Zambia: Emergence of the mixed economy and the one-party state (1964-1974)

Updated January 2006

Zambia became independent on October 24, 1964, with Kenneth Kaunda as its first president (US State Department 2005, Columbia Encyclopedia 2005). Even prior to independence the government was forced to deal with two crises. The first was created by a rebellion of the Lumpa Church led by its prophetess, Alice Lenshina. The government suppressed the rebellion with force and about 700 people were killed (Lambert Undated, Van Binsbergen 2001). The second turned on the status of the Lozi kingdom in Barotseland. Fearing the loss of autonomy it had enjoyed in the colonial period, Barotseland threatened secession and the fears of the Lozi were put to rest only by a treaty between the National and Barotseland governments guaranteeing autonomy to the Western Province. The agreement was eroded through legislation in the 1960's and finally abrogated in 1969 (Sumbwa 2000).

The government drew up a plan for the period 1965-69 aimed at developing the country's infrastructure and human resources. The end was the diversification of the economy away from its reliance on the mining industry and reducing the importance expatriate skill through the training of Zambian to take their place. The plan envisaged a free market driven private sector alongside a massive expansion of the public sector to improve healthcare and education. (Lambert Undated, Columbia Encyclopedia 2005). Diversification was to be driven by import substitution and financed by growing copper export revenues. The focus was thus on mining and industry in the urban areas and neglected the contribution that agriculture could make to the growth of economy (Thurlow & Wobst 2004).

The consequence was an influx of foreign investment in mining and an expansion in the mining industry along with a modest rise in per capita income. This did not translate into a rise in income for the population as a whole and inequality increased while living standards for the poor, especially, decreased (Mwanawina & Mulungushi 2002). Over time the government became increasingly interventionist as it attempted to redress the income imbalances wrought by the markets: "The government introduced restrictive fiscal and monetary policy instruments aimed at regulating most economic activities like price controls of essential commodities, interest rate, exchange rate and wage rate controls, regulations governing the borrowing of financial resources and remittance of profits" (Mwanawina & Mulungushi 2002).

Investment in education resulted in an improvement in education at lower levels with the number of children in primary school doubling and the number in secondary schools increasing more than four-fold between 1964 and 1972. However, the expansion of the civil service was not rationally pursued, with jobs been granted on the basis of loyalty and personal connections rather than of expertise and skills. The consequence was a massive drain on state resources on salaries without a concomitant return in outcomes desired (Lambert Undated).

As far as its white dominated neighbours to the south were concerned, the sympathies of the government lay with the various nationalist groups that were struggling to end minority domination and the government lent its active support to these groups. This drew the government into increasing conflict with the economically more powerful Southern Rhodesia and South Africa (US State Department 2005). After Southern Rhodesia declared independence of Britain unilaterally in 1965, Zambia joined the economic boycott at great cost to its economy, for Rhodesia (as it styled itself) retaliated by cutting off fuel supplies. Rationing was introduced and measures taken to secure imports through Tanzania. A pipeline was laid in 1968 and a railway completed with Chinese assistance in 1974 (Lambert Undated, Columbia Encyclopedia 2005, US State Department 2005).

The trend towards greater state involvement in the economy was justified by Kaunda in 1967 with his philosophy of Humanism, based on traditional African ideas, Christianity and Socialism (Lambert Undated). The 1968 elections were fought on by parties that were essentially ethnically based and the election campaign was marked by violence and intimidation. The opposition almost doubled the proportion of seats it held from the previous election. Moreover the ruling party was itself riven by ethnic based factionalism (Lodge et al 2002).

In 1969 Kaunda nationalized the mining companies, to form Zambia Consolidated Copper Mines Ltd, as well as banks and other large firms by taking a 51% shareholding for the state (Hansungule et al 1998, Columbia Encyclopedia 2005). The state was not able to manage these enterprises effectively and productivity and profitability fell. Moreover there was an increasing scarcity of capital as foreign entrepreneurs, alarmed by these measures, disinvested and channeled their resources elsewhere (Andreasson 2001).

The issue of ethnicity reemerged in 1972 when a close associate of Kaunda resigned from UNIP, alleging unfair treatment of the Bemba people, and formed the United Progressive Party (UPP). More over increasing dissatisfaction was expressed in student and labour circles over the increasingly authoritarian style of governance by UNIP (Lodge et al 2002, Columbia Encyclopedia 2005). Faced by resurgent opposition that was increasingly tribal based, the UNIP decided to introduce a one-party state. A one-party state was declared in December 1972 and opposition leaders were induced by patronage to join the ruling party; those who refused were imprisoned. Within the government itself, frequent shuffling of the cabinet took place so that no leader in UNIP could challenge Kaunda (Lambert Undated, Lodge et al 2002, Columbia Encyclopedia 2005).

The 1973 elections were conducted under the new one-party regime. Changes were made to the UNIP constitution to prevent opposition leaders forcibly absorbed into the party from contesting power within the party. Kaunda was thus able to run unopposed for the presidency. Although several candidates were permitted, party control over the election process was tightened up and a more rigid party discipline was imposed. Further elections in 1978 and 1983 followed the same pattern (Lodge et al 2002).

References

ANDREASSON, S 2001 "Divergent Paths of Development: The Modern World-System and Democratization in South Africa and Zambia", Journal of World-Systems Research, 7(2), fall, 175-223, http://jwsr.ucr.edu/archive/vol7/number2/pdf/jwsr-v7n2-andreasson.pdf [PDF document, opens new window] (accessed 9 Mar 2010).

COLUMBIA ENCYCLOPEDIA 2005, "Zambia", Sixth Edition, [www] http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-Zambia.html [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

HANSUNGULE, M, FEENEY, P & PALMER, R 1998 "Report on Land Tenure Insecurity on the Zambian Copper Belt", Oxfam GB in Zambia, [www] http://www.oxfam.co.uk/what_we_do/issues/livelihoods/landrights/downloads/full1998_ landtenureinsecurityreport.pdf [PDF document, opens new window] (accessed 9 Mar 2010).

LAMBERT, T UNDATED "A Short History of Zambia", IN Local Histories, [www] http://www.localhistories.org/zambia.html [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

LODGE, T, KADIMA, D & POTTIE, D (eds) 2002 A Compendium of Elections in Southern Africa, EISA, 373-403.

MWANAWINA, I & MULUNGUSHI, J 2002 "Explaining African Economic Growth Performance: The Case Study for Zambia" (DRAFT), Global Development Network, [www] http://www.gdnet.org/pdf/draft_country_studies/Zambia-Mwanawina-RIR.pdf (offline 10 Mar 2010).

SUMBWA, N 2000 "Traditionalism, Democracy and Political Participation: The Case of Western Province, Zambia" IN African Study Monographs, 21(3): 105-146, [www] http://www.africa.kyoto-u.ac.jp/kiroku/asm_normal/abstracts/pdf/21-3/105-146.pdf [PDF document, opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

THURLOW, J & WOBST, P 2004 "The Road to Pro-Poor Growth in Zambia", International Food Policy Research Institute, [www] http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPGI/Resources/342674-1115051237044/oppgzambia11.pdf [PDF document, opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

US STATE DEPARTMENT 2005 "Background Note: Zambia" [www] http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2359.htm [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).

VAN BINSBERGEN, W 2001 "Religious Innovation and Political Conflict in Zambia: The Lumpa rising" [www] http://www.shikanda.net/african_religion/lumpa3.htm [opens new window] (accessed 10 Mar 2010).