The Politics and Governance of Development
Chapter One
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The objectives of the study are;
- To ascertain the relationship between politics and governance of development
- To ascertain the kind of development brought by politics
- To ascertain whether politics affect economic development
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
CONCEPT OF POLITICS OF DEVELOPMENT
According to Karimi and Sarjit (2014), political development is a vast area of study in politics and involves different views. Accordingly, there has been diversity in the definition of the concept and its relation to socio economic culture of many societies. Most definitions have emphasized the necessary features of political development. For exampleKarimi and Sarjit (2014) defined the concept as the adjustment between old patterns of life andnew demands in relation to political aspects.Pye (1995) looks at political development as a concept supporting the gradual diffusion throughout all societies of what we might call a world. According to Pye (1995) theintermediate step to reach political development is the development of a national state. He pointed out that political development can be in the whole population, at the government leveland in the organisation of political systems as well.Almond (1960) pointed out that political development is mobilization of power.According to Weber and Lapalombara (1963), political development is administrative development. Lerner (1958) described political development as one aspect of multi-dimensional social change. On the other hand political development is the building of democracyby promoting democratic values among the people (Almond and Coleman, 1960).Pye (1966) made a mention of the views about political development. For example in the economists’ point of view, he noted that political prerequisites as well as social ones play a crucial role in facilitating increase in per capita income. Thus according to him political development translates into economic growth and industrial development as well asgeneral performance of the economy. Understandably, the most common definition of political development consists of a larger number of changes in different layers of the economy, society, taking into account state performance, people’s welfare, activities of the elites, socioeconomic and progressive political cultural tendencies (Karimi et al, 2014). In this regard with respect to government performance, political development strikes at the roots of its capacity of the political system to manage public affairs, control conflicts, and cope with popular demands (Pye, 1966).
CONCEPT OF DEVELOPMENT
The earliest concept of development was interpreted in terms of growth output over time and later in terms of per capita output. The terms growth and development were used interchangeably (Raju, 2011).According to Kindler-Berger and Herrick (1958), “economic development is generally defined to include improvements in the material welfare especially for persons with the lowest incomes, the eradication of mass poverty with its correlates of illiteracy, disease and early child death, changes in the composition of inputs and output that generally include shifts in the underlying structure of production away from agricultural towards industrial activities, the organisation of the economy in such a way that productive employment is generally among the population rather the situation of the privileged minority. Kindler-Berger tried to make adistinction between economic growth and economic development by defining economic development to mean both more output and changes in the technical and institutional arrangement by which it is produced and distributed unlike economic growth which merely comprises of an increase in the output.
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research design
The researcher used descriptive research survey design in building up this project work the choice of this research design was considered appropriate because of its advantages of identifying attributes of a large population from a group of individuals. The design was suitable for the study as the study sought to the politics and governance of development
Sources of data collection
Data were collected from two main sources namely:
(i)Primary source and
(ii)Secondary source
Primary source:
These are materials of statistical investigation which were collected by the research for a particular purpose. They can be obtained through a survey, observation questionnaire or as experiment; the researcher has adopted the questionnaire method for this study.
Secondary source:
These are data from textbook Journal handset etc. they arise as byproducts of the same other purposes. Example administration, various other unpublished works and write ups were also used.
Population of the study
Population of a study is a group of persons or aggregate items, things the researcher is interested in getting information on the politics and governance of development. 200 selected residents in Enugu communities, Enugu state was selected randomly by the researcher as the population of the study.
CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION ANALYSIS INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Introduction
Efforts will be made at this stage to present, analyze and interpret the data collected during the field survey. This presentation will be based on the responses from the completed questionnaires. The result of this exercise will be summarized in tabular forms for easy references and analysis. It will also show answers to questions relating to the research questions for this research study. The researcher employed simple percentage in the analysis.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Introduction
It is important to ascertain that the objective of this study was to ascertain the politics and governance of development. In the preceding chapter, the relevant data collected for this study were presented, critically analyzed and appropriate interpretation given. In this chapter, certain recommendations made which in the opinion of the researcher will be of benefits in addressing the challenges of the politics and governance of development
Summary
This study was on the politics and governance of development. Three objectives were raised which included: To ascertain the relationship between politics and governance of development, to ascertain kind of development brought by politics, to ascertain whether politics affect economic development. In line with these objectives, two research hypotheses were formulated and two null hypotheses were posited. The total population for the study is 200 selected residents in Enugu communities, Enugu state. The researcher used questionnaires as the instrument for the data collection. Descriptive Survey research design was adopted for this study. A total of 133 respondents made politicians, civil servants, youths and women were used for the study. The data collected were presented in tables and analyzed using simple percentages and frequencies
Conclusion
It is possible then to attribute important consequences for development to governance. Nevertheless, we have argued in this chapter that the literature on governance is really part of the more general literature on the political economy of institutions and development and so far the proponents of governance have not made a strong case that there is something called `governance’ which is conceptually distinct and which is causally related to development. As yet governance has not been unbundled and indeed appears too vague to be unbundled. This being the case, though we have attempted here to enter into the spirit of the literature on governance, we are ultimately quite skeptical about what the term, as currently wielded by its proponents, adds to our understanding of development.
Recommendation
Good governance and development is for the benefit of the nation, should be a room for development especially for the masses
REFERENCES
- Asian Development Bank. (2008). Asian Development Bank annual report 2007. Retrieved from http://www.adb.org/documents/ adb-annual-report-2007
- Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2009). How development leads to democracy: What do we know about modernization today? Foreign Affair, 88(2), 33-48.
- Lawal, G., & Tobi, A. (2006). Bureaucratic corruption, good governance and development: The challenges and prospects of institution building in Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 2(10), 642-649.
- Schaumburg-Müller, H. (2005). Private-Sector development in a transition economy: The case of Vietnam. Development in Practice, 15(3-4), 349-361.
- Siegle, J. T., Weinstein, M. M., & Halperin, M. H. (2004). Why democracies excel. Foreign Affairs, 83(5), 57-71.
- Um, K. (2008). Cambodia: A decade after the coup. Southeast Asian Affairs. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Pp. 109-119.
- Weatherbee, D. E. (2004). Governance in Southeast Asia: The good, the bad, and the ugly. In Y. Sato (Ed.), Growth and governance in Asia (pp. 179-192). Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies.
- World Bank Group. (2006). The world development report 2007: Development and the next generation. Washington D.C.: The World Bank. Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/556251468128407787/pdf/359990WDR0complete. pdf
- Acemoglu, Daron, Davide Cantoni, Simon Johnson and James A.
- Robinson (2008) \Consequences of Radical Institutional Reform: The French Revolution and European Capitalism,” work in progress. Acemoglu, Daron, Simon Johnson, Pablo Querubn and James A.
