Journal articles on the topic 'Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA)'

The preferential trade agreement of Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) was formed in 1982 with the objective of achieving deeper integration. In 1994 COMESA member states agreed to form a free trade agreement. The free trade agreement came into effect after nine member states ratified it. In 2004, Rwanda and Burundi joined the free trade agreement and increased the membership size to 11. In 2009 COMESA was transformed into a customs union. The purpose of the article is to analyse how formation of the COMESA customs union affects the current state of multiplicity of membership in Southern and Eastern African countries. The article argues that multiplicity of membership hinders deeper integration. Based on the assumption that deeper regional integration can play a role in the development project of Eastern and Southern African countries, the article tries to make a cursory review of the overlap of membership among COMESA, Southern African Development Community (SADC), Southern African Customs Union (SACU) and East African Community (EAC) states. It tries to draw policy choices of the way forward to end the multiplicity of membership. The analysis of this article is based on the percentile of each member state's rate of export. It is not a percentile of the total regional exports. Not all COMESA member states have been analysed in this article. The article mainly focuses on those COMESA member states that treat COMESA as their main trading block in Africa and that also have multiple memberships in SADC, SACU and EAC.

The author investigated the nature of institutional quality in the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) on the basis of voice and accountability political stability, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law and control of corruption. The author further investigated the existence of a link between institutional quality and factors of production. The results show that capital, entrepreneurship and foreign direct investment are the major determinants of production of tradable goods in COMESA. In exception of Mauritius and Namibia (currently no longer a member) the rest of COMESA member states have very poor institutional quality. This affects their ability to attract foreign direct investment hence production of tradable goods. Voice and accountability, government effectiveness, rule of law and political stability play a major role in increasing production of tradable goods in COMESA. Foreign direct investment is affected by voice and accountability, rule of law and political stability than any other factors. Availability of raw material is affected by government effectiveness, regulatory quality, political stability, voice and accountability and control of corruption. Capital is very sensitive to issues of voice and accountability and control of corruption and regulatory quality.

A rethink of the purpose of investment treaties is progressively leading to a paradigm shift. Whereas the traditional model of investment treaties has emphasised the protection of investments, we are witnessing a change in focus to the facilitation of investments. Simultaneously, there is a deliberate and conscious effort to restrict the scope of coverage of the standards of protection typically offered under such treaties. These developments in the international investment regime are discernible in the regional investment instruments concluded by the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the East African Community (EAC) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC). A corresponding move is also beginning to emerge at the national and bilateral levels. Cumulatively, these changes in investment instruments signal a developing trend in future investment agreements negotiated and concluded by COMESA, EAC and SADC Member States.

<p class="ber"><span lang="EN-GB">The purpose of this research paper is to investigate the level of financial market integration in the COMESA (The Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa) regional market over the period from January 2005 to December 2013 using monthly data. Due to data constraint, we select ten countries from the COMESA regional market that have relatively stable data. We also include two big international markets - China and the U.S. to assess the level of integration of the regional market with two of the key global market leaders. To analyze the long-run relationship among the markets, we use the Level-VAR procedure that was proposed by Toda and Yamamato (1995).</span></p><p class="ber"><span lang="EN-GB">Despite the establishment of NEPAD (The New Partnership for Africa’s Development) to promote free trade zone and regional integration, and the advent of structural adjustments, we find that the level of financial market integration in the COMESA regional market is not significant, and most of the markets are still fragmented. The financial market integration of the regional market (COMESA) with the two big international markets - China and the U.S. is not also significant to realize integration with the global market leaders.</span></p>

Economic integration efforts in Africa have been ongoing since the 1960s. In spite of the fact that judicial bodies – in the form of Courts and Tribunals – have been provided as key institutions in integration treaties, they have largely not been active in application of the treaties or addressing disputes within the economic blocs until after 2000. This was partly a result of the failure in the timely establishment of the Courts and Tribunals and partly a result of the absence or limited role of individuals and non-State entities in the integration process (and, under certain treaties, of the right of access to the Courts and Tribunals). In the past decade, mainly through protocols to the treaties, the role of individuals and non-State entities in integration has been greatly enhanced, including the grant of locus standi before the Courts and Tribunals. The recent decisions of the Courts and Tribunals under the regional economic integration blocs, especially the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the East African Community (EAC), the Economic Community for West African States (ECOWAS) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC), have addressed the role and locus standi of individuals and non-State entities that has significant implications for the future of economic integration processes in Africa.

This paper assessed the impact of foreign aid on agricultural productivity and growth in the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), using panel vector autoregressive methods. The results show a significant unidirectional causality from agricultural growth to foreign aid and thus confirming the theoretical dispositions of the developmental role of foreign aid. However, instead of complementing domestic resources in this regard, the results showed that foreign aid in the sector substitutes government financing, which effectively reduces its effectiveness. A mismatch in government resources and aid allocations to a sub-sector erodes the synergy that should typically exist between donor aid and government expenditure in a sector. A policy shift towards Result-Based (Aid on Delivery) approaches in aid disbursements will be critical to eliminating fungible resources. Misalignment of aid allocations that are inconsistent with the relative importance of subsectors in the sectoral development goals further undermines the potency of aid. A better understanding of the contribution of&nbsp;the various sub-sectors to the overall growth of the agriculture sector will be crucial for equitable resource allocation and enhanced aid effectiveness. Moreover, the higher impact of domestic resources compared to foreign aid calls for policies to increase domestic resource mobilization and a broader focus on reducing aid dependency.

