History, Society, and Economy in Middle Eastern/North African Development

The major objective of Alan Richards and John Waterbury in their Political Economy of the Middle East is to explain development and growth in the Middle East/North Africa (MENA) – how it appears now, how it got to that point, and the prospects for the future. They undertake an ambitious project examining data on all aspects of Middle Eastern state and society – using general quantifiable measures of income, education, and other factors, detailed case study investigations, and extensive historical background. In doing this, they hope to provide a comprehensive picture of the circumstances in the region, and to situate it within two comparative contexts: the comparison with the region’s past (how things have changed over the past several decades) and the comparison with other countries at similar levels of income, industrialization, and development (how MENA looks in relation to the rest of the world). The overarching theme and conclusions they come to – that development has come a long way and greatly benefited the region but still has significant challenges ahead of it and in many areas lags behind comparable areas – is valuable, and their approach raises a number of interesting questions.
Specifically, while the authors don’t explicitly frame it in this way, they seem to present three broad classes of explanation – historical, social/cultural, and political-economic – in their assessment of how circumstances have been shaped and will continue to be shaped in the future. In their account these three factors combine to make up what they see as the problems as well as the promise of the current situation in the Middle East/North Africa.
The first frame, historical analysis, traces the log-term trends within individual states and the region as a whole, and sees this as the formative factor in the direction of events. A number of their arguments feel historically deterministic – something happened because such and such was the case before it, which in turn happened because such and such was the case before that. This paints a picture of development as a steady evolution, with the natural course of events being to proceed as it did. Undeniably this perspective has some merit – the remnants of colonial imperialism, independence movements, and regime changes (both gradual and sudden) have a powerful impact on the ongoing development and growth of the region, and historical legacies are a powerful factor in shaping the situation today. However, one ought to be cautions about attributing too much agency to history, since it implies that the path taken was the only possible path, and it overlooks important other factors that can contribute to the direction of progress. It fails to fully consider the social, cultural, political, and economic forces that shape both the history and the current situation.
The next broad category of explanations is social and cultural. The Middle East/North Africa is a region with a number of very strong and deeply felt ideological foundations, and many practical situations can be viewed as having their roots in the influences of Islam (or other religions), tribal affiliations, cultural norms, or other societal rules and customs. These arguments attempt to explain the way MENA societies function internally as well as in relation to each other as a product of the beliefs and attitudes their people hold about the world. Education and employment patterns, health and wellness levels, and demographic trends often appear to have roots in, among other explanations, the role and socioeconomic status of women in current Middle Eastern Islamic societies, and understanding the trends and possibilities of the situation requires understanding the cultural backdrop that shapes them.
Finally, the third analytical perspective the authors present includes political-economical explanations. Actions, events, and circumstances are the output of the behavior of individuals and groups acting in accordance with their interests and seeking to protect their welfare and get the best possible outcome for themselves. This approaches focuses on the different actors with influence, what resources they can mobilize for development, and what incentives they have to do so. Income and wealth distributions are seen as powerfully affecting the path of development because they determine which actors have the resources to make changes happen and which actors will stand to gain (and which will lose) from possible reforms.
While the three categories of historical, social/cultural, and political-economic explanations seem critical to Richards and Waterbury’s understanding of the region, they are not explicitly articulated and it is often not apparent what degree of influence each carries in each situation. Future research along these lines ought to clarify this relationship, and draw out the distinctions between causes and elaborate both the role that these types of factors individually play as well as how they interact with each other.