On the importance of quantitative thinking in policy making.

Zambia.

I often hear people talk about how their favorite political actors did a good job when they were in office.

Some will say, look—that President built a lot of universities, or this other President left the exchange rate at XYZ Kwacha to the US Dollar.

More often than not. People rely on visibly observable “proofs” of work.

This way of looking at the world is pervasive. Policy makers don’t seem immune to it either. It creates an incentive to optimize for form over substance.

What appears good, versus what is truly useful.

Take for example the UNIP period. Often hailed as the “golden age” of Zambian progress.

GDP per capita was ~$1800 in the early 60’s. By the time UNIP was voted out of the executive, GDP/capita was ~$300. That’s not even adjusting for inflation!

Copper output was ~750,000/yr in the early 70’s; by the end of the UNIP era it was closer to 250,000/yr.

Post nationalization, no new mines were explored or developed (to my knowledge). Production declined, and declining cash flows used to develop more infrastructure.

So, yes. People were educated, hospitals were built. Some semblance of industrialization happened: but on diminishing capacity in the core driver of the economy’s vitality. So....progress?

Between 1990 and 2012, the economy grew GDP/capita from about $300 to ~$1500.

So we just about got back to where we were at independence (not adjusting for inflation )

So, 50 years spent going essentially no where.

But we got malls, roads, new colleges, new mines, etc..

So progress? It depends.

I’d say since we’ve lost our first 50 or so years. We need to earn it back, and then some. Otherwise the wasted time keeps us in a deficit relative to our potential.