Democracy is a highly contested concept, both in terms of its definition and its relationship to development. Whilst some understand it in procedural terms – as electoral competition and decision-making – others view it more broadly in terms of civil and political rights and the distribution of power within society. Either way, a central question is how citizens exercise control and scrutiny over political institutions.
This page addresses two specific issues for development practitioners. How can processes of democratisation be supported in different development contexts? And how can democracy be pro-poor? A large body of literature on democracy addresses these and many other questions. For further reading, please see the links in the useful websites section.
Page contents
- Processes of democratisation
- Democratic consolidation and democracy promotion
- Hybrid regimes
- Democracy and development
- Democracy and conflict
- Useful websites
Processes of democratisation
How are processes of democratisation influenced by economic development, history, state capacity and civil society? Why do some democratisation processes succeed where others fail? Can these processes be effectively supported by external agencies?
The so-called ‘third wave’ of democratisation during the early 1990s demonstrated that the emergence of democracy is not contingent on a certain level of economic development. But there is considerable ongoing debate about whether and how structural factors – economic, social, and institutional conditions and legacies – impact on the prospects for democratisation and on the sustainability of democratic political systems.
Carothers, T., 2007, ‘How Democracies Emerge: The Sequencing Fallacy’, Journal of Democracy, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 12-27
Should the rule of law and a well-functioning state be prerequisites for democratisation? Democratic sequencing suggests that they should. This article from the Journal of Democracy argues that sequencing is a problematic idea rooted in scepticism about democracy, which helps to postpone democratisation indefinitely. A more useful alternative is gradualism, which aims to build democracy slowly, taking into account the risks and complications of democratisation.
Access full text: available online
Tilly, C., 2000, ‘Processes and Mechanisms of Democratization’, Sociological Theory, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1-16
How is the process of democratisation best defined? What are the necessary conditions for successful democratisation? This study from Columbia University attempts to specify the various conditions and processes that promoted or blocked democratisation in different parts of Europe between 1650 and the present. It identifies possible mechanisms in democratisation and specifies likely conditions affecting their emergence.
Access full text: available online
Lynch, G. and Crawford, G., eds., 2011, ‘Democratization in Africa 1990-2010: an assessment’, Democratization, vol.18, no. 2, pp.275-310
This special issue of Democratization examines the (lack of) progress made in democratisation processes in Africa from 1990 to 2010. It highlights seven areas of progress and setbacks: 1) increasingly illegitimate, but ongoing military intervention; 2) regular elections and occasional transfers of power, but realities of democratic rollback and hybrid regimes; 3) democratic institutionalisation, but ongoing presidentialism and endemic corruption; 4) the institutionalisation of political parties, but widespread ethnic voting and the rise of an exclusionary (and often violent) politics of belonging; 5) increasingly dense civil societies, but local realities of incivility, violence and insecurity; 6) new political freedoms and economic growth, but extensive political controls and uneven development; and 7) the donor community’s mixed commitment to, and at times perverse impact on, democracy promotion.
Access full text: available online
Democratic consolidation and democracy promotion
What factors determine the quality and strength of democratic politics, and what can make democracies susceptible to failure?
There is broad consensus that in order for democratisation processes to be sustainable, they need to come from within. Building democratic institutions alone does not guarantee the spread of democratic politics – the consolidation or ‘deepening’ of democratic norms and principles in every area of governance and society is a more complex and long-term process of change. While some have argued that existing donor approaches to democracy promotion have neglected local concerns, others argue that the most serious problem with democracy promotion has been a failure to defend core liberal norms.
Kapstein, E., and Converse, N., 2008, ‘Why Democracies Fail’, Journal of Democracy, Volume 19, Number 4, October 2008
In explaining why democracies fail, experts have tended to focus on economic performance. Yet this article analyses new data on young democracies and argues that political institutions are crucial for democratic consolidation. Institutions that place effective constraints on executive power are especially important. Donor assistance strategies should aim to help spread political and economic power more widely and must be maintained for a young democracy’s first five years.
Access full text: available online
Rakner, L., Rocha Menocal, A. and Fritz, V., 2007, ‘Democratisation’s Third Wave and the Challenges of Democratic Deepening: Assessing International Democracy Assistance and Lessons Learned’, Research Paper for the Advisory Board to Irish Aid, Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London
What are the main challenges facing incipient democratic regimes in the developing world? How can donors best support democratisation in these countries? This paper argues that incomplete democratisation processes and the predominance of ‘hybrid regimes’ pose serious challenges to the sustainability, capacity, responsiveness and effectiveness of democratic institutions. In order to be sustainable, democratisation impulses need to come from within. External actors have a positive role to play in efforts to strengthen democratic structures, but they cannot act as substitutes when domestic support is lacking.
