NICOLE KOKI
AS GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES AND RESERCH
9239/02 – INDIVIDUAL REPORT
Research Question: Does emphasis of democratic space affect the growth of developing
countries?
Democracy has been an ideology that has roamed the grounds of the globe since the 5th century
(B.C), and the credit for its creation goes to the ancient Greeks. The word 'Democracy" is a
coined term derived from "Demos", (meaning people) and "Kratos" (meaning rule), and it
ultimately refers to the rule of a particular setting influenced by its people's choice and for its
people's benefit (Britannica, Sharpio et al,2023). The thought would most probably be that
since democracies allow freedom to people that the ideology would be accepted and enforced
worldwide, but that is not the case. According to Garcia the 'Democracy Index' has undergone
a plummet as of 2021 from 2020, and has remained stagnant in 2022. It has also set a 'dismal
record for the worst global score since the world democracy index was first produced in 2006'
(Garcia,2022).
According to wisevoter, the top ten most democratic countries happen to be developed, which
include "Norway, New Zealand, Finland, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, Ireland, Taiwan,
Australia, and Canada", whilst the least happen to be undeveloped, including 'Democratic
Republic of Congo, Syria, Chad, and Afghanistan' (Most Democratic Countries 2023Wisevoter, n.d). The controversy in this shows that there are scarce countries worldwide that
are full democracies, and in that percentage undeveloped countries dwell as the least
democratic. This raises the question of whether undeveloped countries should therefore work
on enhancing democracy to enforce economic improvement. 'Brookings' claims that studies
have demonstrated that a nation's performance improves with time when it comes to a range of
development and governance metrics, including economic performance, if it is under
democratic rule. Examples of countries that have done this are Indonesia, Brazil, Turkey, and
South Africa (the path to progress? How democratic development drives five rising leaders/
Brookings, 2023).
China is known to be less democratic than USA or India, and its economic miracle suggests
that democracy is not sole catalyst for development. In China, the ruling Chinese communist
party decides who becomes the Chinese leader. However, China remains the world’s second
largest economy. According to the ‘World Bank’, China has a GDP growth of 4.2 and as of
2023 the GDP was $17.7 trillion, according to ‘U.S news & world report’ (World Bank Open
Data, n.d.). In comparison, the afore mentioned countries have graduated from descendants of
military rule, apartheid, colonialism, and authoritarianism to countries with better livelihoods
economically, socially, and politically due to their chosen path of democracy. This is however
not always the case for countries transitioning from developing to developed, and from
authoritarian rule to democratic rule, and this issue is predominantly present in Africa. In
Rwanda, for example, President Paul Kagame has held onto power for over two decades ruling
the country with an iron. However, Rwanda seems to be one of the fastest developing countries
in Africa, being the “first African country to develop its own phone”, and having investors like
“Volkswagen”. His dictatorship power was officiated in 2000, after the 1994 genocide that
killed more than a million. One of his toughest policies, the keeps the country on its toes is that
of ‘Umuganda’, that forces all to sacrifice part of the last Saturday of the month to contribute
to community service. “You can see on social media that and especially President Paul
Kagame, is popular among young Africans…” says Jean-Paul Kimoyo, President Kagame’s
advisor. With dictatorship not being the most socially accepted way of rule, it is interesting to
see that Paul Kagame’s rule is creating influence amongst individuals of even the earlier
generations, because his strategies are efficient in making results for the country. <20 years
under Rwanda’s “benevolent dictator.” dw.com.>, (Cascais, 2020). As of 2021, the country
has a 10.9% annual change GDP growth rate, as recorded by the ‘World Bank’, showing that
the country has been doing well economically despite it not being under a democracy.
