If you were given Stalin-esque authority over one of the impoverished, underdeveloped African countries you visit every year or so, what steps would you take to improve things...to spur modernization?
[WS:] Before I answer this question, let me make a brief comment on the environmental concerns that you mentioned earlier. The problem with environment is not technology, but the choice of technology. Most of the pollution is caused by burning oil and coal - and that energy choice was for a large part politically motivated. Hydroelectric or even nuclear energy does not pollute nearly as much - but it requires a very different institutional arrangement - from rail based transit system rather than individual autos, to building construction regulations, international cooperation in sharing surplus energy etc. which may be politically opposed by various interest groups. So if I had Stalinesque authority - the lobbyists, lawyers and leaders of those interest groups opposing more efficient and less polluting energy sources would be digging ditches for hydroelectric dams in Siberia :)
Now your African question. Brace yourself for what you will hear will ruffle some feathers.
The main cause of African development is the structural inability of African states to provide that kind of investment in fixed and human capital that European and Asian states provided. The reason for that is timing. The European and Asian development occurred when the issues of intra-national hegemony and international sovereignty of the nation-states in question had been already settled. That is to stay, by the 19th century, most European states already passed the internal strife and civil conflicts with a relatively stable national government as undisputed sovereign ruler of the land. These governments did not have to fight for their existence with rival groups. Consequently they could invest in large scale national development project without the fear of those investment being captured by the rival gang and turned against them.
Russia is probably a good illustration. Its major development occurred only after the Bolsheviks took power and suppressed all rivals by brute force. Other European governments had no rivals at that time all - challengers, yes (e.g. organized labor) but not rivals. The battle for intra-national European hegemony was for the most part over by the 18th century.
This, however, is not the case of Africa. African states are basically a creation of colonial powers with little regard for local identities and power structures. The main form of local power structure, reinforced by the British colonial rule, is along the tribal lines. To maintain allegiance of their supporters, tribal chiefs had to give something in return i.e. buy that support with tangible goods.
Now, if you have an artificially created state with multiple tribal identities within its borders, you have a prescription for perpetual internal conflicts, not dissimilar to internal strife in Europe during the Reformation. In that situation, no group holding the state power is going to invest in national development. They will use the available resources to solidify their power by buying allegiances the traditional way - by paying off their supporters. That is the only rational thing to do. Otherwise, they would be giving the resources to people who will shoot them during the next putsch.
So with that in mind, my solution - or think of it more like a though experiment because it cannot possibly be implement under the current political conditions, involves two steps.
Step 1. Abolish the existing African states, and replaced them with pan-African structure of territorial administrative units based on tribal and ethnic affiliations. The federal government would have the power comparable to the US fed - control of the military, legislative, fiscal and the power to override all local decisions. This move would reduce the level of internal strife currently under way in Africa. BTW, pan-Africanism is not a new idea in that continent.
Step 2. "Re-colonize" African economy by selling development rights to outside investors, in the same way former Soviet block countries sold their aging plants to Western or Asian companies. This would provide development capital and training that would boost local capacity and develop skilled labor. Of course the central/federal Pan-African l government would regulate that development with an iron first and would not allow any neo-liberal nonsense of individual companies doing as they please. Individual companies would be guaranteed stability and the protection of their investment in exchange of their acceptance of strong regulation. This arrangement would not only build local capacity, but also integrate Africa to the global economy.
Of course, this only a thought experiment, which will probably be fiercely opposed by nationalists and populist of all stripes. But I think it is something that, if implemented correctly, would work much better than current haphazard development policies of wild goose chasing and following managerial fads.
Wojtek