Access full text: available online
Luckham, R., Goetz, A. M. and Kaldor, M., 2003, ‘Democratic Institutions and Democratic Politics’ in Can Democracy be Designed? The Politics of Institutional Choice in Conflict-Torn Societies, eds. S. Bastian and R. Luckham, Zed Books, London
Contemporary governance debates often assume the positive contribution of democracy to civil and political equality, poverty reduction, and conflict resolution. Yet, is the evidence for this conclusive? This book chapter makes a distinction between institutions and politics, seeking to demonstrate that the spread of democratic institutions does not guarantee the spread of democratic politics. It investigates ways in which democratic institutions can be designed to foster democratic politics that embody popular demands for participation, social justice and peace.
Access full text: available online.
A growing body of literature discusses how democratic politics can embody popular demands for participation, social justice and peace. Approaches to building democratic political systems need to go beyond the introduction of minimal, procedural democracy.
Siegle, J. et al., 2011, ‘Africa and the Arab Spring: A New Era of Democratic Expectations’, Special Report, Africa Center for Strategic Studies, Washington DC
This paper suggests that the Arab Spring is a trigger for further democratic reforms in Africa, rather than a driver. There are few linear relationships linking events in North Africa to specific shifts in democratisation on the continent. However, the frustration propelling the protests in North Africa resonates with many Africans. The Arab Spring is instigating changes in the expectations that African citizens have of their governments.
Access full text: available online
Radelet, S., 2010, ‘Success Stories from “Emerging Africa”‘, Journal of Democracy, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 87-101
What changes have occurred among sub-Saharan African nations since the mid-1990s? This essay highlights 17 African countries that have achieved dramatic improvements in economic growth, poverty reduction and political accountability. Another six ‘threshold’ countries have experienced promising change. The turnaround was ignited by a combination of economic reform and political change. While the countries of ’emerging Africa’ face challenges and risks, they seem likely to continue their progress. This is due to the combination of five key factors: the rise of more democratic and accountable governments; the implementation of better economic policies; the end of the debt crisis; the spread of new technologies that promote political accountability and new business opportunities; and the emergence of new policymakers, activists and business leaders.
Access full text: available online
Gaventa, J., 2006, ‘Triumph, Deficit or Contestation: Deepening the “Deepening Democracy” Debate’, IDS Working Paper 264, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton
What are the strengths and weaknesses of current approaches to democracy? What challenges exist in efforts to promote “deeper” democracy? This working paper from the Institute of Development Studies surveys current debates about democracy, covering four main strands: “civil society” democracy, participatory democracy, deliberative democracy and empowered participatory governance. It argues that democracy is an ongoing process of contestation, rather than a set of standardised institutional designs: approaches to democracy should combine a range of democratic models.
Access full text: available online
Horner, L. and Puddephatt, A., 2011, ‘Democratic Space in Asia-Pacific: Challenges for Democratic Governance Assistance and Deepening Civic Engagement’, Working Paper, UNDP
This paper examines the factors that affect the capacity of democratic space to give poor and marginalised groups meaningful opportunities to exercise their human rights. It shows that democracy in many Asia-Pacific countries consists mainly of formal democratic institutions rather than substantive democratic processes, values and relationships. This leaves democratic space prone both to manipulation and to closure by powerful individuals and groups.
Access full text: available online
Ottaway, M. and Hamzawy, A., 2009, Getting to Pluralism: Political Actors in the Arab World’, eds. M. Ottaway and A. Hamzawy, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, D.C.
Why has political pluralism in the Arab world not yet matured into functional democratic politics? This book examines the weakness of the secular parties, the complexities of Islamist participation in politics, and incumbent regimes’ grip on power. Formal political spaces are tightly controlled and have failed to achieve democratic dividends. Informal protests are increasingly popular as a way of making demands on leaders, but have not yet reinvigorated formal politics or generated concessions from governments.