Africa is currently commodity dependent in its global trade engagement particularly in agro-based sectors where it has strong presence. Therefore, an in depth analysis of the leather industry which is an important component of agri-business in the continent is discussed in this paper. The attempt takes cognizance of its key socio-economic aspects related to unemployment, wealth creation, rural development and gender parity. As such, the need for appropriate transformational strategies as prerequisite to the continent’s sustainable development initiatives are investigated. It is envisaged that these strategies will encompass sustainable models of translating the continent to product dependency and inculcate a diversified approach to the resultant value added products anticipated to have huge potential. The approach is to strengthen Africa’s regional value chain platform as a preamble to the global value chain entry which, for a long time has placed the continent towards commodity dependence. Whilst focusing on the regional value chains, relevant stratums of the leather sector are considered in this paper. This initiative encompasses depiction of Africa’s performance, innovation and developmental strides so far achieved. Major results indicate that low to medium level artisanal skills and long experienced practioners (5-30yrs) consolidates the continent’s strength. In addition, the existence of youthful entrepreneurs (aged 30-49) provides a solid ground for the transformational quest to be pursued in Africa. To actualize on this initiative, the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa-Leather and Leather Products Institute (COMESA-LLPI) in collaboration with The Common Wealth Secretariat (ComSec) has successfully established a regional design studio (RDS) whose objective is to promote value addition, increase productivity and competitiveness, market access, regional integration and incentivize the drive towards product diversification and regional value added product dependence. Thusly, the paper asserts that to attain this aspired position the approach has to be all encompassing, adopt a triple helix approach and operate on a strengthened regional value chain platform.

A study using quantitative analysis determined the performance of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) involved in the production of leather footwear and other leather products. The study was carried out in February 2014 in selected countries with no previous baseline studies related to SME’s associated with the leather sector. Therefore, the study covered Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Uganda and Zimbabwe. The main objective was to identify critical factors that undermine the growth of these SMEs’ with regard to turnover, employment, exports and profitability. Seventy-six SMEs were interviewed during the study period with data collection using a semi-structured questionnaire, visits to production units, discussion with key informants and involving a consultative review which encompassed different documents and reports. The outcome of the interview was then expressed as numerical attributes depicting various results of measured variables. For example, the demographic trends indicated average number of employees per SME ranged from 2.68 ±1.16 persons for Zimbabwe to 11.38 ±12.26 persons for Kenya with an overall average for all the sample countries standing at 5.5± 6.18 persons. The study further showed that Females represented more than one third of the employees in all the countries sampled. Production wise on average, SMEs produced 18.9 ±22.7 and 27.8 ±43.3 pairs per day for men and ladies shoes respectively. On the other hand the average output for School shoes and Sandals stood at, 26.5 ±33.5 and 25.5 ±21.3 respectively. The labour productivity per day was 3.4 pairs for men shoes, 5 pairs for ladies shoes, 4.8 pairs for school shoes and 4.6 pairs for sandals. Thus, the study demonstrated that based on average productivity of above ten pairs per person observed in India and China, the performance of the selected countries SMEs were dismal with respect to productivity. The lowered productivity meant the SMEs were uncompetitive and unable to meet market demand at the national and regional level. Mostly, their shortcomings were related to a plethora of challenges being faced by these SMEs where overall citations in decreasing order were lack of machineries, raw material problem (availability, cost and quality), financial problem (working capital) and market problem among others. Therefore, interventions that promote SMEs development need to address the stated challenges that the sector is currently facing in a holistic manner.

The promotion of international trade is seen as one of the important instruments to ensure development in developing nations and regions. The history of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the drafting of many regional and similar international trade agreements are evidence of this. The Southern African Development Community (SADC) is no exception.1 It is therefore strange that many states that are members of the WTO and actively encourage the opening up of international borders to free trade do not include public procurement2 in such free trade arrangements. This is particularly evident in developing states. If the WTO Government Procurement Agreement (GPA), which is a plurilateral agreement, is considered it is clear that many states do not wish to open their internal markets to competition in the public procurement sphere. It is therefore not surprising that public procurement has been described as the last rampart of state protectionism (Ky, 2012). Public procurement is an important segment of trade in any country (Arrowsmith & Davies, 1998). It is estimated that public procurement represents between 10% and 15% of the gross domestic product (GDP) of developed countries and up to 25% of GDP in developing states (Wittig, 1999). Unfortunately, governments often expect private industry to open up national markets for international competition but do not lead the way. Except for the limited use of pooled procurement,3 no specific provision is at present made for the harmonisation and integration of public procurement in the SADC. In view of the proximity of the member states, the interdependency of their economies and the benefits that can be derived from opening up their boundaries to regional competition in public procurement, the possibility of harmonisation and deeper integration in this sphere needs to be given more attention. The importance of public procurement in international trade and regional integration is twofold: first, it forms a substantial part of trade with the related economic and developmental implications; secondly, it is used by governments as an instrument to address socio-economic issues. Public procurement spending is also important because of its potential influence on human rights, including aspects such as the alleviation of poverty, the achievement of acceptable labour standards and environmental goals, and similar issues (McCrudden, 1999). In this article the need to harmonise public procurement in the SADC in order to open up public procurement to regional competition, some of the obstacles preventing this, and possible solutions are discussed. Reference is made to international instruments such as the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), the Model Law on Public Procurement and the GPA. In particular, the progress made in the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) with regard to the harmonisation of public procurement, which was based on the Model Law, will be used to suggest possible solutions to the problem of harmonising public procurement in the SADC.

