Our economic salvation lies in the ancient Yoruconomics - Baasegun at IlanaUK Clubhouse 14.04.22

Yuroconomics = economics as practised by the ancient Yoruba

The economic philosophy of the ancient Yoruba was ‘Kinshipism’ (or Kinship Corporatism), an economic philosophy based on the belief that it is the economic efficiency of the individual ‘family’ that made the community achieve harmonious economic functioning. The kinships were the organ of the economy. Members of the same ‘family’ worked closely together with individuals acting in concert with one another. Individual economic desires were made to accord primarily with the ‘family’ needs.
 
In the ancient times, persons of the same lineage lived together as ‘family’ in one compound or courtyard in a collection of homes (Agboile). The typical courtyard contained more than one ‘nuclear’ family, and more than one generation. There was a hierarchy of ages, a hierarchy of responsibilities, and a hierarchy of power. The progenitor (Baale or sometimes Iyale) was at the top of the hierarchy. Each ‘nuclear’ family had its own separate dwelling place or apartment within the courtyard. But children of the courtyard were raised and schooled together. All members ate together at mealtimes, worshipped together, etc. Socio-economic decisions were made collectively. The Agboile selected your spouse, and before a man took a wife, the Agboile assisted him to build his own apartment for his own ‘nuclear’ family within the courtyard space. Individuals were born and buried within the courtyard. And when you died, your possession passed on to your Agboile. The Agboile had its own autonomous existence.
 
Economy (Isunna) is that which is associated with production, distribution and consumption of goods and services. There are three sectors commonly distinguished. The primary sector is where the raw materials are captured such as in farming and fishing. The secondary sector is where the raw materials are transformed into finished products such as by manufacturing and processing. The tertiary sector provides services, like transport, distribution and sales, rather than products. What was unique about Yoruconomics was that the three sectors of the economy were privately Agboile owned so that Yoruconomics was neither capitalist nor socialist.
 
There was full employment as everyone, but children, were involved in the Yoruba economy. The primary sector was mainly agrarian with men as the principal workers. Agrarian meant growing just about any variety of food crops - berries, fruits, legumes, onions, peas, rice, tubers, vegetables etc. It meant farming mushrooms, fish, and small animals. Product surplus was generated to use to acquire the needs of individuals or of the ‘family’. The ancient Yoruba primary sector was not agricultural. Agricultural economy refers to farming as a business. It was not subsistence. Subsistence farming means the practice of growing crops/livestock sufficient only for personal use leaving no surplus for trade.
 
The secondary sector was mainly food-processing with women the principal workers. There were no housewives in those days. The secondary sector was home-based where women converted raw materials into finished products, for example, cassava to gari, yam to elubo, cotton to aso and so on.
 
The tertiary (service) sector was based mainly in the markets. Women worked there too. They determined the needs of the family which they then went out to acquire by means of exchange. The language of Yoruconomics (Ise aje) was ‘acquire’ (Jere) and ‘acquisition’ (Ere). The ancient Yoruba did not use money, and therefore did not make acquisition by payment of money. Instead, they made their acquisition by exchanging goods and services for needed goods and services. They exchanged a thing of value for a thing of value unlike European economics, whether capitalism, communism or socialism, which was based on money and the ability to manipulate its arbitrariness.
 
The ancient Yoruba people were city and town (Ilu) dwellers. This urbanisation brought with it a sizeable tertiary (service) sector of artisans, healthcare providers and so on.
 
At the heart of Yoruconomics was individual enterprise and competition (ie traditional individualism) but overall ownership was by the ‘kinship corporate’. Each farmer had his own individual holding exclusive to him. He was his own limit in the amount of what he planted and harvested. Each seller at the marketplace (Oja) had her own stall exclusive to her. The ‘market’ determined what she could exchange, but she was her own limit in the amount of food that she processed or what she exchanged. The ‘kinship corporate’ provided a launch pad for an individual who had reached adulthood and ready to participate in the economy. For example, the ‘kinship corporate’ would assist a man to annex a piece of land, assist him to clear it and then provide him with the seeds for planting. The ‘kinship corporate’ provided the comfort and support that he required to succeed, and he in turn played his part in the kinship economics (ie familial neighbourism).
 
