Democratization in A Developmental State
Democratization in A Developmental State
Democratization in A Developmental State
the Human Development Index (HDI) among Least Developed Countries (LDCs).
Moreover, it is determined to accelerate and maintain this development result while
strengthening its democratic agenda. It has set for itself a challenging goal of becoming
a Democratic Developmental state seeking to create a middle income society and a
green economy by 2025. This piece tries to explore the question of what it takes to
advance the frontiers of democracy in a developmental state, and what UNDP can do
to contribute to the process of deepening democracy in a developmental state.
The theme of this paper revolves around the issues, challenges, and prospects of
democratization in a developmental state by taking the Ethiopian case as an example.
Ethiopia has declared itself to be pursuing the path of a developmental state. It seeks
to construct a developmentalist state while also deepening its democracy2. The latter
is particularly made clear in the Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP) it has adopted
for itself to transform the economic and political terrain of the country3. The interest in
constructing a developmental state while also deepening democracy, as stimulating as
it is to those who value a democratic developmental state, is not without its challenges.
Indeed, it poses a set of challenges. It also resuscitates the relatively old question as to
whether the two goals of achieving development and enhancing democracy can be
attained at one and the same time. It evokes the question as to whether pressing the
democratic agenda impedes or facilitates development. The issues of whether there is
a relationship of priority, or primacy, between development and democracy are raised.
These issues raise difficult (perhaps intractable) questions deservedly long debate
among development scholars. These same questions are raised in different forms in
different contexts and they lead to smaller, local, and context-specific issues that need
to be raised and discussed.
1- This piece is part of a larger study being conducted under the auspices of the Governance and Human Rights Unit on
Deepening Democracy in a Developmental State: Circumscribing the Scope of Democratic Governance Work in Ethiopia.
The draft piece was presented at the Policy Forum of UNDP Ethiopia, on 28 July, 2011. The authors are grateful to the Policy
Advisory Unit (PAU) for organizing the Forum and the participants at the Forum for their comments and questions which
helped to improve the paper. The usual disclaimer applies.
2- Nothing demonstrates this intention more strongly than the Prime Ministers statement made in late 2010. Prime
Minister Meles Zenawi said that Democratic Federalism is one of the two pillars of our national renaissance. Together with
the establishment and consolidation of an effective developmental state in our country, it has enabled us to begin the long
road back to the frontiers of our civilization. (emphasis mine.) See his keynote address delivered on the 13th of December,
2010, on the 5th International Conference on Federalism, held in Addis Ababa.
3- See FDRE, Growth and Transformation Plan 2010/11-2014/15 (Vol .I Main Text). Addis Ababa: MOFED, 2010 for the full
text of the document that stipulates the transformative agenda. It is particularly instructive to look at the vision, objectives,
and the pillars of this transformative venture on pp.21-27.
This paper seeks, albeit briefly, to explore these and other issues.
The objective of this paper is therefore to explore the issues, challenges, and prospects
of democratizing a developmental state. It does so with a view to identifying the role
of UNDP in deepening democracy in the context of working with a developmental
state.
The major questions the paper seeks to address itself include: what does it mean to be
a developmental state? How do we characterize it? What types of developmental states
are there? Is there a prototype and/or a variant of a developmental state? If so, what are
its essential features? What are the goals and objectives of a developmental state? What
are the advantages of a developmental state? Is there any merit in having one? These
questions are asked to help us understand the nature of the developmental state and
to establish a modicum of clarity about what it is that we are talking about when we
talk about a developmental state? In an attempt to identify the major issues, challenges
and prospects of a developmental state (as laid down in the objective), we ask: what
are the points of debate in relation to the developmental state? What are the issues that
invite diverging set of opinions? In short, what are the key issues around the idea and
practice of the developmental state? Also, what are the challenges of developmental
states? What are the challenges of the Ethiopian state? In an attempt to identify the
prospects, we ask: what are the windows of opportunity available to us as we work
towards supporting Ethiopia democratize its developmental state?
In order to address these questions, we relied mainly on desk review and policy and/or
legal analysis as our method. We review the literature on developmental state in general
and the Ethiopian state in particular. We also review and analyze the major policy
documents and the core legal documents of the contemporary Ethiopian state.
