The CGD Podcast – "One Size Doesn’t Fit All: Lant Pritchett on Mimicry in Development"

Date: August 20, 2013
Host: Lawrence MacDonald (A), Center for Global Development
Guest: Lant Pritchett (B), Professor of the Practice of Development at Harvard Kennedy School

Episode Overview

This episode features a deep-dive conversation with development economist Lant Pritchett on the pitfalls of "capability traps" and "isomorphic mimicry" in international development. Pritchett challenges the idea that development and government capability naturally progress over time, arguing that many low-capability states are stuck in a pattern of mimicking the visible structures of successful countries without developing real functionality. The discussion also covers potential solutions, pitfalls in measurement, and social change in places like India.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Defining the "Capability Trap"

• Development as a Natural Process?

  • Pritchett challenges the conventional idea that, like tadpoles becoming frogs, countries naturally grow into effective modern states over time.
  • Some, like Haiti, have failed to demonstrate significant progress even after centuries of independence.
    • "It's still a basket case. It has not developed." (01:17 - B)

• Stagnation over Centuries

  • Using data on bureaucratic quality/capacity (e.g., ability to deliver mail), Pritchett calculates that, at current rates, some low-capability states might take hundreds to thousands of years to reach Singapore-level efficiency.
  • The "trap" is this glacial progress, not the trajectory originally envisioned in the optimistic 1960s.
    • "Many of the poorer countries would take literally thousands of years at their current rate of progress to reach Singapore's level of capability." (02:46 - B)

Notable Quote:

"If in 200 years [Haiti] went from one to two [on a ten-point capability scale], it's going to take eight more of those units to go from two to ten... That's 1600 years." (07:14 - B)

2. Measuring State Capability

• Perception-Based Indicators: Bureaucratic quality is ranked using various indexes (e.g., Failed State Index’s “progressive deterioration of services”).

• Empirical but Imperfect: Rankings are "not super precise," but reliable enough for broad comparisons (Somalia at the bottom, Singapore at the top).

  • "Neither is GDP per capita." (04:24 - B)

• Growth Analogy: Analogous to measuring plant growth when you only know age and height.

3. Are There Exceptions? (Outlier Success Stories)

• Some countries do improve faster, but even the best performers progress slowly in acquiring state capability.
  • "Even the fast growing countries in terms of acquiring capabilities grew at a pace of about 0.1 units a year. So it took them a decade to improve by one point." (08:46 - B)
  • "If you're a fast growing acquirer of state administrative capability, to get from Somalia to Singapore, it's going to take about 100 years." (09:43 - B)

Memorable Moment:

On Afghanistan:
"In 10 years, they might be Pakistan [not Singapore or the US]." (10:24 - B)

4. Isomorphic Mimicry in Development

• The Concept:

  • Borrowed from biology (e.g., harmless bugs faking poison’s appearance) and organization theory (organizations adopting forms for legitimacy, not function).
  • In development: Countries adopt the form of institutions (laws, agencies, etc.) without the functionality.
    • "You'd paint spots on your back to look poisonous." (11:28 - B)

• Aid Agency Fads:

  • Donors routinely promote "institution building" that often results only in superficial reforms.
  • Example: World Bank mimicking private sector trends (open offices, etc.) to look effective.
    • "If only we had massages, we'd be profitable too." (13:55 - B)

• Systemic Problem:

  • When real outputs aren't measured, organizations focus on looking good (isomorphic mimicry) rather than being effective.

5. Consequences and Solutions

• Outcome-Blind Reforms:

  • Enrollment in schools has surged, but actual learning is neglected:
    "In terms of learning while kids are in school, it's complete isomorphic mimicry." (17:00 - B)

  • Governments often define "quality" by infrastructure (e.g., having a girls' toilet) rather than results.

    • "The system never systematically measures the output, so you can never tell you're failing." (17:44 - B)

• Pritchett’s Proposed Solution:

  • Outcome-Based Metrics:
    • Development agencies should focus on rigorous measurement of real outputs (learning, clean water, etc.), not bureaucratic compliance.
    • Each country should define its desired outcomes, then measure meaningful progress toward them ("Millennium Learning Goal," not just "Millennium Development Goal").
      • "Let's create measurements of progress that are really reflective of underlying values." (19:06 - B)
  • Cash on Delivery Aid:
    • Cites Nancy Birdsall's proposal: Link aid to measurable outcomes—let countries innovate how they get there.
      • "If you started to measure the learning, you could actually maybe make some progress on it." (19:06 - A)

6. Social Mobility and Poverty Dynamics in India

• Andy Sumner’s "Bottom Billion" Idea:

  • There's a significant number of the world’s poor in middle-income countries like India, not just Africa.
  • Pritchett agrees broadly, but challenges the simplicity and specifics (e.g., citing data on Dalit progress).

• Dalit Progress in Uttar Pradesh:

  • New research finds substantial social and economic improvements among Dalits since the 1990s market reforms.
    • "At the beginning of that period... only 4% of people said they would have snacks if they were in somebody's home... That's 76% today." (24:25 - B)
  • Market reforms erode old social structures and provide new opportunities, not always along expected social fault lines.

Notable Quote:

"The market is a solvent of many social structures and the social structures of... Dalits in India, we think, have been substantially eroded by the market freedoms..." (24:59 - B)

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• Lant Pritchett:

  • "There are fast growing trees in the forest, but even those grow at a pretty moderate pace relative to what plans expect." (08:44)
  • "In an isomorphic mimicry system, organizations can't get ahead by being better at promoting learning because there's no systematic measurement of the progress on learning." (19:06)
  • "Once there's no independent measures of functionality, isomorphic mimicry can persist forever." (16:13)
  • "What the isomorphic freak does is it closes off space for innovation." (21:22)

• Lawrence MacDonald:

  • "So you have some measures of this... can you explain one of these indicators?" (03:18)
  • "I've got my fingers up here for the inverted commas, institution building, which always kind of puzzled me..." (10:56)
  • "If you started to measure the learning, you could actually maybe make some progress on it." (19:02)

Timeline of Highlights

• 00:37–03:31: Introduction to capability traps; why development is not automatic.
• 03:31–07:14: Methods and examples for measuring state capability.
• 08:24–10:56: Outliers and the surprising slowness of state capability growth—even among "success stories".
• 10:56–15:10: The concept of isomorphic mimicry; institutional fads; superficial reform.
• 16:07–21:22: Solutions—measuring real outcomes, not compliance; outcome-based aid, closing the innovation gap.
• 22:04–26:17: Changing social dynamics in India; questioning received wisdom about poverty and mobility.

Tone & Style

Conversational, candid, and lightly humorous. Pritchett speaks plainly about uncomfortable truths in development, occasionally using vivid metaphors. The host maintains a curious and slightly skeptical stance, encouraging plain explanations and concrete examples.

Conclusion

Lant Pritchett’s interview challenges the optimism and assumptions of the international development field, urging professionals to move past institutional imitation and focus on tangible results. His insights on "capability traps" and "isomorphic mimicry" serve as a powerful critique of current aid and reform paradigms, advocating for outcome-driven approaches tailored to local realities.

For more details and to read Lant Pritchett’s paper, visit the Center for Global Development’s website.