This article traces the evolution of regional integration in East Africa, discussing its nature, scope, triumphs, and challenges. It reviews the Protocol on the Establishment of the East African Community Common Market (PEEACCM), which develops aspects of free movement policy that were implicit in earlier editions of the EAC regional integration. The article then addresses the several challenges that exist to free movement in the EAC as it endeavors to usher in the larger Southern and East Africa COMESA–EAC–SADC Tripartite Agreement and even wider continental-level coordination. It concludes that a managed migration policy rather than free movement might be more appropriate. Spanish Este artículo traza la evolución de la integración regional en África del Este, discutiendo su naturaleza, alcances, triunfos y desafíos. Se revisa el Protocolo para el Establecimiento del Mercado Común de la Comunidad de África del Este (conocido como Protocolo de Mercado Común), el cuál desarrolla aspectos de la política de libre circulación que estaban implícitas en las previas ediciones sucesivas a la integración regional en la Comunidad de África del Este (CAE). Posteriormente, el artículo aborda los diversos desafíos que existen para la libre circulación en la CAE en contraste con los esfuerzos de la misma CAE por ser la vanguardia en el amplio Acuerdo Tripartita COMESA-CAE-SADC, que abarca países del sur y del este de África, y en la coordinación a nivel continental aún más amplia. El autor llega a la conclusión de que una política de gestión de la migración en lugar de libre circulación podría ser más apropiada. French Cet article retrace l'évolution de l'intégration régionale en Afrique de l'Est (AE), en discutant de sa nature, de sa portée, des succès et des défis qui se posent à elle. Il examine le Protocole portant sur la création du Marché commun d'Afrique orientale communautaire (PEACCM en anglais), qui développe des aspects de la politique de libre circulation qui étaient implicites dans les éditions précédentes des accords d'intégration de l'AE. L'article aborde ensuite les nombreux défis qui se posent à la libre circulation dans la CAE, comment les CAE s'efforcent également d'inaugurer la plus grande Afrique australe et orientale de l'Accord tripartite COMESA-EAC-SADC et de la coordination encore plus large au niveau continental. Il conclut qu'une politique de gestion des migrations pourrait être plus appropriée que la libre circulation.

The paramount vision of every country or sub-regions is to attain economic growth and sustainable economic growth. The paradigm drift of studies into foreign aid and sustainable economic growth has shown conflicting results that play on researchers to fill the gap of knowledge void. The plurality of studies looked at economic growth and foreign aid in single countries. However, one of the major determinants of sustainable growth such as CO2 emissions and trade goes beyond the boundaries of a country. Deductively, grouped countries or sub-regional studies are needed to ascertain the heterogeneous relationship and cross-sectional dependency among panels grouping. We fill these gaps with the recent empirical methodology to unveil the impact of foreign aid, CO2 emissions, trade openness, and energy consumption on economic growth. Thus a percentage rise in foreign aid corresponds to different significant weights in all panel groupings with exception of Southern African Development Community, which unveiled a non-significant estimate. Whereas trade openness in all panel grouping indicated a significant weight on economic growth. An increase in CO2 emissions has a significant material effect on economic growth in Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa, Economic Community of West African States, and Community of Sahel-Saharan States. The impact of energy consumption on economic growth across the panel groupings was statistically significant with Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa having the highest weight impact. These results obtained in this study indicate that foreign aid, energy consumption, trade openness, and CO2 emissions are positively correlated with economic growth. Based on the finding, the significant of the policy implications suggested. (a) The need for a paradigm shift from fossil fuel sources to renewables is encouraged in the various trading blocs (b) The need to embrace carbon storage and capturing techniques to decouple pollutant emissions from economic growth on the continent’s growth trajectory.

AbstractThis article examines the rejection of the International Investor–State dispute (ISDS) system across the African continent and its replacement with a range of domestic and regional alternatives. It assesses the advantages of the two principal options for African countries: retaining the current ISDS system, or using local courts and regional tribunals. To this end, the dispute resolution mechanisms proposed in the Pan-African Investment Code, the 2016 Southern African Development Community Finance and Investment Protocol, the SADC model BIT, the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa, Economic Community of West African States and East African Community investment agreements and domestic approaches are critically examined. The argument is then advanced that African countries should not abandon ISDS because replacing it with isolated domestic or regional mechanisms does not reduce any of the risks. In particular, for foreign investors, the risk associated with the adjudication of investment disputes in potentially biased, politically influenced domestic courts may prove too high. African host nations, in turn, risk sending out the wrong message concerning their commitment to the protection of foreign investments. Instead of veering off course, perhaps the time has come for African States to display the political will to remain within the ISDS system and contribute to its reform from within.

The bright greenish yellow fluorescence (BGYF) test has been used with varying success in screening for aflatoxins in maize. This test was applied to 180 maize samples collected from different markets within 12 districts of Malawi in order to evaluate its performance against high performance liquid chromatographic analysis. The number of BGYF grains in 2.5 kg unground samples ranged from 0 to 35 and about 49% of all tested samples had aflatoxin concentrations ranging from 1 to 382 μg/kg. A total of 65 (36%) of the examined unground samples showed no BGYF. The European Commission recommends a false negative rate of less than 5% for a screening technique to be acceptable. In this study, four BGYF grains per 2.5 kg unground maize sample successfully indicated an aflatoxin contamination of >10 μg/kg (10 μg/kg being the maxium tolerable level proposed by the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa), with a 4.4% false negative rate. In this case, the amount of confirmatory analyses would be reduced by 63%, if the BGYF test was employed as a screening method. The screening technique therefore offers a practical tool for Malawi and possibly for the Sub-Saharan region.