The overall goal is to provoke thoughts and to stimulate discussions thereby
eventually allowing us at the UNDP to position ourselves properly vis--vis the type
of developmental state in Ethiopia. Although we do not have a ready-made set of
prescriptions, our orientation (in lieu of assumptions) is to resist the appealif any
of the incompatibility thesis (the argument that developmental state and democracy
are incompatible), to counter the sequencing fallacy (the fallacy committed by those
subscribing to the dictum development first, and democracy later), and thereby to
promote, albeit tentatively, the idea that a developmental state with a democratic
deficit is unsustainable. But one is impelled to ask what a developmental state is. We
now turn to this question in the subsequent section.
East Asia and some other countries who won the label since the 1970s, serious attempt
at conceptualizing it is said to have begun with the work of Chalmers Johnson in the
1980s4. In the context of Ethiopia, the term is increasingly being used only in recent
times5. But the invocation of the term is shrouded in vagueness that clouds the meaning.
Is the term similar to or different in meaning from forms of interventionsit states such
as the regulatory state or welfare state? How similar or different is it from these states?
What does it entail to have a developmental state? If having a developmental state is
a desirable goal, what does it take to establish such a state? What does it really mean
to be a developmental state? In this section, we address these questions. But before
delving into that, it is important to have some conceptual clarifications on the notions
of development and economic growth.
4- See Chalmers Johnson, MITI and the Japanese Miracle. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1982, who, interestingly
refers to Japan as a developmental state.
5- See Tesfaye Habisso, The Challenges of Building a Democratic Developmental State available at http://www.utna.
org/2010%20/august/TesfayeHabisseptember.pdf visited on 27 April 2011.
6- Michael Todaro, Economic Development (6th ed.). Longman: Addison Wesley Longman.1996, pp.49.
7- Barbara Ingham, The Meaning of Development: Interactions between New and Old Ideas in World Development,
Vol. 21, No. 11 (1993), pp.1803.
Rostow, for instance, equates growth with development, and found out there are five
stages of growth in which all societies, in their economic dimensions, fall into one
of five categories: the traditional economy, the precondition for take-off, the take-off,
the drive to maturity, and the age of high mass-consumption8. His economic growth
model is of the neo-classical tradition which takes a linear view of development; this
means that countries are believed to develop in the same, unilineal, way over time.
According to this economic model, to grow is to increase in size or number. To develop,
in contrast, has come to mean the reduction or elimination of poverty, inequality,
and unemployment. Reinforcing the importance of poverty reduction, reduction of
unemployment and inequality to development, Dudley Seers poses pointed questions
about the meaning of development as follows:
The questions to ask about a countrys development are therefore: what has been
happening to poverty? What has been happening to unemployment? What has been
happening to inequality? If all three of these have declined from high levels, then
beyond doubt this has been a period of development for the country concerned. If
one or two of these central problems have been growing worse, especially if all three
have, it would be strange to call the result development even if per capita income
doubled9.
In a similar vein, in its 1991 World Development Report, the World Bank also observed
that:
8- W.W. Rostow, The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1960, pp.4-16.
9- Dudley Seers, The Meaning of Development, presented at the 11th World Conference of the Society for International
Development, New Delhi, 1969, pp. 3.
10- World Bank, World Development Report. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991, pp.4.
11- As quoted in Todaro, supra note 5. pp.51.
12- Ibid
orientation (i.e. promoting the ideal and agenda of developmentalism) and its
institutional arrangements (i.e., its institutional capacity to formulate and implement
its policies and programs).16
But one can state that a developmental state is a state with sufficient organization and
power to achieve its developmental goals.17 In other words, it is a state with the ability
to prove consistent economic guidance and rational and efficient organization, and
the power to back up its long-range economic policies. Standard descriptions also
maintain that a developmental state is a state with instincts to resist external demands
(e.g. Multinational corporations) and internal resistance (from groups bent on transient
political gains or shortterm profits, i.e., local political and business elites).
This latter description requires that a developmental state ought to have the capacity
to control domestic infighting and build consensus among the populace on national
developmental agenda by drawing attention to long-term benefits to all. Ideally,
therefore a developmental state needs to be a persuasive state with the competence
to mobilize people and resources around its development plan, especially if it is to
become a democratic state. It is perhaps because of this that a recent economic report
on Africa holds that a developmental state is one that has the capacity to deploy its
authority, credibility and legitimacy in a binding manner to design and implement
development policies and programs for promoting transformation and growth, as well
as for expanding human capabilities.18
As has been hinted at earlier on, there seems to be a consensus to view the
developmental state as one defined by both its ideological orientation (toward
development) and institutional arrangement (administrative and political) deployed
to underpin the realization of developmentalist projects.19 Peter Evans refers to it as a
state with institutional design meant to advance transformative role of the state rather
than constraining the state,20 a state with the capacity to formulate and implement
its development goals in an authoritative and binding fashion21 resulting in improved
economic performance.