Access full text: available online
Schattan, V., Coelho, C. and von Lieres, B., eds., 2010, ‘Mobilizing for Democracy: Citizen Action and the Politics of Public Participation’, Zed Books, London
This book is an in-depth study into how ordinary citizens and their organisations mobilise to deepen democracy. It features a collection of new empirical case studies from Angola, Bangladesh, Brazil, India, Kenya, Nigeria and South Africa, to illustrate how forms of political mobilisation, such as protests, social participation, activism, litigation and lobbying engage with the formal institutions of representative democracy in ways that are core to the development of democratic politics.
Access full text: available online
Youngs, R., 2011, ‘Misunderstanding The Maladies of Liberal Democracy Promotion’, Working Paper 106, FRIDE, Madrid
This paper contends that the problem with democracy promotion is not the over-zealous imposition of liberal norms, as much current criticism suggests. Instead, the paper argues, the problem is governments’ failure to defend core liberal norms in a way that would allow local variations and choices of democratic reform, along with genuine civic empowerment and emancipation. Current criticisms of the democracy agenda therefore risk pushing policy deliberations in the opposite direction to their required improvement.
Access full text: available online
Further resources
- ‘Pro-poor participation’ – for further consideration of the relationship between democracy and participation.
- See ‘Voice and participation’ in the GSDRC’s Voice, Empowerment and Accountability topic guide.
Hybrid regimes
The quality of democratic politics is highly variable between countries and also between institutions within them. Even where the formal institutions of democracy are seemingly in place, in reality, the state can continue to operate on non-democratic principles. There isn’t always a clear distinction between political systems that are ‘democratic’ or ‘undemocratic’.
In recent years, semi-democracies, or hybrid regimes – which occupy a middle ground between outright authoritarianism and full liberal democracy – have become a focus of attention.
Rocha Menocal, A., Fritz, V., and Rakner, L., 2007, ‘Hybrid Regimes and the Challenges of Deepening and Sustaining Democracy in Developing Countries’, Background note (2) prepared for the Wilton Park Conference on Democracy and Development, 10-12 October 2007
Despite the momentous transformation that the ‘Third Wave’ of democratisation has brought to formal political structures in Africa, Asia and Latin America, only a limited number of countries have succeeded in establishing consolidated and functioning democratic regimes. Instead, many of these new regimes have ended up ‘getting stuck’ in transition, combining a rhetorical acceptance of liberal democracy with essentially illiberal and/or authoritarian traits. This article analyses the emergence and key characteristics of these ‘hybrid regimes’ and the challenges of democratic deepening. Because a broad consensus to uphold democracy as ‘the only game in town’ is lacking, hybrid regimes tend to be unstable, unpredictable, or both. A deeper understanding of the problems besetting these regimes helps provide a more realistic assessment of what these incipient and fragile democracies can be expected to achieve.
Access full text: available online
Boege, V., Brown, A., Clements, K., and Nolan, A., 2008, ‘On Hybrid Political Orders and Emerging States: State Formation in the Context of “Fragility”‘, Berghof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management, Berlin
Newly imposed states lacked roots in the recipient societies, undermining their legitimacy, and subsequent economic and political reforms only served to further erode the state’s capabilities and institutions. What emerges instead in the developing world is a hybrid political order in which ‘the state’ is only one actor among others. As such, it does not have a privileged position; it has to share authority, legitimacy, and capacity with other structures.
Access full text: available online
Further resources:
- ‘Patronage politics’ section of this guide
Democracy and development
Is democracy necessary or good for development? Can it work in under-developed contexts? How can democracy be pro-poor?
The relationship between democracy and development is highly contested. Some argue that democratic institutions play a crucial role in promoting development, but others contend that democratic politics can actually hinder prospects for economic growth. Overall, the evidence of any causality between democracy and development is inconclusive.
Halperin, M., Siegle, J., and Weinstein, M., 2010 (rev. ed.), ‘The Democracy Advantage: How Democracies Promote Prosperity and Peace’, Routledge
Should international actors support the emergence of democracy? This book provides an empirically-grounded analysis of the development track record of poor countries with both democratic and oppressive political systems. It argues that democracy supports development and reduces the likelihood of violent conflict, recommending that democracy be made central to international engagement with the developing world.
Access full text: available online
Rocha Menocal, A., 2007, ‘Analysing the relationship between democracy and development: Defining Basic Concepts and Assessing Key Linkages’, Background note (1) prepared for the Wilton Park Conference on Democracy and Development, 23-25 October 2007
This paper analyses the complex relationship between democracy and development, highlighting the importance of democracy as a process and development as an outcome. The evidence on whether democratic or authoritarian regimes promote development more effectively remains mixed. Given that different political regimes may be capable of implementing similar policies, it may be useful for donors to consider the kinds of institutional arrangements that are in place instead of focusing solely on regime-type.