According to 'ISSAfrica’, the root of Africa's lack of economic success branches several other
issues, but "an undeniable root is its poor leadership". The assumption was that after 1989, with
Africa aborting the ideology that they were dominated by authoritarian governments, the
introduction of democracies would assist in their economic growth. According to the "V-Dem
2020" Democracy report which ranked states in four categories – "liberal democracy, electoral
democracy, electoral autocracy and closed autocracy – over 70% of sub-Saharan African
countries were either electoral or closed autocracies as of 2019" (democracy alone is no
guarantee of development/ISSAfrica). This possibly concludes that both the presence and
absence of democratic leadership affect the effort of economic growth that is somewhat active
in Africa, and amongst other countries worldwide, but it is still an issue that if followed to the
latter would assist massively in bringing developing countries to an economic solution. A good
example of a country that can be said to have undergone all aspects of this hypothesis is Kenya.
A different perspective is that of Kenya’s economic development. Under British rule, the
country found no formal economic activity in the land by the natives. The imperialist, however,
managed to make it the largest economy in East Africa in fifty years. This was of course at a
heavy cost of infringement on human rights particularly to the inhabitants of Kenya as they
implemented forces labor, alienation of land and taxation without representation. In the span
of 1895 to 1930.Britsh colonization regardless brought the economic development amongst
others to Kenya ; although this was mostly visible in the so called ‘white highlands’ , which
were the fertile parts of the former rift valley and central Kenya .Their works along with that
of the Kenyans are visible seen as the country hold a GDP annual growth of “4.8” compared
to the “4.6” of the neighboring countries , Tanzania and Uganda ( as of 2022) , according to
the ‘World bank’ (World Bank Open Data, n.d.)
From an historical perspective, the democratic journey in Kenya roots from when the country
got her independence in 1963, however, the focus here will be from when the political system
saw a comeback of multiparty politics in December 1991. Kenya seemed to have set a stable
pace that would have possibly led to its economic rise and its lift from being an undeveloped
country after the 2002 election, as it set a milestone for other African countries according to
how properly and peacefully it was conducted. This boosted Kenya's confidence in democracy
being used as their political system. However, after that term, the 2007 election set a negatively
contradicting example of how democracy can affect a country.
An underlying vice seemed to have started forming amongst the people of Kenya; ethnical bias.
This escalated to a somewhat ethnic hierarchy and the struggle for dominance over the
centralized executive authority. Corresponding to "Kenya Democracy and Political
Participation", a review by 'AfriMAP', shows the percentage of the "major groups whose
individual share of the national population exceeds 10% are the Kikuyu (17.15%), Luhya
(13.82%), Kalenjin (12.86%), Luo (10.47%), and Kamba (10.07%). Their total share of the
population is 64.4%."(Kanyinga, 2014). It is anticipated that a larger majority of Kenyans think
that Mwai Kibaki's strategy was to persuade the larger percentage of ethnicities that he
coincidentally also happened to be a part of and that the system was rigged in his favor. An
estimate of '70%' of Kenyans, according to 'Gallup', presumed that Kibaki got his support from
the Kikuyu, Embu, and Meru communities," while Odinga had the support of the "Luo, Luhya,
Kalenjin, and some smaller ethnic communities.". The percentage also thought of the elections
as unjust and "dishonest", due to the ethnical division that was formed beforehand and
afterward (Inc., 2008).
Kenya's five main ethnic groups are relatively equal, there is no single numerically dominant
group, instead there five relatively superior groups, and there are many smaller
ethnicities whose combined demographic share is still in the minority. These factors have made
ethnicity more politicized in the country. Based on ethnicity, political leaders frequently rally
support. A significant reason as to why ethnicity was predominant in Kenya could root of the
controversies over the educational background of its people at the time. According to 'The
UNESCO Institute of Statistics (UIS)', approximately "39.1%" of the population covered the
whole spectrum of attendance from pre-primary to secondary age in 2007. This is a relatively
low figure and it shows that the rest of the population that voted were not of prominent diverse
knowledge. It is said that "Ethnicity is also central to politics because of inequalities in ethnoregional development which stems from the colonial policy of developing areas occupied by
the colonial settlers, namely the White Highlands. The settlers favored central Kenya and the
highlands in the Rift Valley." (Kanyinga, K. K. (2014, March). Thus, there is a sense of the
'superior tribe' in the sense that the white settlers correlated to the 'leader' figure at that time,
and their choice of settlement gave its people a sense of preeminence following Kenya's
independence.