The developmental state is also referred to as an emphatic state, a hard state, relatively
autonomous/independent, with a decidedly interventionist bent on seeking not
only to regulate, guide, and shape, but also to monitor and control, the economy. A
developmental state (also referred to as state development capitalism) is a state that
nurtures and thrives upon state-led macro-economic planning. In this sense, it can
even be viewed as a model of capitalism that nonetheless differs from a minimalist
state or other species of interventionist states such as the regulatory state and the
welfare state. In the literature, it is also contrasted with weak states (that easily bow to
the pressure mounted on them by the business or political elite) or predatory states
(that tends to be extractive and exploitative of public resources for private purposes). 22
18- UN ECA and AU, Economic Report on Africa 2011: Governing Development in Africathe Role of the State in Economic
Transformation. Addis Ababa: UN ECA, 2011, p. 7.
19- See, for example, Thandika Mkandawire, Thinking About Developmental States in Africa, Cambridge Journal of
Economics (2001); Omano Edigheji, A Democratic Developmental State in Africa? A Concept Paper, Research Report No.
105. Johannesburg: Center for Policy Studies, 2005.
20- Peter Evans, Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University press,
1995, p.
21- H. Schmiz, State Capacity and Donor Proliferation. Sussex: Institute of Development Studies, 2005 as quoted in:
Edigheji, supra note 14, p.6.
22- See, for example, Meles Zenawi, African Development: Dead Ends New Beginnings (Preliminary Draft) (ND, NP).
Types. In most of the literature, developmental states are classified into 20th century
(e.g. East Asian Tigers) and of the 21st century (e.g. Mauritius, Botswana). This distinction
is also made to indicate the authoritarian tendency of the 20th century states and to
emphasize the democratic nature of the emerging 21st century developmental states.
There is, as a consequence, a classification of developmental states into authoritarian
and democratic; or classical and emergent. What this hints at is the fact that there isnt
one right or typical model of a developmental state. What one can have is a type in a
spectrum of minimalist states (of the laissez faire, classical-liberal, or neo-liberal types
which are not developmental states at all!); regulatory states; welfare states; and
developmental states. (If such is the configuration, one wonders where to put China30
who trod on the developmentalist path but with a radically different ideological
commitment.)
8
Variants. Developmental states come in many colors and types. Typical examples
include East Asian countries such as the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand,
Taiwan, and Hong Kong. Brazil can also be cited as one of the outstanding examples of
a developmental state that successfully achieved macro-economic stability, export-led
industrialization, spiraling economic growth, expansion of infrastructure, and greater
social welfare. Less obvious examples include the Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden)
and Japan. Explaining the unique cultural context of Japan, Chalmers Johnson, in his
MITI and the Japanese Miracle, states that:
28- Such skepticism must have evoked the phrasing African Development: Dead Ends, and New Beginnings in the title of
a study done by Meles Zenawi, in which he strongly argues that the neo-liberal route leads to a dead end.
29- Note Johnsons reference to Japans success as miracle. Note also the reference to the East Asian countries as tigers in a
host of literature.
30- See Bolesta China as a Developmental State in Montenegrin Journal of Economics, No.5.(2007) on China as a
developmental state.
The economic miracle occurred because the Japanese possess a unique, culturally
derived capacity to cooperate with each other. This capacity to cooperate reveals
itself in many wayslower crime rates than in other, less homogenous societies;
subordination of the individual to the groups; intense group loyalties and patriotism,
and, last but not least, economic performance. The most important contribution of
the culture to economic life is said to be Japans famous consensus, meaning virtual
agreement among government, ruling political party, leaders of industry, and people
on the primary of economic objectives for the society as wholeand on the means to
obtain those objectives.31
Examples of emerging developmental states include Mauritius and Botswana.
10
Why do developmental states matter? Are they an end or a means to a further end?
