinavian developmentalist welfare state. Subsequently, the paper discusses the applicability of the developmental state framework to S outh A frica. Specifically, it argues that the East Asian model neither is a model that would work in S outh A frica, nor is it a model that S outh A frica would wish to apply. S outh A frica currently resembles more a transfer welfare state than the S candinavian–Brazilian social investment state. The social investment state, though, is closer to what S outh A frica needs.