Leaf rust, caused by Puccinia triticina, is a common and widespread disease of wheat in the US. On an annual basis, over 50 races of the leaf rust fungus are detected. There are at least 5 major groups of genetically distinct P. triticina isolates in the US based on allelic variation at microsatellite loci. Distinct regional race populations of P. triticina are found in the US, due to the widespread use of race-specific leaf rust resistance (Lr) genes in different market classes of wheat. In the south-eastern States where soft red winter wheats are grown, races with virulence to Lr9, Lr11, and Lr18 are predominant. In the southern Great Plains region where hard red winter wheats are grown, races with virulence to genes Lr9, Lr17, Lr24, and Lr26 are common. In the northern Great Plains region where hard red spring wheats are grown, races with virulence to Lr2a and Lr16 are common. Due to the wide dispersal of P. triticina, some races are found in all regions of the US. Highly effective durable resistance to leaf rust has been difficult to achieve due to the high degree of virulence variation in the P. triticina population and the rapid selection of races with virulence to effective Lr genes in wheat cultivars. Hard red spring wheat cultivars with genes Lr16, Lr23, and Lr34 have been highly resistant for more than 10 years in Minnesota and the Dakotas. Stem rust, caused by P. graminis f. sp. tritici, has not been a common disease of wheat in the US since the last major epidemics in the 1950s. The low levels of stem rust infections in the US can be attributed to the increasing use of highly resistant winter and spring wheat cultivars, which has greatly reduced the overall level of stem rust urediniospores. Eradication of the alternate host, Berberis vulgaris, has reduced the number of races and slowed the emergence of new races. Resistance genes Sr2, Sr6, Sr17, Sr24, Sr31, Sr36, and SrTmp are common in the winter wheats. Genes Sr6, Sr9b, Sr11, and Sr17 are common in the spring wheats. Spring wheat cultivars may also have adult plant stem rust resistance derived from cv. Thatcher. Many of the winter and spring wheats are susceptible to the new stem rust race from East Africa; however, cultivars with resistance to this race can be found in each of the major wheat classes.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to critically examine the move to Africanise international investment law (IIL) aimed at promoting sustainable development on the continent. Design/methodology/approach The study analyses the move by African countries to “Africanise” IIL by incorporating specific and innovative provisions and features in their international investment agreements (IIAs) for the benefit of African economies. This is evidenced by provisions in African regional investment instruments such as the 2007 Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa Investment Agreement and the 2008 Economic Community of West African States Supplementary Act on Investments produced by the different African regional economic communities (RECs), new-generation IIAs such as the 2016 Nigeria-Morocco IIA and the China-Tanzania IIA and the African Union’s Pan-African Investment Code 2016. The common features of these instruments include linking the objective of investment promotion and protection to sustainable development; excluding portfolio investments; including provisions on investor-obligations; and reserving wide scope of regulatory space for host-states, including the ability to take emergency measures without incurring liability to investors. Some of these provisions are rare in IIAs. Findings The study finds that, while the efforts are commendable, there are real challenges. Firstly, there are inconsistencies in the regimes existing on the continent due to differences in the contents of the international investment instruments promulgated by the different RECs, and also differences in the content of IIAs signed by some member-states of the RECs with countries external to the RECs. Secondly, there are governance gaps and a lack of enforcement in practice, which would undermine the effectiveness of the laws being forged. Thirdly, the Africanised IIL alone would not attract investment if other important determinants, such as critical infrastructure, remain lacking. Fourthly, there is under-representation of Africa in the arbitral institutions that develop and enrich the laws, which, if it continues, would undermine the effectiveness of the Africanisation provisions being included in IIAs. Research limitations/implications While the research discusses both law and policy, more is discussed of the law, owing to space limitation. Practical implications It is anticipated that this research will impact the content of the investment protocol under the African continental free trade area and beyond and will prompt review of existing and future IIAs by member states of the various RECs to align them for consistency. It is also hoped that this research will impact the review of various investment instruments of the RECs with the aim of harmonising them. It is further hoped that this research would contribute to addressing the challenges that militate against the achievement of the goals of Africanising ILL for sustainable development. Originality/value The study is original. It has not been published previously and the authors have found no existing publication that addresses the issues covered in this study.

AbstractThe Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) is a Free Trade Area (FTA) regional trade agreement in Africa. Currently, Ethiopia is negotiating to join COMESA FTA. This study assesses the impact of three regional trade arrangements, COMESA FTA, customs unions, and the European Partnership Agreement (EPA) on the economy of Ethiopia. The analysis is based on a static Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model, version 9 database. Unlike previous studies, the customs union scenarios are designed at the detailed Harmonized System (HS) level. COMESA FTA (scenario 1) with standard GTAP model results in a welfare loss for Ethiopia due to negative terms of trade and investment-saving effect, but with unemployment closure (scenario 2); Ethiopia enjoys a welfare gain mainly due to endowment effect. In scenario 3 (COMESA customs union) and scenario 4 (European Partnership Agreement), Ethiopia loses due to negative terms of trade and investment-saving effect. There is a large increase in demand for unskilled labor force in Ethiopia by around US$23 million, US$112 million, and US$43 million for scenario 2, 3, and 4 respectively. Moreover, there is a positive output effect for oilseeds, leather, and basic metals across all scenarios. The world, as a whole, enjoys welfare gains with COMESA FTA (scenario 1 and 2). However, with scenario 3 and 4, there is an overall welfare loss. There is no strong reason for Ethiopia to move to the customs union, and the EPA in the short run. Therefore, a transition period is necessary, but it is recommended for Ethiopia to join COMESA FTA.

Purpose The relationship between economic growth performance and achieving inclusive growth, especially concerning poverty rate, is a subject of continuous argument in economic literature. Although some argue that this relationship is deterministic, i.e. achieving economic growth will definitely reduce poverty and enhance inclusive growth, others believe that the relationship between growth and poverty is conditional, depends mainly on the status of income distribution in this country, i.e. if the growth is combined with a significant improve in distribution then it will reduce poverty. Design/methodology/approach Africa is a clear example of the nexus between economic growth and poverty reduction. Although many African countries manage to achieve relatively high growth rates, hit two digits in some cases, during the last decades, poverty still widely spread in those countries. Of the 30 poorest countries in the world, 24 are African countries. And about 50% of African people still live under the poverty line. Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), which could be considered as one of the fastest growing regions in Africa, is not an exception; although the region achieves relatively high growth rates, poverty and inequality are still among the region’s main development challenges. Findings This paper found that the economic growth rate achieved in COMESA countries could not be considered as inclusive growth as it does not combine with adequate enhancement in inclusiveness indicators. And that the structural characteristics of those countries economy and its inelasticity are the main reasons behind this inefficiency. Originality/value In this context, this paper aims to evaluate the effectiveness of economic growth achieved in COMESA countries in achieving inclusive growth and to identify the main factors affecting this relationship by using two steps data envelopment analysis. Although this method is originally developed to evaluate the relative economic efficiencies, the main contribution of this paper is the adaptation of data envelopment analysis to evaluate the efficiency of economic growth achieved in COMESA countries in enhancing inclusive growth dimensions such as poverty rate, inequality, unemployment, education, health, and then to identify in its second step the main indicators that could be used to explain the variation in efficiency scores.

