Meritocratic Bureaucracy and Democratic Stability: Lessons from Botswana

The political science literature generally holds that meritocratic bureaucracy is the foundation of stable democracies. Meritocracy and democracy are two distinct yet closely related concepts. Can the two ideas be combined to create a ‘meritocratic democracy’? This chapter answers in the affirmative. Due to the neo-patrimonial nature of many polities in Africa, meritocratic bureaucracies are often lacking, and many bureaucracies operate along clientelist rather than meritocratic lines. Malaises such as political appointments and cognate ‘non-meritocratic’ malpractices such as cadre deployment, as well as ‘balancing’ acts, are the norm in some polities. Notable exceptions are Botswana and Rwanda, where meritocracy defines the DNA of the public bureaucracy. The overarching aim of this book chapter is to discuss meritocratic bureaucracy in Botswana. This is a qualitative case study that is steeped in the interpretive research paradigm. Both primary and secondary data were gathered, and data analysis techniques included document review and interview analysis. It concluded that meritocracy is used in the public service regarding recruitment and career advancement and that a meritocratic bureaucracy has contributed to the consolidation of democracy, making Botswana one of the continent’s most stable democracies, in addition to reducing corruption and collusion, which frequently impede the effectiveness of government, and fostering a professional and results-driven government structure to achieve effective governance. Despite the foregoing, there is evidence of surreptitious patronage and politicisation of the public service, particularly regarding ambassadorial and senior-level appointments. The chapter ends by offering recommendations to enhance meritocratic bureaucracy in Botswana and on the continent.