UNIT: DDS 104: DEVELOPMENT POLITICS
STUDENT’S NAME: MARK MUTEMBEI DAVID
REG NO: DDS/00211/019
LECTURER’S NAME: JOHN OWUOR
DATE 25/8/2020
Using examples discusses the notion that political leadership is a crucial determinant of development outcomes.
Political leadership plays a significant role in every country’s development process. Thus the nature of leadership determines development outcome. Political leadership has to incorporate and harmonize all required resources, including financial recourse, human resources, and programs aimed at meeting the development plan of the state. Political leadership has the duty of establishing development through majoring in investing in all fields that all more likely to bring positive outcomes. It is highly expected, and usually, a country with political instability is more likely to have adverse political consequences than a country with a stable political system. Thus a country weak stable political system will face more challenges when establishing development as compared to a country with steady leadership, for instance, united states have stable leadership from bottom positions to the top posts and thus why it experiences positive development outcomes compared to states like Somalia which have unstable political system therefore why Somalia is operating in the pit of poverty and underdevelopment (Leach et al. 2020).
The level of corruption in political leadership determines the political outcome since corrupt administration we have low developments because much of the economic resources will be mismanaged and rooted by the direction leaving almost nothing for construction to be established and this for instance applies to most of the African states which the regime are corrupt and thus why most of the African countries have adverse development outcomes as it is with states which almost exercise corrupt-free leadership like united states and united kingdom which are more developed (Leach et al. 2020).
Another issue of concern in political leadership that determines development outcomes in-country is the administration’s ability to raise revenue from taxes and enforce property rights. This process of raising taxes has two demission’s, which are legal and fiscal capacities. Political leadership with weak ability is naturally weak since it cannot appropriately manage its revenue resources compared to countries that can reasonably handle its revenue resources. Financial aspects focus on business planning and include the ability to implement and monitor budget (Leach et al. 2020).
Political leadership’s ideology is more likely to determine the development level in a country, especially when it comes to applying and implementing the doctrine. Political leadership that fully works under guidelines of the ideology adopted is more likely to experience development than political leadership that might not adhere to their development ideology. This happens regardless of the devolvement ideology espoused, for instance, the political direction of china fully adheres to its development ideology. Thus, it is experiencing more development contrary to Kenya’s political leadership, which in most cases, works outside its development ideology and, therefore, why Kenya remains underdeveloped (Leach et al. 2020).
Political leadership development laws are more likely to determine development since leaderships with strictly development laws are more likely to develop at a fast rate since all arms of leadership play their role in establishing development contrary to political leadership with weak laws concerning development that are more like to underdeveloped on the fact that no close follow up (Leach et al. .2020).
Transparency of political leadership is more likely to determine the level of development that the country is expected to experience. Developing states are more associated with underdevelopment since, in most cases, their arms are more likely to mismanage resources leading to underdevelopment (Kim et al., .2020).
In conclusion, the nature of political leadership affects the development outcome; thus, any country that wants to develop must have stable, corrupt-free leadership and leadership that follow its development ideology (Kim et al., .2020).
Reference
Kim, Joungwon A. Divided Korea: The Politics of Development, 1945–1972. Brill, 2020.
Leach, M., Nisbett, N., Cabral, L., Harris, J., Hossain, N., & Thompson, J. (2020). Food politics and development. World Development, 134, 105024.
Leach, J. M. (2020). Civil Society in ‘Politics’ and ‘Development’ in African Hybrid Regimes: The Kenyan Case. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 1-14.