The Rio+20 outcomes document, the Future We Want, enshrines green economy as one of the platforms to attain sustainable development and calls for measures that seek to address climate change and biodiversity management. This paper audits climate change policies from selected east and southern African countries to determine the extent to which climate change legislation mainstreams biodiversity and wildlife management. A scan of international, continental, regional and national climate change policies was conducted to assess whether they include biodiversity and/or wildlife management issues. The key finding is that many climate change policy–related documents, particularly the National Adaptation Programme of Actions (NAPAs), address threats to biodiversity and wildlife resources. However, international policies like the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and Kyoto Protocol do not address the matter under deliberation. Regional climate change policies such as the East African Community, Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa and African Union address biodiversity and/or wildlife issues whilst the Southern African Development Community region does not have a stand-alone policy for climate change. Progressive countries like Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania and Zambia have recently put in place detailed NAPAs which are mainstream responsive strategies intended to address climate change adaptation in the wildlife sector.Keywords: mainstreaming, biodiversity, wildlife, climate change policy, east and southern Africa

Although I'm a rich white guy, I'm also a feminist anti-racism activist who fights for the rights of the poor and oppressed. (Carl Kenner)Systemic bias is a scourge to the pillar of neutrality. (Cerejota)Count me in. Let's leave the bias to the mainstream media. (Orcar967)Because this is so important. (CuttingEdge)These are a handful of comments posted by online editors who have banded together in a virtual coalition to combat Western bias on the world’s largest digital encyclopedia, Wikipedia. This collective action by Wikipedians both acknowledges the inherent inequalities of a user-controlled information project like Wikpedia and highlights the potential for progressive change within that same project. These community members are taking the responsibility of social change into their own hands (or more aptly, their own keyboards).In recent years much research has emerged on Wikipedia from varying fields, ranging from computer science, to business and information systems, to the social sciences. While critical at times of Wikipedia’s growth, governance, and influence, most of this work observes with optimism that barriers to improvement are not firmly structural, but rather they are socially constructed, leaving open the possibility of important and lasting change for the better.WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias (WP:CSB) considers one such collective effort. Close to 350 editors have signed on to the project, which began in 2004 and itself emerged from a similar project named CROSSBOW, or the “Committee Regarding Overcoming Serious Systemic Bias on Wikipedia.” As a WikiProject, the term used for a loose group of editors who collaborate around a particular topic, these editors work within the Wikipedia site and collectively create a social network that is unified around one central aim—representing the un- and underrepresented—and yet they are bound by no particular unified set of interests. The first stage of a multi-method study, this paper looks at a snapshot of WP:CSB’s activity from both content analysis and social network perspectives to discover “who” geographically this coalition of the unrepresented is inserting into the digital annals of Wikipedia.Wikipedia and WikipediansDeveloped in 2001 by Internet entrepreneur Jimmy Wales and academic Larry Sanger, Wikipedia is an online collaborative encyclopedia hosting articles in nearly 250 languages (Cohen). The English-language Wikipedia contains over 3.2 million articles, each of which is created, edited, and updated solely by users (Wikipedia “Welcome”). At the time of this study, Alexa, a website tracking organisation, ranked Wikipedia as the 6th most accessed site on the Internet. Unlike the five sites ahead of it though—Google, Facebook, Yahoo, YouTube (owned by Google), and live.com (owned by Microsoft)—all of which are multibillion-dollar businesses that deal more with information aggregation than information production, Wikipedia is a non-profit that operates on less than $500,000 a year and staffs only a dozen paid employees (Lih). Wikipedia is financed and supported by the WikiMedia Foundation, a charitable umbrella organisation with an annual budget of $4.6 million, mainly funded by donations (Middleton).Wikipedia editors and contributors have the option of creating a user profile and participating via a username, or they may participate anonymously, with only an IP address representing their actions. Despite the option for total anonymity, many Wikipedians have chosen to visibly engage in this online community (Ayers, Matthews, and Yates; Bruns; Lih), and researchers across disciplines are studying the motivations of these new online collectives (Kane, Majchrzak, Johnson, and Chenisern; Oreg and Nov). The motivations of open source software contributors, such as UNIX programmers and programming groups, have been shown to be complex and tied to both extrinsic and intrinsic rewards, including online reputation, self-satisfaction and enjoyment, and obligation to a greater common good (Hertel, Niedner, and Herrmann; Osterloh and Rota). Investigation into why Wikipedians edit has indicated multiple motivations as well, with community engagement, task enjoyment, and information sharing among the most significant (Schroer and Hertel). Additionally, Wikipedians seem to be taking up the cause of generativity (a concern for the ongoing health and openness of the Internet’s infrastructures) that Jonathan Zittrain notably called for in The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It. Governance and ControlAlthough the technical infrastructure of Wikipedia is built to support and perhaps encourage an equal distribution of power on the site, Wikipedia is not a land of “anything goes.” The popular press has covered recent efforts by the site to reduce vandalism through a layer of editorial review (Cohen), a tightening of control cited as a possible reason for the recent dip in the number of active editors (Edwards). A number of regulations are already in place that prevent the open editing of certain articles and pages, such as the site’s disclaimers and pages that have suffered large amounts of vandalism. Editing wars can also cause temporary restrictions to editing, and Ayers, Matthews, and Yates point out that these wars can happen anywhere, even to Burt Reynold’s page.Academic studies have begun to explore the governance and control that has developed in the Wikipedia community, generally