The no developmental state, no development dictum aside, what are the advantages
of the developmental state? Are these advantages apparent? What are they? While
there are no direct answers to these questions, there is an emerging consensus that
a developmental state is central to the process of accelerated growth and social
transformation of any country.33 Such a state, it is argued, helps create a new form
of collaboration between officials and citizens that can be utilized for forging new
opportunities for trade and profitable production.34 To most of the African countries
that dabbled with a form of developmental state in the aftermath of decolonization
but faced a downturn before diversifying and transforming their economies (owing
to several external and internal factors), it offered the possibility of breaking out of the
cycle of hunger, poverty, poor infrastructure, and poor human development. It offered
the possibility that, through state-led economic planning, support to business, and
creation of coalition, economic and social development can be attained.
To the UNDP, a developmental state satisfies its quest for a capable, responsive and
inclusive state. The emphasis on advancing human capabilities also reinforces its
corporate commitment to the broader ideal of human development.
32- It is helpful to think of the developmental state as a temporary stopover in the paradigm of a planned economic
system en route to advanced capitalist economic system. As a state-led capital development process, it is also a conscious
effort at finding a short-cut to advanced capitalist mode of development. In this sense, one notes that the developmental
state model stands in stark contrast to a Revolutionary Democratic State which can be seen as a temporary stopover in
capitalism as we steadily but inexorably head into a planned socialist economic system.
33- UN ECA, p.95.
34- A. K. Bagchi, The Past and the Future of Developmental State, Journal of World Systems Research, 11(2) (2000), p. 398,
as cited in UN ECA, p.95
ask about what the relationship between developmental state and democracy is like.
Bolesta notes: It is true that developmental state has existed in authoritarian Korea and
Taiwan as well as an allegedly democratic Japan. In fact, Japan was the first East Asian
state to be considered a developmental state.35 The separation of the state from societal
pressures, as presented, for example, by Leenders is essential to the developmental
state as it allows the state to carry out its function in directing development without
being subject to other influences. 36
Indeed, according to Wong37 the developmental state is defined by its ability to
balance strategic linkages with, and relative autonomy from, different societal forces.
This crucial aspect of the developmental state allows the state to dictate the direction
of the economy, which is often equated with the direction of the developmental
process. The impartiality achieved by having an autonomous state means Leenders
adds that no bias can be present in policy formulation, and allows the state to focus on
what is the best decision for continued development. States in other areas, primarily
Latin America and post-colonial Africa have been negatively affected by not having
the same level of autonomy achieved in East Asia, and this has restricted their capacity
to development.38
Thus, in the case of East Asian examples, autonomy was initially conceived in terms of
the state imposing its will over society and suppressing civil society.
Johnson39 points out that the soft authoritarian character of the state was the source
of its autonomy. However, a major weakness of this conceptual framework is that
statesociety relations are limited to government-business relations, what Edigheji calls
an elite coalition. Edigheji argues that the earlier conception of the developmental
state paid no heed to the democratic aspect of the developmental state. This is partly
because some scholars regarded the repressive nature of the state as one of the factors
that enhanced its developmental capacity.40
35- Bolesta, China as a Developmental State in Montenegrin Journal of Economics, No.5. 2007, pp.107
36- Leenders, The East Asian Miracle and the Developmental State, Is it possible to replicate the developmental model,
and is it desirable to replicate the developmental state model? Politics of Development. Brendan Da Costa, 2007, pp.6-7.
37- Quoted in Leenders, ibid.
38- Leenders, ibid.
39- As cited in Edigheji, 2005, ibid. p. 12.
40- Edigheji, ibid.
11
He goes on to remind us that what is of central importance is the states ability to use
its autonomy to consult, negotiate and elicit consensus and cooperation from its social
partners in the task of national economic reforms and adjustment. Cooperation is thus
a central element of the developmental state, although cooperation is limited to the
private sector.