Access full text: available online
Diamond, L., 2004, ‘Moving On Up Out of Poverty: What Does Democracy Have to Do With It?’, CDDRL Working Paper no. 4, Centre on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, Stanford University
What is the relationship between governance and poverty? Do democracies eliminate poverty more effectively than authoritarian regimes? This working paper from Stanford University’s Centre on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law suggests that the obstacles to the elimination of poverty are largely political. Poverty is generated and reproduced by power disparity and abuse. The enduring reduction of poverty requires a broad context of good governance, beyond the narrow arena of free and fair elections.
Access full text: available online
Gerring, J., Thacker, S. C. and Alfaro, R. (2012). Democracy and human development. The Journal of Politics, 74(1), pp. 1-17.
Does democracy improve citizens’ quality of life? This quantitative study finds that there is limited evidence to support the theory that a country’s level of democracy in a given year affects its level of human development. However, it finds that a country’s stock of democracy over the past century has a significant impact on its human development.
Access full text: available online
Kalyvitis, S. and Vlachaki, I. (2012). When does more aid imply less democracy? An empirical examination. European Journal of Political Economy, 28(1), pp. 132-146.
Has foreign aid affected the political regime of recipient countries? This quantitative study finds that aid flows decrease the likelihood of observing a democratic regime in a recipient country. This effect is dependent on economic and social conditions. The negative relationship between aid and democracy is moderated when aid flows are preceded by economic liberalisation.
Access full text: available online
A key issue is whether the institutions required for stable and consolidated democracy and those required for rapid, effective and sustained growth and development are compatible.
Leftwich, A., 2005, ‘Democracy and Development: Is There Institutional Incompatibility?’ Democratization Volume 12, Number 5, pp. 686–703.
Are the institutions of development and the institutions of democracy structurally compatible? This article from the journal ‘Democratization’ examines development and democracy from an institutional perspective. It argues that while development requires rapid and far-reaching change, democracy is essentially a conservative system of power producing consensual and incremental change. The institutional characteristics and requirements for development and those for stable and consolidated democracy, therefore, pull in opposite directions.
Access full text: available online
Democracy and conflict
It is often stated that democracies do not go to war with each other. But does research support this claim? What effect does democracy have on conflict and what does this mean for development?
Mansfield, E.D. and Snyder, J., 2007 ‘Turbulent Transitions: Why Emerging Democracies Go to War in the Twenty-first Century’, in Crocker, C., Hampson, F. O. and Aall, P. (eds.), Leashing the Dogs of War: Conflict Management in a Divided World, United States Institute of Peace, pp. 161-176., Washington, D.C.
Is democratisation to best way to promote peace? This research from the United States Institute of Peace argues that the world would probably be safer if there were more mature democracies but, in the transition to democracy, countries become more aggressive and war prone. The international community should be realistic about the dangers of encouraging democratisation where the conditions are unripe. The risk of violence increases if democratic institutions are not in place when mass electoral politics are introduced.
Access full text: available online
Stewart, F. and O’Sullivan, M., 1999, ‘Democracy, Conflict and Development – Three Cases,’ in The Political Economy of Comparative Development into the 21st Century, eds. G. Ranis, G. et al, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Western governments view the promotion of democracy as desirable both as an end in itself and because of the widespread belief that democracies do not wage war on one another, that they are less likely to repress their own citizens, and that democracy promotes development and growth. This chapter, from ‘The Political Economy of Comparative Development into the 21st Century’, asks whether democracies are invariably less likely to suffer internal strife, and whether such strife really hampers development. It examines the relationship between democracy, conflict and development, through three case studies: Kenya and Uganda (which have much in common) and Sri Lanka.
Access full text: available online
Useful websites
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is a non-partisan, non-profit organisation which aims to advance cooperation between nations and promote active international engagement by the US.
- The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) is an intergovernmental organisation that aims to provide knowledge and policy analysis to support democratic reform.
- The National Democratic Institute (NDI) is a non-profit organisation working to strengthen and expand democracy worldwide by promoting citizen participation, openness and accountability in government.
- The Centre for Democratic Institutions at the Australian National University support democratic processes and institutions in Southeast Asia and the Pacific through knowledge sharing.
- Read more on democratisation from Eldis.