highlighting how order is maintained not through particular actors, but through established procedures and norms. Konieczny tested whether Wikipedia’s evolution can be defined by Michels’ Iron Law of Oligopoly, which predicts that the everyday operations of any organisation cannot be run by a mass of members, and ultimately control falls into the hands of the few. Through exploring a particular WikiProject on information validation, he concludes:There are few indicators of an oligarchy having power on Wikipedia, and few trends of a change in this situation. The high level of empowerment of individual Wikipedia editors with regard to policy making, the ease of communication, and the high dedication to ideals of contributors succeed in making Wikipedia an atypical organization, quite resilient to the Iron Law. (189)Butler, Joyce, and Pike support this assertion, though they emphasise that instead of oligarchy, control becomes encapsulated in a wide variety of structures, policies, and procedures that guide involvement with the site. A virtual “bureaucracy” emerges, but one that should not be viewed with the negative connotation often associated with the term.Other work considers control on Wikipedia through the framework of commons governance, where “peer production depends on individual action that is self-selected and decentralized rather than hierarchically assigned. Individuals make their own choices with regard to resources managed as a commons” (Viegas, Wattenberg and McKeon). The need for quality standards and quality control largely dictate this commons governance, though interviewing Wikipedians with various levels of responsibility revealed that policies and procedures are only as good as those who maintain them. Forte, Larco, and Bruckman argue “the Wikipedia community has remained healthy in large part due to the continued presence of ‘old-timers’ who carry a set of social norms and organizational ideals with them into every WikiProject, committee, and local process in which they take part” (71). Thus governance on Wikipedia is a strong representation of a democratic ideal, where actors and policies are closely tied in their evolution. Transparency, Content, and BiasThe issue of transparency has proved to be a double-edged sword for Wikipedia and Wikipedians. The goal of a collective body of knowledge created by all—the “expert” and the “amateur”—can only be upheld if equal access to page creation and development is allotted to everyone, including those who prefer anonymity. And yet this very option for anonymity, or even worse, false identities, has been a sore subject for some in the Wikipedia community as well as a source of concern for some scholars (Santana and Wood). The case of a 24-year old college dropout who represented himself as a multiple Ph.D.-holding theology scholar and edited over 16,000 articles brought these issues into the public spotlight in 2007 (Doran; Elsworth). Wikipedia itself has set up standards for content that include expectations of a neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and the publishing of no original research, but Santana and Wood argue that self-policing of these policies is not adequate:The principle of managerial discretion requires that every actor act from a sense of duty to exercise moral autonomy and choice in responsible ways. When Wikipedia’s editors and administrators remain anonymous, this criterion is simply not met. It is assumed that everyone is behaving responsibly within the Wikipedia system, but there are no monitoring or control mechanisms to make sure that this is so, and there is ample evidence that it is not so. (141) At the theoretical level, some downplay these concerns of transparency and autonomy as logistical issues in lieu of the potential for information systems to support rational discourse and emancipatory forms of communication (Hansen, Berente, and Lyytinen), but others worry that the questionable “realities” created on Wikipedia will become truths once circulated to all areas of the Web (Langlois and Elmer). With the number of articles on the English-language version of Wikipedia reaching well into the millions, the task of mapping and assessing content has become a tremendous endeavour, one mostly taken on by information systems experts. Kittur, Chi, and Suh have used Wikipedia’s existing hierarchical categorisation structure to map change in the site’s content over the past few years. Their work revealed that in early 2008 “Culture and the arts” was the most dominant category of content on Wikipedia, representing nearly 30% of total content. People (15%) and geographical locations (14%) represent the next largest categories, while the natural and physical sciences showed the greatest increase in volume between 2006 and 2008 (+213%D, with “Culture and the arts” close behind at +210%D). This data may indicate that contributing to Wikipedia, and thus spreading knowledge, is growing amongst the academic community while maintaining its importance to the greater popular culture-minded community. Further work by Kittur and Kraut has explored the collaborative process of content creation, finding that too many editors on a particular page can reduce the quality of content, even when a project is well coordinated.Bias in Wikipedia content is a generally acknowledged and somewhat conflicted subject (Giles; Johnson; McHenry). The Wikipedia community has created numerous articles and pages within the site to define and discuss the problem. Citing a survey conducted by the University of Würzburg, Germany, the “Wikipedia:Systemic bias” page describes the average Wikipedian as:MaleTechnically inclinedFormally educatedAn English speakerWhiteAged 15-49From a majority Christian countryFrom a developed nationFrom the Northern HemisphereLikely a white-collar worker or studentBias in content is thought to be perpetuated by this demographic of contributor, and the “founder effect,” a concept from genetics, linking the original contributors to this same demographic has been used to explain the origins of certain biases. Wikipedia’s “About” page discusses the issue as well, in the context of the open platform’s strengths and weaknesses:in practice editing will be performed by a certain demographic (younger rather than older, male rather than female, rich enough to afford a computer rather than poor, etc.) and may, therefore, show some bias. Some topics may not be covered well, while others may be covered in great depth. No educated arguments against this inherent bias have been advanced.Royal and Kapila’s study of Wikipedia content tested some of these assertions, finding identifiable bias in both their purposive and random sampling. They conclude that bias favoring larger countries is positively correlated with the size of the country’s Internet population, and corporations with larger revenues work in much the same way, garnering more coverage on the site. The researchers remind us that Wikipedia is “more a socially produced document than a value-free information