Rwanda: a puzzling tale of growth and political repression – get the data
Twenty years after the 1994 genocide that claimed the lives of 800,000 people, much of the international commentary about Rwanda swings between extremes – astonishment at the country’s dramatic public health and economic success, and condemnation of alleged political repression under President Paul Kagame.
Development indicators tell a story of significant changes in education, public health and the economy – Rwandans are living longer and are better off economically than 20 years ago – but extreme poverty remains a reality for more than 60% of the population.
Nearly 620,000 tourists visted Rwanda in 2010, according to World Bank figures – just short of a sixfold increase on the 105,000 recorded in 2000. Major retail chains have also set up shop in the capital, Kigali, as have several commercial banks.
Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and the World Bank have sung Rwanda’s praises. Last year, corporate consultants Andrea Redmond and Patricia Crisafulli described the forutnes of the country as the ultimate turnaround. Their book, Rwanda Inc, was described by one reviewer as “an extended investment brochure“.
But human rights activists maintain that Rwanda too often suppresses political opposition and free speech. The government’s alleged role in the conflict in the neighbouring Democratic Republic of the Congo has also drawn condemnation.
The ability of regimes criticised for human rights abuses to achieve notable social and economic gains poses difficult questions for development experts. Last month, the New York University economist William Easterly argued that observers tended to give too much credit to leaders for development gains when progress might have happened despite their rule, rather than because of it.
Below, we have pulled out the data on key social and economic development indicators from the World Bank’s database. Take a look at what some of the official statistics reveal about what has changed in Rwanda over the past two decades, and let us know what you think is missing in the comment thread below.
Population
Rwanda is a tiny country, with fewer than 11.5 million people. This places it between Guinea and Chad on the population league tables – just slightly ahead of Greece, which is home to 11.3 million people. Life expectancy has risen from fewer than 48 years in 2000 to more than 62 in 2011, but, since the 1980s, the proportion of under-15s has remained relatively stable at 40-50%.
Population density has skyrocketed, however: in 1980, there were an estimated 208 people per sq km; in 1995, that figure was 230, and by 2011 it was 452. Rwanda is also increasingly urban – in 2012, almost 20% of the population lived in urban areas, compared with 8% in 1995 and 5% in 1980.
Economy
For years, Rwanda’s impressive GDP growth – often approximately 8% – has made economists sit up and take notice. At the same time, GDP per capita, when adjusted for purchasing power, has grown from $575 in 1995 to almost $1,170 in 2012.
Poverty has fallen, but an estimated 63% of Rwandans continue to live on less than the equivalent of $1.25 a day and 82% on less than $2. In 2011, the top 10% of the population took home 43% of the country’s income.
Foreign aid
Rwanda has often been labelled a donor darling and foreign aid accounted for 20% of the country’s gross national income in 2011, with Rwandans receiving $113 a head.
But this does not mean it takes orders from rich countries. The former head of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s development assistance committee, Richard Manning, said that regardless of what you thought about Rwanda, you could not accuse it of being shy about standing up to donors.
“My thesis for a long time has been that no country will develop successfully unless it is prepared to say no to donors,” Manning said. “Just because you are dependent on aid doesn’t mean you have to have a dependent mentality. I think that’s the crucial thing. It’s very clear that the Rwandan government, whether you like it or not, has a very clear view on how Rwanda should develop, and it expects donors to fit into that.”
Health and education
Rwanda is often praised for its success on key health indicators. Deaths of under-fives have fallen from 230 per 1,000 live births in 1998 to 55 in 2012. Infant mortality has also plummeted – from 120 deaths per 1,000 live births in 1998 to fewer than 40 in 2012.
Rwanda spends huge proportions of its national budget on health and education, according to World Bank statistics. In 2011, almost 24% of total government expenditure went to health and 17% to education.
Women and girls
Rwanda tops the global league tables for the percentage of female parliamentarians. Fewer than 22% of MPs worldwide are women; in Rwanda, almost 64% are.
Women have also outnumbered men as primary school teachers. At secondary school, however, fewer than 28% of teachers are women (compared with 21% in 2000). In higher education, only 16% of teachers are women (compared with 10% in 1999 and 5% in 1990).
What do you think?
No set of statistics can fully capture the changes a country and its citizens have experienced – and top-line data can sometimes hide as much as they reveal. If you live, or have lived, in Rwanda, we want to hear from you. How do these figures match your experiences? What do you think is missing? Post your comment in the thread below or tell us on Twitter @GdnDevelopment.
The full data is below. What can you do with it?
Source: The Guardian
