Politics of development

MANY would argue that development consists of more than improvements in human well-being. Development should incorporate the capacity of sustainable human systems, including economic, political and social aspects.

Poverty remains one of the primary struggles across the globe. Rising inequality generates anxiety, which is reflected through social behaviour, including problems such as discrimination and mental health problems.

When I was in secondary school around the mid-1990s, I heard about water well construction projects in villages in Cambodia. Despite the overwhelming economic progress Cambodia is enjoying nowadays, the country at that time was in great poverty. This was starkly indicated by the inability of most Cambodians to access basic necessities such as clean water and electricity.

At that time, Cambodia was still struggling to recover from brutal civil wars and the terrible rule of the Khmer Rouge Regime (1975-1979). There were years of brutality, systematic persecution and killing of Cambodians by the Khmer Rouge under the leadership of Pol Pot, who radically pushed Cambodia towards communism through coercive aggression. This resulted in the deaths of 1.5 to two million people from 1975 to 1979, nearly a quarter of Cambodia’s 1975 population.

A few years ago, I was involved with a local NGO to monitor the delivery of modern water wells to some rural villages in Kampong Thom province, the second largest province in Cambodia.

Throughout the hazardous journey to reach the villages, my mind was occupied with many questions, including why projects to build water wells were still going on after more than three decades since I had first heard about them. Who is to blame for the failure to provide water to the people?

Soon after returning from the villages and spending a few days in Phnom Penh before heading back home to Malaysia, I had a chat with a development activist who was delivering water well projects in the country. Unsurprisingly, this person was making his living on the management fees from every project he managed. He told me that in a post-conflict country like Cambodia, outsiders need to acknowledge the importance of understanding social diversity when reviewing the outcome of development assistance.

This social diversity ranges from ethnicity to political division and class categorisation.

In Malaysia, there are many places that still lack access to clean water and sanitation. Sadly, this describes the state of our development despite our promising journey to becoming a developed nation. This is the politics of development, which influences issues pertaining to complex and often fluid political environments including political settlements between elites. These settlements often involve a set of correlated actions including negotiation, bargaining and compromise.

In recent years, particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic, many politicians have begun talking about the importance of supporting “pro-poor” politics. However, few could reach a genuinely clear consensus about what constitutes pro-poor development or whether it is even feasible or desirable.

Development should have a connotation of lasting change. Amartya Sen, the 1998 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences laureate, has reformed our claim that development only focuses on incomes as the main measure of well-being.

Sen viewed development as an integrated process of expanding human freedom. He introduced innovative solutions to help underdeveloped countries to cope with social problems like poverty, gender inequality, human rights and biased liberalism.

Development must be judged by its impacts on people in terms of their choices, capabilities, and freedoms. Above all, we must concede that the actual meaning of the term “development” remains elusive, since its meaning depends on where and by whom it is used.

The time has come to remind our politicians that delayed development is justice denied.

URWAH SAARI

Ampang, Selangor