Furthermore, it can be argued that one of the most definitive characteristics of the
developmental states of East Asia was their authoritarian nature and thus the model of
developmental state is inconsistent with the vision of a pluralistic form of democracy,
in which a multitude of interest groups enjoy broadly equal and unrestricted access to
the state.41 Yet despite the fact that the developmental state, according to
Leenders,seems to be mutually exclusive of democracy, the states of East Asia have
still tried to portray a veil of democratic process in society. Despite these late attempts
at democratic legitimacy, during the development years none of the NICs have made
much progress in creating democratic structures that would facilitate meaningful
political participation by the majority.42 It is therefore highly questionable whether it
would be a good idea to apply this in another region, forcing an authoritarian system
upon them. Along with this question, Bolesta argues that:
developmental state in Japan can be traced back to the Meiji era, an undemocratic
period of time in the Japanese history, as well as the fact that in contemporary Japan
it is the bureaucratic structure which is believed to manage the countrys affairs and
democratically elected politicians seem to have limited influence on the running of
the state. Japanese state bureaucracy, unaffected by democratic elections, as it in fact
should be in a liberal democracy, seems to have a longer control over state governing
than in other democracies.43
12
Lipset, on the other hand, suggested a positive linear relationship between levels
of socio-economic development and democratic development. According to him:
economic development involving industrialization, urbanization, high educational
standards, and a steady increase in the overall wealth of the society, is a basic condition
sustaining democracy; it is a mark of efficiency of the total system. The stability of a
given democratic system depends not only on the systems efficiency in modernization,
but also upon effectiveness and legitimacy of the political systems. 46
This leads us further into probing the concept of democratic developmental state. The
concept of democratic developmental state denotes that a given state can be a
developmentalist and at the same time advance democratic values for the two can
arguably reinforce each other. Matlosa suggests that for a sustainable economic
nationalism, which is a key for the existence and functioning of a developmental
state, democratic governance is necessary, and argues that the notion of democratic
developmental state makes liberation (of the people, state, society and economy)
from domestic tyranny and foreign domination fundamental to democratization,
democracy and development47
The invocation of liberation points to the fact that democracy and development
cannotand should notbe externally driven, no matter how benevolent the
international community might be. Edigheji provides a more comprehensive definition
to the notion of democratic developmental state:
It not only has the institutional attributes of the classical developmental state, that is,
being autonomous and coherent, but also takes on board the attributes of procedural
democracy.
In addition, the democratic developmental state is one that forges broad-based
alliances with society and ensures popular participation in the governance and
transformation processes. Although the democratic developmental state may be
federalist or unitary, a parliamentary or presidential system of government, it is guided
by the goals of coherence and authoritative governance, accountability, inclusiveness,
stability, ability to generate consensus and popular participation.48 (emphasis mine.)
It is thus possible to contend that what the democratic developmental state requires is
a political system that is able to accommodate diverse political interests and voices.
This implies that a developmental state must, of necessity, be an authoritarian one,
as it may as well be democratic. One can conclude from the foregoing, then, that a
developmental state and democratic governance are not antithetical to each other.
Indeed, they are complementary and as such can reinforce each other.
46- Quoted in Z. F. Arat, Democracy and Economic Development: Modernization Theory Revisited in Comparative Politics,
Vol.21, No.1. 1988, p. 22.
47- Khabele Matlosa, The State, Democracy and Development in Southern Africa, Paper prepared for the 11th General
Assembly of CODESRIA on Rethinking African Development: Beyond Impasse, towards alternatives, Maputo, Mozambique.
2005, p.4.
48- Edigheji, supra note 39, P.22.
13
This is important especially for achieving the consensus needed around the
developmental route the country seeks to take. This in turn helps to create the needed
(political) elite coalition around the developmental agenda. The role of the state in the
economy needs to be clearly defined and agreed upon. For a country that came out
of a planned (socialist) economy that was authoritarian and repressive, for a country
that also suffered under a state-led economy that largely funded war efforts in the face
of protracted long-running civil wars, the idea of a strong state posing as the principal
actor in the economy is not something that sinks in easily. Memory informs the choice.
It is also important to discuss if a developmental state meets the needs and demands
of the economy. The admonition that is persistent in the literature is that we have
to avoid the one-size-fits all approach. It is therefore important to ask and resolve
the question of what model of developmental state we seek to pursue in Ethiopia.
Questions that seem to be apparently exhausted but questions that keep coming (such
as the one regarding the privatization of land, or natural resource extraction) are still
potent questions that divide the political elite thereby undermining the much needed
coalition and consensus on the developmental agenda. Questions pertaining to the
emphasis given to democratization (genuine political reform, inclusive participation,
accountability, transparency, exercise of instrumental and constitutive freedoms, etc)
also need to be tackled.
49- See Perry Anderson, Two Revolutions: Rough Notes New Left Review, Vol. 61 (2010), pp. 59-96, for an elaborate
comparison of the Russian and the Chinese revolutions of the 20th century and the limits of success of a coercive state such
as the one in 20th century Russia.
