Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 November 2008
The activities of multi-national companies provide primary sources of economic contact between African countries and the industrialised world. The companies' operations in both resource and product markets are often influenced by impositions made, or not made, by host governments in Africa. Such impositions result from bargaining between governments and companies in which each negotiating agent is intent upon obtaining the most preferred conditions—and these are affected by variables that occupy the central focus of our analysis. First, we outline what we believe are crucial variables that affect bargaining outcomes: i.e. particular patterns of benefits and costs arising from the ways that companies manage their businesses in developing lands. Second, we note particular instances where the critical variables appear to be influential, and explore how closer concentration on these might lead to more preferential outcomes from the viewpoint of African governments.
Page 173 note 1 The model appropriates essential elements of more detailed constructions developed by Contini, Bruno, ‘Time in Bargaining Negotiations’, in The American Economic Review (Evanston), LVIII, 3, 06 1969,Google Scholar and by Curry, Robert L. Jr, and Wade, L. L., ‘A Model for SocioPolitical Bargaining’, in The American Journal of Economics and Sociology (New York), XXX, 4, 10 1971,Google Scholar and as suggested in their book, A Theory of Political Exchange (Englewood Cliffs, 1968).Google Scholar
Page 175 note 1 Garmany, J. W., ‘Enterprise, Management, and Organisation in Africa: a plea for research’, in The Journal of Modern African Studies (Cambridge), XI, 4, 12 1971, p. 634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page 175 note 2 Clower, Robert W. et al. , Growth Without Development: an economic survey of Liberia (Evanston, 1966), ch. 2.Google Scholar
Page 176 note 1 For example, see Curry, Robert L. Jr, ‘Liberia's External Debts and their Servicing’, in The Journal of Modern African Studies, X, 4, 12 1972, pp. 121–26.Google Scholar
Page 177 note 1 See Shoup, Carl et al. , The Tax System of Liberia (New York, 1971), ch. 8.Google Scholar
Page 178 note 1 Bretton, Henry L., Power and Politics in Africa (Chicago, 1973), p. 204.Google Scholar
Page 178 note 2 For a discussion of the management agreement between Zimco and the mining companies, see Bostock, Mark and Harvey, Charles (eds.), Economic Independence and Zambian Copper: a case study of foreign investment (New York, 1972),Google Scholar appendices A and B; and also Rothchild, Donald, ‘Rural–Urban Inequalities and Resource Allocation in Zambia’, in The Journal of Commonwealth Political Studies (Leicester), X, 3, 11 1972, p. 223.Google Scholar
Page 179 note 1 A more extended analysis of these shifting bargaining relationships, and their implications for the ongoing interactional process, appears in Rothchild, Donald, Racial Bargaining in Independent Kenya: a study of minorities and decolonization (London, 1973),Google Scholar chs. 1, 4, and 13. See also his ‘Changing Racial Stratifications and Bargaining Styles: the Kenya experience’, in The Canadian Journal of African Studies (Ottawa), VII, 3, 1973, pp. 419–31.Google Scholar
Page 179 note 2 International Labour Office, Employment, Incomes and Equality: a strategy for increasing productive employment in Kenya (Geneva, 1972), p. 440.Google Scholar
Page 180 note 1 Olatunbosun, Dupe, ‘Nigerian War – an economic blessing?’, in Nigerian Opinion (Ibadan), VI, 1–2, 01–02 1970, p. 9.Google Scholar
Page 180 note 2 W. Arthur Lewis, ‘Aspects of Economic Growth’, ibid. II, 12, December 1966, p. 137.
Page 180 note 3 Cronje, Suzanne, ‘Nigeria will Control Shell-BP by 1982’, in African Development (London), 08 1973, p. 11;Google Scholar and West Africa (London), 18 06 1973, p. 818.Google Scholar
Page 180 note 4 Hutchison, Alan and Rake, Alan, ‘Oil: Nigeria takes a stake of its own’, in African Development, 03 1972, p. 21.Google Scholar
Page 181 note 1 Department of Planning and Economic Affairs, Economic Survey of Liberia: 1970 and 1971 (Monrovia, 1971 and 1972), chs. 1 and 2.Google Scholar
Page 182 note 1 Curry, , ‘Liberia's External Debts’, loc. cit., pp. 121–26.Google Scholar
Page 183 note 1 New York Times, 11 09 1973, p. 7.Google Scholar
Page 184 note 1 U.N.C.T.A.D., Report on Restrictive Business Practices (Geneva, 1972), p. 82.Google Scholar Also see Articles 20 and 25 of Decision No. 24 of the Cartegena Agreement on the Transfer of Technology, 31 December 1970; and Patel, Surendra J., ‘The Technological Dependence of Developing Countries’, in The Journal of Modern African Studies, XII, 1, 03 1974, pp. 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page 185 note 1 Nye, Joseph S. Jr, Pan-Africanism and East African Integration (Cambridge, Mass., 1965), pp. 155–58;CrossRefGoogle ScholarTreaty for East African Co-operation (Nairobi, 1967),Google Scholar Article 23; and East African Standard (Nairobi), 7 04 1972, p. 1.Google Scholar
Page 185 note 2 The Kampala Agreement is reprinted in Rothchild, Donald (ed.), Politics of Integration: an East African documentary (Nairobi, 1968), pp. 224–29.Google Scholar
Page 186 note 1 Ministerial Meeting of the Group of 77, The Declaration and Objectives of the Meeting at Lima (Geneva, 1971), p. 87.Google Scholar
Page 187 note 1 U.N.C.T.A.D., Resolution on Restrictive Business Practices in Manufactures and SemiManufactures (Santiago), 15 05 1972, p. 2.Google Scholar
Page 187 note 2 U.N.C.T.A.D., Press Release (Geneva, mimeo.), 4 04 1973, pp. 1–5.Google Scholar
Page 188 note 1 Zammit, J. Ann, ‘UNCTAD III: End of an Illusion’, in Bulletin (Institute of Development Studies: Sussex University), V, 01 1973, p. 3.Google Scholar
Page 188 note 2 Michael Lipton, ‘UNCTAD’, in ibid. p. 30.
Page 188 note 3 Ibid. pp. 31–32.
Page 189 note 1 Dumont, René with Mazoyer, Marcel, Socialisms and Development (New York, 1973), p. 335.Google Scholar