The United Nations Development Report, just published, shows that the lowest 20 countries in the Human Development Index are all in Africa. It is against this backdrop that the ambitious project of forming an African Union seems almost impossible.
Yet that is what the 35 heads of government, meeting recently in Lusaka, have pledged to do, and one hopes they will succeed. But is it likely? Unfortunately, the desperate state of the continent, the ineffectual history of the Organisation of African Union (OAU) and the democratic pedigree of most of those ageing leaders suggest the contrary.
The latest estimates indicate that sub-Saharan Africa has the largest proportion of people who live on less than $1 a day. Growth in per-capita income averaged 1.5 per cent in the 1960s, 0.8 per cent in the 1970s and minus 1.2 per cent in the 1980s. In the 1990s, the region grew more slowly than any other group of middle or low-income countries.
Today, per-capita income is $500 a year. Private capital flows to Africa are a fraction of global flows, and for some countries capital flight is several times their GDP. Total outstanding external debts often exceed the entire gross national product and debt servicing can exceed 25 per cent of export earnings.
Reversing these trends poses an enormous challenge to both domestic and international policy-makers, and the difficulty is multiplied manifold by the severity of Africa's AIDS crisis.
Extractive industries dominate the region's economy and resources are being depleted at an alarming rate. Infrastructure needs are enormous, particularly in power generation and telecommunications. Electrical power consumption, per person, is the lowest in the world. Africa has 14 telephone lines for 1,000 people, and less than half of 1 per cent of Africans have used the Internet. A mere 17 per cent of road surfaces are paved. The list goes on.
Agriculture in Africa has yet to experience a green revolution. Unlike the rest of the world, yields of basic foods have not increased significantly. Variable rainfall, highly-weathered soils, disease and pests have taken their toll. Agricultural technologies developed in other climatic and ecological zones have not transferred well.
Inputs such as fertiliser are often controlled by state monopolies and are not available to farmers at competitive prices. Fertiliser prices in the early 1990s, for example, were estimated to be two to four times higher in Africa than in Asia. Poor infrastructure restricts movement of goods, so transport and shipping costs are prohibitive.
Africa's agricultural sector is thus unable to generate a steady and inexpensive source of food for urban populations. Indeed, much of sub-Sahara's food supply is imported. Its urban centres remain small, and they have not provided the workforce necessary to fuel industrial expansion.
In the last two decades Africa's least-developed countries have seen their share of world trade fall from 0.6 per cent to 0.3 per cent. Prices for commodities, the principal export, have fallen steadily, making it more difficult to service debt. Then there is the problem of trying to compete with the developed world.
Exports from the developed countries also face tariff barriers, although the EU, in its "Anything but Arms" initiative, has begun to deal with this issue. Still, processed foods, which would be the obvious basis for industrialising an agriculture economy, are subject to high tariffs.
An African Union, modelled on the European Union, would have enormous potential to correct the structural injustices in the world which leave so many millions mired in poverty.
Africa, as a trading bloc, could demand fair terms of trade. It could protect its natural resources and biodiversity. It could create a climate to foster industrial development. Most importantly, perhaps, it could create the moral pressure on industrialised countries to facilitate its integration into the global economy.
Regrettably, an African Union is unlikely to become a serious project. The leaders who gathered in Lusaka, with a few honourable exceptions, are too deficient in credibility to be taken seriously.
The summit was marred by the murder of Paul Tembo, a prominent and popular Zambian opposition leader, a few days earlier. He was due to give testimony in a government corruption case which could have implicated three cabinet ministers. Neither was it helped by a statement of support for Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe's President, in his thuggish attempt to retain power in his country under the pretext of land redistribution. The statement could not have been more ineptly timed.
The African Union will replace the OAU, based in Addis Ababa, which has existed for 38 years. For most of its life the OAU focused on the fight against apartheid and the consequences of colonialism. Other than that it achieved little and its demise will be little mourned.
But even if the conditions were right it would seem that an African Union with a common parliament and a single currency is ambitious. It might be more realistic to focus instead on President Mbeki's concept of a Millennium Action Plan for the continent's recovery. But, most important of all, Africa needs honest government, respect for human rights and an end to conflict.
David Begg is chief executive of Concern. He retires from that post in August to become general secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions