This is a story of the soft budget constraint. It seeks an answer to a paradox: the prevalence of the soft budget constraint in spite of the tremendous inefficiencies that it gives rise to, and its persistence in spite of reform of the system of which it is an integral part. The story aims at increasing our understanding of why the phenomenon exists. By studying the case of state in Tanzania before, during and after socialism, an explanation of the owned enterprises emergence, persistence and logic of the soft budget constraint is suggested. This introductory chapter presents an argument showing why this story is worth telling. It discusses the research topic and how the problem it presents is attacked. THE SOFT BUDGET CONSTRAINT The soft budget constraint is today a popular metaphor. Originally it was seen as a characteristic of the socialist system. It refers to the tendency of primarily state-owned enterprises to have their liquidity gaps or losses accommodated by the state, or some other external funding body, and to the resulting expectations of such bail-out. The concept was coined by the Hungarian economist Hmos Kornai. ' He distinguishes between four major forms of external financial assistance that contribute to the soft budget constraint: soft subsidies, soft taxation, soft credit and soft 2 administrative pricing.

Developing countries commonly adopt reforms to improve their governments yet they usually fail to produce more functional and effective governments. Andrews argues that reforms often fail to make governments better because they are introduced as signals to gain short-term support. These signals introduce unrealistic best practices that do not fit developing country contexts and are not considered relevant by implementing agents. The result is a set of new forms that do not function. However, there are realistic solutions emerging from institutional reforms in some developing countries. Lessons from these experiences suggest that reform limits, although challenging to adopt, can be overcome by focusing change on problem solving through an incremental process that involves multiple agents.

This book focuses on issues related to entrepreneurship and SME management on the African continent by providing insights from different conceptual, empirical and case studies. In doing so, it focuses on context-specific challenges for conducting entrepreneurial activities or business endeavors in smaller firms in the African continent. The book responds to calls for more research about African businesses given the acknowledgement of scholars, students and policy makers around the world who realize the increasing and growing economic importance of the African continent. In addition to serving as a source book for more in-depth studies by assisting the reader in gaining increased understanding of the topics covered, complementing the different parts with reviews, the book also elaborates on issues such political unrest, corruption, untrained personnel and environmental concerns. Entrepreneurship and SME Management Across Africa: Context, Challenges, Cases will be useful to academics with an interest in different entrepreneurial contexts in general, and Africa in particular, and for students interested in regional business practices, as well as for practitioners and policy makers.

This book is concerned with the problem of achieving sustained economic growth in thirteen African countries. Structural adjustments designed to remove imperfections have made it difficult for the market system to work optimally.

Renowned for its international coverage and rigorous selection procedures, this series provides the most comprehensive and scholarly bibliographic service available in the social sciences. Arranged by topic and indexed by author, subject and place-name, each bibliography lists and annotates the most important works published in its field during the year of 1997, including hard-to-locate journal articles. Each volume also includes a complete list of the periodicals consulted.

What's wrong with foreign aid? Many policymakers, aid practitioners, and scholars have called into question its ability to increase economic growth, alleviate poverty, or promote social development. At the macro level, only tenuous links between development aid and improved living conditions have been found. At the micro level, only a few programs outlast donor support and even fewer appear to achieve lasting improvements. The authors of this book argue that much of aid's failure is related to the institutions that structure its delivery. These institutions govern the complex relationships between the main actors in the aid delivery system and often generate a series of perverse incentives that promote inefficient and unsustainable outcomes. In their analysis, the authors apply the theoretical insights of the new institutional economics to several settings. First, they investigate the institutions of Sida, the Swedish aid agency, to analyze how that aid agency's institutions can produce incentives inimical to desired outcomes, contrary to the desires of its own staff. Second, the authors use cases from India, a country with low aid dependence, and Zambia, a country with high aid dependence, to explore how institutions on the ground in recipient countries also mediate the effectiveness of aid. Throughout the book, the authors offer suggestions about how to improve aid's effectiveness. These suggestions include how to structure evaluations in order to improve outcomes, how to employ agency staff to gain from their on-the-ground experience, and how to engage stakeholders as "owners" in the design, resource mobilization, learning, and evaluation processes of development assistance programs.

Why have South-East Asian countries like Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam been so successful in reducing levels of absolute poverty, while in African countries like Kenya, Nigeria and Tanzania, despite recent economic growth, most people are still almost as poor as they were half a century ago? This book presents a simple, radical explanation for the great divergence in development performance between Asia and Africa: the absence in most parts of Africa, and the presence in Asia, of serious developmental intent on the part of national political leaders.