Kenyans allowed ethnical differences to influence their rule and moreover sabotage their
chances of quick economic stability as an undeveloped country that is part of an
underdeveloped continent. The claim that President Kibaki stole votes in the 2007 election was
rooted in the weak political economy in Kenya, deep-seated resentment stemming from the
"socioeconomic injustices of poverty", unemployment, and "landlessness" that have plagued
the nation since its independence. What it brought about is the questionable ultimatum as to
how/ whether democracy benefits the country.
The Fire-filled demonstrations are but a drop in the bucket of the amount of chaos that infested
Kenya from December 27 2007 to February 8, 2008. According to 'The Guardian', by January
2008 the violence had taken the lives of 800 innocent civilians, and "Ethnic clashes were
spreading across Kenya's Rift Valley last night with at least 19 people burned in their homes
or hacked to death in the popular tourist town of Naivasha, 65 miles from Nairobi." The
prominent weapon of choice in this miniature civil war seemed to be fire, as it is the most
accessible and affordable for the common, likely uneducated Kenyan citizen, an example of
the deep-rooted anger inbuilt within them due to the injustices they face due to their ethnical
background and social class. (Rice, 2017)
According to the 'United Nations OHCHR', "more than 1,200 Kenyans were reported killed,
thousands more injured, over 300,000 people displaced and around 42,000 houses and many
businesses were looted or destroyed. A significant number of cases of sexual violence were
also reported.", and this is marked as following the violent post-election events. This was after
the National Accord and Reconciliation Act 2008, which established the office of the Prime
Minister and a coalition government, on February 28, 2008, was signed by Raila Odinga and
Mwai Kibaki.
The economic repercussions of the violence were present in and out of Kenya. The UN
suggested that "Such blockages, along with other economic disruptions, will likely slow
economic growth throughout East Africa. Before the unrest, the five countries of the East
African Community — Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, and Uganda — expected to see
their combined gross domestic product grow by 6 per cent in 2008. As of this year, (2024),
economic analysts predict that the region's growth rate will be at least 1.5 percentage points
lower.", thus signifying the economic drop Kenya had faced after a good run of economic
upturn (East Africa Feels Blows of Kenyan Crisis, 2013). Within Kenya, business owners
suffered as their businesses were affected in various ways, thus bringing large reports of losses,
due to some ethnic groups burning and destroying the belongings of other ethnic groups.
Looking back at the journey that the country has had, it is imperative that further research needs
to be conducted on long-term effects of the post-election violence in Kenya and how political
anarchy in the recent days has affected economic progress. This could be looked at from the
point of view of ethnic divisions. This will be particularly important to quell speculations from
citizens that they are swindled when one of their own does not ascend to power. Otherwise,
democracy will continue to be a debatable question in the uprising of developing countries,
and the most prominent issue in my opinion that brings this up is the lack of ethical education
and awareness that regardless of their roots.
In conclusion, emphasis on democratic space is more likely to affect the growth of democratic
countries, if the politicians are knowledgeable of the manipulative ways to lure the citizens to
their 'trap'. Developing countries more than often have low education percentages, but the
initiative to educate citizens on social skills should be observed to avoid such brutality, due to
the lack of knowing. The simple concept of ethnicity should not be a reason as to why
thousands of people lose their lives, hundreds of thousands of people are displaced from their
homes and the growth of a promising country is put to a halt. Countries worldwide should
therefore work to putting such discriminatory norms behind and not implement them on a
governmental manner that affects a wide variety of people, by using such strategies in
campaigns