How does the Ethiopian state position itself in relation to democratization? Is there
(a sign of ) the endorsement of the incompatibility thesis, or is there a risk of inviting
the sequencing fallacy? The policy pronouncement in Ethiopia seems to go beyond
the thesis and the fallacy, but when memory of past repression and authoritarianism
informs present choices, it is important to confront these questions heads on and
resolve them resoundingly so that the skepticism born out of the irresolution might
fragment the consensus and impede the needed coalition.
Given the fact that the transition to democracy is taking long and tortuous routes, the
developmental state to be constructed in Ethiopia is bound to push the agenda of
democratic transitions as well as economic transformation. This is partly a necessity
because the developmental state in Ethiopia needs the legitimacy, the credibility, and
the competence that comes from its democratic credential. To lead the transformation
emphatically in an authoritative and binding manner, it is imperative that the state
work on the democratization agenda as well as the developmental agenda without
prioritizing one over the other. Added to the memory of a repressive past that informs
the existential present is the incomplete transition to a multi-ethnic multi-cultural
federal polity that subscribes to the federalist principle of self-rule and shared rule,
equitable sharing of resources and power.50 To the extent there is disaffection regarding
the division and sharing of power, resources, and social opportunities, it is challenging
to secure the consensus needed for a developmental state.
Other issues such as the issue of capacity in the public sector (competent, qualified,
and professional staff with a clear career plan) also need to be addressed particularly
in the light of the high staff turnover in the public sector of the country. The issue of
whether the developmental state we seek to construct in Ethiopia will sit well with the
constitutional democracy prescribed and sanctioned by the liberal multiculaturalist
constitution is also an issue to explore. The question of how a developmentalist state
stringently constrained by the human rights provisions of the constitution with a
heavy accent on accountability and transparency of government is an important one
to explore as things unfold day by day. Asked in another way, the question actually is:
did the constitution foresee, and can it accommodate, a developmental state? In short,
the question of whether the Ethiopian state evolving into a democratic developmental
state, can become a state that promotes economic and social inclusion, that is
underpinned by the principles of democratic governance, and that is environmentally
sustainable, is a yet other question to explore.
50- The incompleteness of the transition has been voiced by a number of commentators on Ethiopian politics. See for
example, J. Abbink, Discomfiture of democracy? The 2005 Election Crisis in Ethiopia and its aftermath African Affairs 105
(2006); J Abbink, The Ethiopian Second Republic and the Fragile Social Contract African Spectrum 2 (2009);
J.M. Cohen, Transition toward Democracy and Governance in the Post-Mengistu Ethiopia, (1994) Development Discussion
Paper No. 493, Harvard Institute of International Development, Harvard University; J. Harbeson, Is Ethiopia Democratic:
A Bureaucratic Authoritarian Regime, Journal of Democracy, vol.9, no. 4 (1998); Leenco Lata, The Ethiopian State at the
Crossroads: Decolonization or Disintegration?. Lawrenceville: Red Sea Press,1999; Merera Gudina, Ethiopia: From Autocracy
to Revolutionary Democracy, 1960s-2011. Addis Ababa: Chamber printing House, 2011;
Pausewang, Tronvoll, and Aalen (eds), Ethiopia Since the Derg: A Decade of Democratic Pretension and Performance.
London: Zed Publishers, 2002; Tronvoll, The Ethiopian 2010 Federal and Regional Elections: Re-establishing the One Party
state, African Affairs 110/438 (2011); Vestal, Ethiopia: A Post-cold war African State. Westport, Connecticut and London,
1999; etc.
15
16
The challenges of democratizing a developmental state are many and varied. Creating
an inclusive responsive state that is grounded in established international standards of
human rights and democracy is not something one can do without a challenge. In this
section, we will summarize the outstanding challenges as follows: a) overcoming the
legacy of authoritarianism, ethnocracy, and neo-liberalism; b) forming a capable state
with an efficient bureaucracy, meritocratic public service system, and stemming the
staff turnover, the lack of skill, etc); c) managing the challenge of multiple transitions
that demand: restructuring the state, opening the political space, and liberalizing the
economy; d) living under a constitutional democracy with the onerous burden of
protecting and enforcing human rights by harmonizing the relation between collective
and individual, civil/political and economic/socio-cultural, rights; e) confronting the
external elements that have the role of makers and breakers of developmental state;51
and f ) the challenges of mobilizing people and resources for the developmentalist
project persuasively (not coercively).