source” (Royal & Kapila).WikiProject: Countering Systemic BiasAs a coalition of current Wikipedia editors, the WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias (WP:CSB) attempts to counter trends in content production and points of view deemed harmful to the democratic ideals of a valueless, open online encyclopedia. WP:CBS’s mission is not one of policing the site, but rather deepening it:Generally, this project concentrates upon remedying omissions (entire topics, or particular sub-topics in extant articles) rather than on either (1) protesting inappropriate inclusions, or (2) trying to remedy issues of how material is presented. Thus, the first question is "What haven't we covered yet?", rather than "how should we change the existing coverage?" (Wikipedia, “Countering”)The project lays out a number of content areas lacking adequate representation, geographically highlighting the dearth in coverage of Africa, Latin America, Asia, and parts of Eastern Europe. WP:CSB also includes a “members” page that editors can sign to show their support, along with space to voice their opinions on the problem of bias on Wikipedia (the quotations at the beginning of this paper are taken from this “members” page). At the time of this study, 329 editors had self-selected and self-identified as members of WP:CSB, and this group constitutes the population sample for the current study. To explore the extent to which WP:CSB addressed these self-identified areas for improvement, each editor’s last 50 edits were coded for their primary geographical country of interest, as well as the conceptual category of the page itself (“P” for person/people, “L” for location, “I” for idea/concept, “T” for object/thing, or “NA” for indeterminate). For example, edits to the Wikipedia page for a single person like Tony Abbott (Australian federal opposition leader) were coded “Australia, P”, while an edit for a group of people like the Manchester United football team would be coded “England, P”. Coding was based on information obtained from the header paragraphs of each article’s Wikipedia page. After coding was completed, corresponding information on each country’s associated continent was added to the dataset, based on the United Nations Statistics Division listing.A total of 15,616 edits were coded for the study. Nearly 32% (n = 4962) of these edits were on articles for persons or people (see Table 1 for complete coding results). From within this sub-sample of edits, a majority of the people (68.67%) represented are associated with North America and Europe (Figure A). If we break these statistics down further, nearly half of WP:CSB’s edits concerning people were associated with the United States (36.11%) and England (10.16%), with India (3.65%) and Australia (3.35%) following at a distance. These figures make sense for the English-language Wikipedia; over 95% of the population in the three Westernised countries speak English, and while India is still often regarded as a developing nation, its colonial British roots and the emergence of a market economy with large, technology-driven cities are logical explanations for its representation here (and some estimates make India the largest English-speaking nation by population on the globe today).Table A Coding Results Total Edits 15616 (I) Ideas 2881 18.45% (L) Location 2240 14.34% NA 333 2.13% (T) Thing 5200 33.30% (P) People 4962 31.78% People by Continent Africa 315 6.35% Asia 827 16.67% Australia 175 3.53% Europe 1411 28.44% NA 110 2.22% North America 1996 40.23% South America 128 2.58% The areas of the globe of main concern to WP:CSB proved to be much less represented by the coalition itself. Asia, far and away the most populous continent with more than 60% of the globe’s people (GeoHive), was represented in only 16.67% of edits. Africa (6.35%) and South America (2.58%) were equally underrepresented compared to both their real-world populations (15% and 9% of the globe’s population respectively) and the aforementioned dominance of the advanced Westernised areas. However, while these percentages may seem low, in aggregate they do meet the quota set on the WP:CSB Project Page calling for one out of every twenty edits to be “a subject that is systematically biased against the pages of your natural interests.” By this standard, the coalition is indeed making headway in adding content that strategically counterbalances the natural biases of Wikipedia’s average editor.Figure ASocial network analysis allows us to visualise multifaceted data in order to identify relationships between actors and content (Vego-Redondo; Watts). Similar to Davis’s well-known sociological study of Southern American socialites in the 1930s (Scott), our Wikipedia coalition can be conceptualised as individual actors united by common interests, and a network of relations can be constructed with software such as UCINET. A mapping algorithm that considers both the relationship between all sets of actors and each actor to the overall collective structure produces an image of our network. This initial network is bimodal, as both our Wikipedia editors and their edits (again, coded for country of interest) are displayed as nodes (Figure B). Edge-lines between nodes represents a relationship, and here that relationship is the act of editing a Wikipedia article. We see from our network that the “U.S.” and “England” hold central positions in the network, with a mass of editors crowding around them. A perimeter of nations is then held in place by their ties to editors through the U.S. and England, with a second layer of editors and poorly represented nations (Gabon, Laos, Uzbekistan, etc.) around the boundaries of the network.Figure BWe are reminded from this visualisation both of the centrality of the two Western powers even among WP:CSB editoss, and of the peripheral nature of most other nations in the world. But we also learn which editors in the project are contributing most to underrepresented areas, and which are less “tied” to the Western core. Here we see “Wizzy” and “Warofdreams” among the second layer of editors who act as a bridge between the core and the periphery; these are editors with interests in both the Western and marginalised nations. Located along the outer edge, “Gallador” and “Gerrit” have no direct ties to the U.S. or England, concentrating all of their edits on less represented areas of the globe. Identifying editors at these key positions in the network will help with future research, informing interview questions that will investigate their interests further, but more significantly, probing motives for participation and action within the coalition.Additionally, we can break the network down further to discover editors who appear to have similar interests in underrepresented areas. Figure C strips down the network to only editors and edits dealing with Africa and South America, the least represented continents. From this we can easily find three types of editors again: those who have singular interests in particular nations (the outermost