BY WOSSENSEGED ASSEFA
Meritocracy is a concept that has been here since sixth century B.C. It is an old idea that has been supported by pioneers of modern thinking like Confucius, Voltaire, Plato and Aristotle. One of the oldest examples of a merit-based civil service system existed in the imperial bureaucracy of China.
Tracing back to 200 B.C., the Han Dynasty adopted Confucianism as the basis of its political philosophy and structure, which included the revolutionary idea of replacing nobility of blood with one of virtue and honesty, and thereby calling for administrative appointments to be based solely on merit. This system allowed anyone who passed an examination to become a government officer, a position that would bring wealth and honor to the whole family.
Meritocracy is a social system in which merit or talent is the basis for sorting people into positions and distributing rewards, such that the positions of highest authority are occupied by those of greatest merit. In his book “The Rise of Meritocracy”, Young defines meritocracy as, “a system under which advancement within the system turns on ‘merits’, like performance, intelligence, credentials, and education.”
Recent developments show that this concept has gained ground in our country. To attest to this, Prime Minister Dr. Abiy Ahmed has recently appointed sixteen scholars to form the first ever independent national economic advisory unit. This move can be seen as one of the first steps towards a more civilized nation.
For a country to fully develop, it needs its best and it’s brightest to be drawing the course for its future. The country needs to have leaders chosen for their intellect and institutions being led not by relations but by merit. This will ensure that superficial issues such as gender, race, and ethnicity are seen as trivial, the only thing that matters is who is most qualified to do the job.
Meritocracy has recently been attacked by some people who have called it a “myth” and an “illusion”. Is meritocracy truly an illusion or myth? No. These individuals forget the two principles upon which meritocracy is built; distribution based on merit, and equal opportunity.
The first principle holds that when it comes to scarce goods — things like jobs and income — justice demands that they be distributed strictly on the basis of merit. This means, for example, that an institution cannot justly use applicants’ identity as a consideration when deciding whom it is to hire. The same goes for gender, ethnicity, physical appearance, religion, and so on. Justice requires that the best-qualified applicant be hired, and that the fastest runner win the medal.
The second principle is equal opportunity. This principle argues that the hiring of people in any institution should be done solely on their productivity and merits rather than their status or identity providing equal opportunity for the penniless and the wealthy.
The application of meritocracy has led countries like Singapore and China to great economic growth. According to a book A History of Singapore 1819–1975 by C.M. Turnbull when Singapore was founded by Stamford Raffles in January 1819, it was a small fishing village inhabited by a thousand Malay fishermen and a few Chinese farmers. Its transformation from a small fishing village in the early nineteenth century to a modern and prosperous city-state today is an incredible story of from rags to riches. Singapore’s gross domestic product (GDP) per capita has increased by 56 times from S$1,310 (US$428) in 1960 to S$73,167 (US$52,962) in 2016 (Department of Statistics, 2017). What was the secret behind the country going from a third world country to a first world country in a matter of 53 years? The answer is Lee Kuan Yew, the first prime minister of Singapore. His successor explained it this way, “During the recent Non-Aligned Meeting in Jakarta, the Nepalese Prime Minister asked me for the secret of Singapore’s success. I smiled and replied, ‘Lee Kuan Yew.’ I went on to explain that I meant it as a short form to encapsulate the principles, values and determination with which he governed and built Singapore.” During the same speech Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong concluded that meritocracy was the key to Singapore’s success because the “practice of meritocracy in the civil service, in politics, in business and in schools” enabled Singaporeans “to achieve excellence and to compete against others”.
This excellence and ability to compete against each other is what Ethiopia needs in its governmental and private institutions, and meritocracy seems to have paved the way for that for Singapore. Meritocracy will help demolish identity-based; corrupt hiring, creating equal opportunities while at the same time sharpening the country’s different institutions for excellence.
China’s dramatic economic rise over the past five decades is inseparable from its meritocratic system. Meritocratic governance in China has a long history, stemming from Confucian ideals. Public officials are selected through rigorous examinations measuring “merit” rather than simply on the basis of their background. The Chinese civil service exams began during the Han dynasty, and were meant to ensure that leaders were wise and ethical. In his book “The China Model” Daniel Bell, an academic who taught at Tsinghua University and Shandong University in China, argued that the Chinese civil service exam system is often held up as the model of meritocracy through which leaders are chosen to run the country. Assessments are put in place to ensure those who lead possess above-average aptitude – intellectually, socially and morally. Over years and decades, aspiring leaders are put through a series of trials that test their capacity to run a country. This refining process insured that only polished diamonds could reach the market place.
However, the same process that has helped the country grow is now said to be the reason for inequality and for large gaps between the rich and the poor. The problem here isn’t meritocracy rather the use of the first principle without concern for the second. For meritocracy to work, we must also ensure that every citizen begins from the same starting line. If some begin their adult lives with undeserved advantage (e.g. wealth, family connections) and others are born in disadvantaged communities, then those features — rather than merit — shape what they may become. Unequal access to resources has a direct and significant effect on the quality of education a child will receive all the way from kindergarten through university. The quality of one’s education, among other factors related to inequalities and discrimination, directly affects the development of merit and how meritorious one will appear when applying for positions. In a meritocracy, all children are brought to the same starting line through measures like estate taxes and public education.
The establishment of an independent economic council composing of intellectuals passing rounds of screening and evaluation can be regarded as the first strong step towards a meritocratic culture. In a country where corruption and ethnic identity have mingled with almost every institution, a meritocratic culture can help remove these barriers holding back the country from achieving its best. The meritocratic culture can help draw talents from different economic, racial and societal backgrounds that can aid the country develop in all aspects of its existence. The meritocratic concept, although dating back to at least sixth century B.C, might be the new horizon of hope for Ethiopia.
The Ethiopian herald 17/20202