51- Consider the varying roles of the US in SE Asia and in Latin America and its impact on the development of a developmental
state or the lack thereof). Note that the heavy military and financial presence of the US in the Tiger countries such as the
Republic of Korea contributed immensely to the success of the developmental state in the 20th century. Note further that in
Latin American states (countries that have more developmentalist instincts than countries of any other parts of the world),
USAs presence (which is focused mainly on undermining Cuban-style socialist revolutions) was negative in the main, if not
outrightly subversive. One cannot imagine a better example with which to show the contrast that comes out depending
on the support or subversion a country obtains from external actors. It is thus important to note that the external element,
depending on its supportive or subversive role, can make or break many a developmental state in a particular geopolitical
space.The external element is particularly important for countries such as Ethiopia, who, being in the volatile region of
East Africa, finds itself beset by the challenges of interlocked conflicts, emerging from weak, collapsed, or fragile states; a
region full of non-state actors (mercenaries, traffickers in SALWs, armed liberation fronts, terrorists, etc. The international
presence as a counter-terrorist force will also have an impact on the domestic political experimentation of the countries of
the horn, including Ethiopia.
To leaders, the challenge of balancing the rights of business (e.g., shareholders) with
the needs of the majority, and the challenge of governing in accordance with popular
wishes while transforming the structure of the economy is an outstanding one.52 These
challenges need to be met as we seek to build a democratic developmental state in
contexts such as that of Ethiopia. They remain to be challenges in spite of the fact
that, owing to the collapse of the Washington Consensus and the emergence of new
global players, their toll might not be that large.
17
The emphasis on becoming a country of democratic rule, good governance, and social
justice pegged on the participation and the consent (involvement and freewill are
the words used!) of the people indicates, in no uncertain terms, that it is a state with a
democratic impetus.
This democratic orientation of the Government is also rooted in the 1995 Federal
Constitution which stresses the construction of a polity founded on the rule of law to
guarantee a democratic order, and advancingeconomic and social development.57
The constitution also insists that respect of individual and peoples fundamental
freedoms and rights is a necessary condition for the achievement of the above
mentioned objective.
This indicates that securing human rights is a condition sine qua non for the attainment
of the goal of economic and social development in a polity founded on the rule of
law. The principles of self-determination of collectivities, inter-personal and intergroup equality and non-discrimination, the principle of affirmative action as a tool of
rectifying unjust historical relationships among ethnic and religious groups, and the
aspiration to establish a lasting peace are some of the values that figure prominently
in the constitution. The explicit recognition of the whole range of human rights set in
international human rights conventions in what constitutes one-third of the corpus of
the constitution shows the interest in ensconcing a democratic order informed and
rooted in international standards.58
18
57 FDRE, The Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE), Preamble, parag.1.
58 Chapter 3 (arts 13-44) of the constitution extends guarantee to fundamental rights and freedoms. In its article 9(4)
and 13(2), it recognizes the fact that international human rights treaties are not only part of the law of the land but also
informing the domestic interpretation of human rights provisions of the constitution. This indicates that the democratic
practice in Ethiopia, much like what the UNDP advocates for, is fully undergirded by relevant international standards. See
the UNDP Strategic Plan, 2008-2012.
5. Conclusion
n this piece, an attempted is made to explore the issues, the challenges, and the
Icase
prospects in relation to democratizing a developmental state by reflecting on the
of Ethiopia. From the beginning, it was suggested that we need to steer away
from the incompatibility thesis and the sequencing fallacy. In other words, it was
suggested that we dont have to subscribe unwittingly to the idea that democratization
is incompatible to development or that development is primary to democratization.
It was also noted that Ethiopia has declared itself as a developmental state thereby
bringing more emphasis to its developmentalist ideology and fortifying itself for a
better capacitated set of institutions that can allow the state to play a key and central
role in the economy. One tentative conclusion we can draw from the foregoing
discussion is that an emphatic, hard, and strong state that has a developmentalist
vision can be innovative and creative in its handling of the democratic agenda. Dealing
with such a state demands a commensurate innovation and creativity in order for it to
make a meaningful impact towards deepening democracy in Ethiopia.
19
Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily
represent those of UNDP
20