The relationship between democracy and development in Africa has been one of the most
contested issues in recent years. At its most basic level, a democratic system can be defined in
procedural terms as that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which
individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote.
Ultimately, Africa should be innovative in its efforts to promote democracy and development, as
there is no single prescribed way of achieving democracy or development. There are a number of
assumptions that have been put forward to explain the relationship between democracy and
development. One of the simplest explanations is that once people start to acquire higher levels
of economic development and social maturity, they will begin to seek more accountability from
their governments, thus achieving better democracy. In other ways, an educated and growing
middle class is more likely to demand an active role in the running of their country, to the extent
that even repressive governments will have but little option to resist such demands and become
more democratic. Therefore, this academic piece of writing will shade more light on the
relationship between democracy and developments.
However, the relationship between development and democracy, first captured by Martin Lipset
in his famous 1959 essay ‘Some Social Requisites of Democracy’, is one of the strongest and
most enduring relationships in the social sciences. In fact, a democratic regime has never fallen
after a certain income level is reached (Commission for Africa, 2005). Therefore, as strong as
this relationship is, it does not mean causation, and so for a very long time academics,
development analysts and policy makers alike have been preoccupied with untangling the
complex relationship between development and democracy and determining whether there is a
causal link between the two.
The appearance of democracy can then be seen as the crowning achievement of a long process of
modernization, or as a luxury that affluent countries can afford. This assumption is maybe more
visible in a country such as South Africa, where the fall of apartheid in 1991 and the subsequent
attainment of independence in 1994 led to a growing middle class and educated black
community, who now demand and expect more responsibility from their government
(Commission for Africa, 2005).
1|Page
, Boucher (2000) stipulated that, almost all of the developed countries in the world are democratic,
hence the relationship that democracy and development are intertwined. This approach helps to
explain why there is an increased belief by the international community, especially among
donors, that democracy is a prerequisite for development. In fact, this belief has seen the donor
community come up with an unwritten rule never to release “development” funds to countries
that are deemed to lack democracy.
Nevertheless, Bates (1981) stated that, democracy and development are complementary, and
they reinforce each other. The relationship between them is all the stronger because it originates
in the aspirations of individuals and peoples and in the rights they enjoy. Indeed, history shows
that cases where democracy and development have been dissociated have mostly resulted in
failure. Conversely, the interlinking of democratization and development helps both of
them to take root durably. For if political democracy, in order to consolidate itself, needs to
be complemented by economic and social measures that encourage development, similarly
any development strategy needs to be ratified and reinforced by democratic participation in
order to be implemented.
Moreover, the other relationship is that in both we find respect of human rights. UNESCO saw
the rule of law or the primacy of law as the thread that can link the construction and
consolidation of democracy to the construction and consolidation of development, as well as the
way of consolidating their common bedrock, the respect of human rights (Commission for
Africa, 2005). It is a fact that, if human rights are to be guaranteed and if democracy is to work,
communities and individuals both men and women, need not only to have access to justice but
also, before that, to be aware of the law and to understand it. Similarly, the lack of justice
directly compromises development, first because it encourages mismanagement and corruption,
and second because it discourages investment and economic exchanges. There can be no
development in a context of arbitrariness or in the absence of the rule of law. In order to
construct and to institutionalize, there needs to be a minimum degree of certainty: one needs to
know what rule is applicable and how it is applied. It should be pointed out that the notion of the
rule of law or the primacy of law has wider implications than the much more concrete notion of
rule by the law, which refers to the authorities’ daily enforcement of existing laws, whether they
2|Page
contested issues in recent years. At its most basic level, a democratic system can be defined in
procedural terms as that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decisions in which
individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote.
Ultimately, Africa should be innovative in its efforts to promote democracy and development, as
there is no single prescribed way of achieving democracy or development. There are a number of
assumptions that have been put forward to explain the relationship between democracy and
development. One of the simplest explanations is that once people start to acquire higher levels
of economic development and social maturity, they will begin to seek more accountability from
their governments, thus achieving better democracy. In other ways, an educated and growing
middle class is more likely to demand an active role in the running of their country, to the extent
that even repressive governments will have but little option to resist such demands and become
more democratic. Therefore, this academic piece of writing will shade more light on the
relationship between democracy and developments.
However, the relationship between development and democracy, first captured by Martin Lipset
in his famous 1959 essay ‘Some Social Requisites of Democracy’, is one of the strongest and
most enduring relationships in the social sciences. In fact, a democratic regime has never fallen
after a certain income level is reached (Commission for Africa, 2005). Therefore, as strong as
this relationship is, it does not mean causation, and so for a very long time academics,
development analysts and policy makers alike have been preoccupied with untangling the
complex relationship between development and democracy and determining whether there is a
causal link between the two.
The appearance of democracy can then be seen as the crowning achievement of a long process of
modernization, or as a luxury that affluent countries can afford. This assumption is maybe more
visible in a country such as South Africa, where the fall of apartheid in 1991 and the subsequent
attainment of independence in 1994 led to a growing middle class and educated black
community, who now demand and expect more responsibility from their government
(Commission for Africa, 2005).
1|Page
, Boucher (2000) stipulated that, almost all of the developed countries in the world are democratic,
hence the relationship that democracy and development are intertwined. This approach helps to
explain why there is an increased belief by the international community, especially among
donors, that democracy is a prerequisite for development. In fact, this belief has seen the donor
community come up with an unwritten rule never to release “development” funds to countries
that are deemed to lack democracy.
Nevertheless, Bates (1981) stated that, democracy and development are complementary, and
they reinforce each other. The relationship between them is all the stronger because it originates
in the aspirations of individuals and peoples and in the rights they enjoy. Indeed, history shows
that cases where democracy and development have been dissociated have mostly resulted in
failure. Conversely, the interlinking of democratization and development helps both of
them to take root durably. For if political democracy, in order to consolidate itself, needs to
be complemented by economic and social measures that encourage development, similarly
any development strategy needs to be ratified and reinforced by democratic participation in
order to be implemented.
Moreover, the other relationship is that in both we find respect of human rights. UNESCO saw
the rule of law or the primacy of law as the thread that can link the construction and
consolidation of democracy to the construction and consolidation of development, as well as the
way of consolidating their common bedrock, the respect of human rights (Commission for
Africa, 2005). It is a fact that, if human rights are to be guaranteed and if democracy is to work,
communities and individuals both men and women, need not only to have access to justice but
also, before that, to be aware of the law and to understand it. Similarly, the lack of justice
directly compromises development, first because it encourages mismanagement and corruption,
and second because it discourages investment and economic exchanges. There can be no
development in a context of arbitrariness or in the absence of the rule of law. In order to
construct and to institutionalize, there needs to be a minimum degree of certainty: one needs to
know what rule is applicable and how it is applied. It should be pointed out that the notion of the
rule of law or the primacy of law has wider implications than the much more concrete notion of
rule by the law, which refers to the authorities’ daily enforcement of existing laws, whether they
2|Page