layer of editors), those who have interests in a particular region (the second layer moving inward), and those who have interests in both of these underrepresented regions (the center layer in the figure). This last group of editors may prove to be the most crucial to understand, as they are carrying the full load of WP:CSB’s mission.Figure CThe End of Geography, or the Reclamation?In The Internet Galaxy, Manuel Castells writes that “the Internet Age has been hailed as the end of geography,” a bold suggestion, but one that has gained traction over the last 15 years as the excitement for the possibilities offered by information communication technologies has often overshadowed structural barriers to participation like the Digital Divide (207). Castells goes on to amend the “end of geography” thesis by showing how global information flows and regional Internet access rates, while creating a new “map” of the world in many ways, is still closely tied to power structures in the analog world. The Internet Age: “redefines distance but does not cancel geography” (207). The work of WikiProject: Countering Systemic Bias emphasises the importance of place and representation in the information environment that continues to be constructed in the online world. This study looked at only a small portion of this coalition’s efforts (~16,000 edits)—a snapshot of their labor frozen in time—which itself is only a minute portion of the information being dispatched through Wikipedia on a daily basis (~125,000 edits). Further analysis of WP:CSB’s work over time, as well as qualitative research into the identities, interests and motivations of this collective, is needed to understand more fully how information bias is understood and challenged in the Internet galaxy. The data here indicates this is a fight worth fighting for at least a growing few.ReferencesAlexa. “Top Sites.” Alexa.com, n.d. 10 Mar. 2010 ‹http://www.alexa.com/topsites>. Ayers, Phoebe, Charles Matthews, and Ben Yates. How Wikipedia Works: And How You Can Be a Part of It. San Francisco, CA: No Starch, 2008.Bruns, Axel. Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond: From Production to Produsage. New York: Peter Lang, 2008.Butler, Brian, Elisabeth Joyce, and Jacqueline Pike. Don’t Look Now, But We’ve Created a Bureaucracy: The Nature and Roles of Policies and Rules in Wikipedia. Paper presented at 2008 CHI Annual Conference, Florence.Castells, Manuel. The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2001.Cohen, Noam. “Wikipedia.” New York Times, n.d. 12 Mar. 2010 ‹http://www.nytimes.com/info/wikipedia/>. Doran, James. “Wikipedia Chief Promises Change after ‘Expert’ Exposed as Fraud.” The Times, 6 Mar. 2007 ‹http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article1480012.ece>. Edwards, Lin. “Report Claims Wikipedia Losing Editors in Droves.” Physorg.com, 30 Nov 2009. 12 Feb. 2010 ‹http://www.physorg.com/news178787309.html>. Elsworth, Catherine. “Fake Wikipedia Prof Altered 20,000 Entries.” London Telegraph, 6 Mar. 2007 ‹http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1544737/Fake-Wikipedia-prof-altered-20000-entries.html>. Forte, Andrea, Vanessa Larco, and Amy Bruckman. “Decentralization in Wikipedia Governance.” Journal of Management Information Systems 26 (2009): 49-72.Giles, Jim. “Internet Encyclopedias Go Head to Head.” Nature 438 (2005): 900-901.Hansen, Sean, Nicholas Berente, and Kalle Lyytinen. “Wikipedia, Critical Social Theory, and the Possibility of Rational Discourse.” The Information Society 25 (2009): 38-59.Hertel, Guido, Sven Niedner, and Stefanie Herrmann. “Motivation of Software Developers in Open Source Projects: An Internet-Based Survey of Contributors to the Linex Kernel.” Research Policy 32 (2003): 1159-1177.Johnson, Bobbie. “Rightwing Website Challenges ‘Liberal Bias’ of Wikipedia.” The Guardian, 1 Mar. 2007. 8 Mar. 2010 ‹http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2007/mar/01/wikipedia.news>. Kane, Gerald C., Ann Majchrzak, Jeremaih Johnson, and Lily Chenisern. A Longitudinal Model of Perspective Making and Perspective Taking within Fluid Online Collectives. Paper presented at the 2009 International Conference on Information Systems, Phoenix, AZ, 2009.Kittur, Aniket, Ed H. Chi, and Bongwon Suh. What’s in Wikipedia? Mapping Topics and Conflict Using Socially Annotated Category Structure. Paper presented at the 2009 CHI Annual Conference, Boston, MA.———, and Robert E. Kraut. Harnessing the Wisdom of Crowds in Wikipedia: Quality through Collaboration. Paper presented at the 2008 Association for Computing Machinery’s Computer Supported Cooperative Work Annual Conference, San Diego, CA.Konieczny, Piotr. “Governance, Organization, and Democracy on the Internet: The Iron Law and the Evolution of Wikipedia.” Sociological Forum 24 (2009): 162-191.———. “Wikipedia: Community or Social Movement?” Interface: A Journal for and about Social Movements 1 (2009): 212-232.Langlois, Ganaele, and Greg Elmer. “Wikipedia Leeches? The Promotion of Traffic through a Collaborative Web Format.” New Media & Society 11 (2009): 773-794.Lih, Andrew. The Wikipedia Revolution. New York, NY: Hyperion, 2009.McHenry, Robert. “The Real Bias in Wikipedia: A Response to David Shariatmadari.” OpenDemocracy.com 2006. 8 Mar. 2010 ‹http://www.opendemocracy.net/media-edemocracy/wikipedia_bias_3621.jsp>. Middleton, Chris. “The World of Wikinomics.” Computer Weekly, 20 Jan. 2009: 22-26.Oreg, Shaul, and Oded Nov. “Exploring Motivations for Contributing to Open Source Initiatives: The Roles of Contribution, Context and Personal Values.” Computers in Human Behavior 24 (2008): 2055-2073.Osterloh, Margit and Sandra Rota. “Trust and Community in Open Source Software Production.” Analyse & Kritik 26 (2004): 279-301.Royal, Cindy, and Deepina Kapila. “What’s on Wikipedia, and What’s Not…?: Assessing Completeness of Information.” Social Science Computer Review 27 (2008): 138-148.Santana, Adele, and Donna J. Wood. “Transparency and Social Responsibility Issues for Wikipedia.” Ethics of Information Technology 11 (2009): 133-144.Schroer, Joachim, and Guido Hertel. “Voluntary Engagement in an Open Web-Based Encyclopedia: Wikipedians and Why They Do It.” Media Psychology 12 (2009): 96-120.Scott, John. Social Network Analysis. London: Sage, 1991.Vego-Redondo, Fernando. Complex Social Networks. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007.Viegas, Fernanda B., Martin Wattenberg, and Matthew M. McKeon. “The Hidden Order of Wikipedia.” Online Communities and Social Computing (2007): 445-454.Watts, Duncan. Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 2003Wikipedia. “About.” n.d. 8 Mar. 2010 ‹http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About>. ———. “Welcome to Wikipedia.” n.d. 8 Mar. 2010 ‹http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page>.———. “Wikiproject:Countering Systemic Bias.” n.d. 12 Feb. 2010 ‹http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias#Members>. Zittrain, Jonathan. The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 2008.