1. Vagaries of Surplus Peasant Labor in the
Eyes of the Developmental State Thesis: the
Case of Ethiopia
Abstract
Four questions: meanings of PSL,
socio-cultural and political causative agents,
relevance of polices, ideological and
epistemological grounds

2. Introductions
Ethiopia:
• The second largest populous country in ASS
(80m) CSA (2006-2007); Fastest growth rate
about 2.9%;
• One of the LDS in the World (WB, 1995);
• Heavily agricultural economy and rural
demography—85%;
• Three Regimes in succession: imperial, military
socialist, and now developmental state (Fasil,
1996);

3. 1. Conceptual Baselines
• Who is a peasant falling in the agro-labor
surplus category?
1. Socio-geographically confined to all parts of Ethiopia outside
the 1974 towns and cities (PASDEP, 2006)
2. Rural food insecure household at a critical level (MPSN, 2005);
3.The Unemployed Labor Force by age criteria:15-59 years( ILO,
1991);
4. A peasant job seeker by time criteria; the previous four weeks
and failed to get (CSA, 2000); It does not include ‘’Concealed
Labor’ (Tenker, 2006);
5. A usual (Permanent) Status as opposed to Current Status
(CSA);
6. Social entitlement specifically referring to ‘a peasant practically
left only labor title (Thodaro, 1995);

4. 2. Ethiopia: Attributes of Surplus
Peasant Labor
• A. Methodologically, controversies over statistics of
surpluses, unemployed, employed;
• B. Socially, both sexes being affected with female
surpluses a bit ahead; 2.6% growth rate (Sosina and
Tsheay, 2008);
• C. Spatially, Northern Ethiopia takes up 58% share;
40% southern and eastern Ethiopia; 2%, pastoralist
areas (MLSA, 2011);
• D. Temporally, seasonality, religions and kin ties
matter in the north-70% in fluid status; income
conditions affect the south (ANRSLSA, 2010) ;

5. E. In genesis, six factors being
responsible:
1. Structural legacies (drought and famine) (ODI 2010);
2. Demographic explosion with 2.9 national average
(Abebe Zegye,1994; CSA, 2006);
3. Environmental degradation especially in the North
(Degefe Tolosa, 1989);
4. Land scarcity where there was no more land
distribution since 1997(MoI, 2003);
5. Innervating government policies (focus on state
farms and Cooperatives in the past 60 years (Degene
Aredo,1990);
6. Traditional views (Tenker, 2005)

6. 4. Evolutions of Peasant Surplus Labor and the
Developmental State in Action
• 4.1. Peasant Surplus Labor and Government
Intervention (1991-2003)
• 4.1.1. Policy Measures:
• A. Rural small and medium scale irrigation schemes
(Azmera, 2003);
• B. Relatively large and well organized Relief and later
Development Organizations (DPPC, 2000) ;
• C. Post-war boom in construction of projects for social
services;
• D. Such public development organizations and Self-
Administrations like government corporations;
• E. ‘Food for work’ programs, (DPPC, 2001); generally
more than half a million trgs;

7. 4.1.2. Constraints
• A. High turnover of labor force (specifically in
southern and central Ethiopia) due to traditions,
religious holidays, poor work habit;
• B. High degree of complaints over small wage rates
(that was birr 6 a day (Worknes Negatu, 2008);
• C. Frequent and intermittent labor disputes as high
as 10% (DPPC, 2001; BCSO, 2003);
• D. Poor group work habit and indiscipline;
• E. High female drop out growths;
• F. Tendencies of preferring ‘individualist,
independent and managerially least hierarchized
jobs’

8. 4.2. Peasant Surplus Labor and Government
Intervention Since 2005
4.2.1 Policy Measures
A. Food Security Package: fishing, gold mining, pottery, forestry,
mine transport, construction, animal husbandry, leather and so
on (MoA, 2011).
B. Productive Safety-Net Programs (PSNP): MoA (2010) 6.7 million
unemployed peasants got jobs through PSNP in the country by
man-hour count;
C. The Construction Industry: MOWUD (2010) the industry grew
faster to absorb more than 37% of the total national
employment figure
D. Micro-enterprise Development: more of urban development;
E. Resettlement Programs: (Desalign Rahimato, 2006; Reporter,
2009; Awuramba, 2010) 175, 000 households between 2004 and
2009 specifically within Tigray, Amhara, SNNPNRS.

9. 4.2.2. Constraints
• Low payments rates, absence of accountable and
transparent recruitment, inclusion and appeal
procedures upon complaints and grievances (Sharp
and Brown, 2006);
• Unresponsiveness to dynamic target demands,
• Serious shortages of data and material resources,
which caused applications of such discriminatory
systems like quota and vivid trends among
beneficiaries to cultivate dependency on the scheme
(Tekle-Birhan Gebre-Micheal, 2008);
• Shortages of raw materials, inadequate availability of
working promises, lack of capital and marketing
problems (Habtmu, Desta and Misfine, 2011)

10. 5. Vagaries of Peasant Surplus Labor: Trend
Analysis
• Remarkable successes amidst several
internal and external vagaries;
• Deslagn Rahmato (2008) Government
domination;
• Reporter (2011) resettlement programs
affected by: 1.Climatic shocks; 2. kinship
factors, 3. continued government support;
• (Zemen, 2011) Slow demographic transition ;
• Continued challenges of food insecurity as a
result of least job security;

11. Conclusions
• Largely mixed results;
• More successful in absorbing the targets into jobs
but less effective in causing labor transformation;
• It was also a matter from bottom up affected by
social traditions, the personal tastes and
experiences of the individual target and above all the
degrees of emergencies for daily livelihoods;
• Free market mechanisms were less sound and
effective;
• Political factors;