There are several lessons to be learnt from this ‘kinship corporate’ arrangement. One, the cost of capturing a raw material, say a yam tuber, was near enough comparable to the cost of transforming it into the elubopowder, the finished product. This made elubo easily affordable. By contrast, in the European economy the cost of transforming raw materials was so comparatively large as to make the finished product unaffordable even to the farmer. Hence, the widespread practice of American and European governments subsidising their farmers and products.
 
Two, the extracting and the transforming of raw materials were in proximity with one another. This made the ancient Yoruba economy harmonious. This could be easily reproduced. Appropriate small-scale food processing units could be cited next to farms. This arrangement would obviate the need to transport perishable products like tomatoes over great distances or the need to refrigerate or use chemical preservatives. I understand Ghana has embarked on such a project.
 
Three, because the costs of extracting and transforming raw materials were comparable, the overall costs in the Yoruba economy was minimised. A developing economy where capital is scarce, or must be borrowed, needs to minimise costs in order to succeed in the modern world. A thousand small tomato processing units sited locally, for example, would be a thousand times cheaper to establish and to run than a large one off like Dangote’s, which has not yet been able to get off the ground despite billions of Naira spent on it.
 
Four, the Yoruba farms were small-scale. This made them sustainable and climate friendly. In these modern times, crop rotation and composting (to replace wildfires) would obviate the need for fertilisers, which dangerously pollute the land, or the need for GM seeds, which interfere with the human physiology. A thousand small-scale farms, translating to at least a thousand jobs, would enhance the overall economy more than one gigantic industrial farm. The same attitude should be adopted to mining, and prospector licences issued to individuals rather than to large corporations.
 
Five, the ‘kinship corporate’ ensured a ‘horizontal economics’, which enthused farmers and boosted local wealth and development. Today, a similar arrangement would loosen the grip of the moneyed on the national economy. It would revivify Yoruba customs and tradition. It would shift the style of urbanisation from current western-style cities, where most youths are jobless and attracted to life of crime, to the rural Yorubaland, which are currently depopulated, gentrified, and lifeless. The ‘incoming’ youths would bring to the rurality, the accoutrements of modern life.
 
Six, cooperation between kinships took place in the marketplace (Oja). The marketplace was not just for trading. It was the place for most and important family interactions. It was the heart of the Yoruba urbanisation The word Oja derived from the primary verb ‘ja’, meaning ‘to hustle’. Oja thus was the place of hustling and therefore a place to be regulated. The exchange of goods was a contract (Pasiparo). Hence, most of the community conventions and rules were made at the marketplace (ie regulated urbanism). The market itself convened in 2-day, 3-day or 4-day cycles depending on the locality. That market cycle was the means by which the ancient Yoruba recorded time.
 
Yoruconomics had an external dimension too. Some individuals were involved in external trade. They acted as middlemen (Alarobo). They bought goods and products from Yorubaland, transported them ‘abroad’, exchanged them for goods and products that were not available in Yorubaland, and then brought the novel goods back to Yorubaland to exchange for Yoruba goods and products to begin the cycle all over again. Beauty products like tiro (eye liner) and atike (face powder) were imported into Yorubaland in this manner. This is the ‘vertical economics’ that Awolowo adopted for the sale of cocoa between 1952 and 1959. The Awolowo government, acting as the middleman, bought cocoa from farmers, which it then sold on the open market for huge amount of profit sufficient to pay for free primary education, a television station and other developments. As it was done then, it could be done now, that is, government purchasing goods and services from individuals and then selling same for profit to the highest, usually foreign, bidders.