Democracy versus development: New urban debates

The politics of development includes subtexts of choice, as underpinned by community consensus (or lack of it), against the larger backdrop of a liberal democracy, with its intricate power structures that influence the choice of concepts and often lead to complicity rather than consent. A dilemma exists between the understanding of field-level practitioners and that of academics, whose understandings of progress differ. Progress can (and often does) imply long-term change across generations whereas development is often more a matter of crisis management and delivering tangible results to end-users. This makes it a bone of contention across political systems, irrespective of local or global dynamics. Development can emerge as a tool to be wielded for power and further political mileage at the expense of progress. Progress cannot be studied as a counterpoint to development as the sense of history is often missing in development interventions. Development tends to be piecemeal as its very logic often stems from the rationale of power. This is not to suggest, however, that development is only about politics; it is definitely more than the politics of everyday life and involves all of civil society that requires its critical and immediate attention. In this sense, it has become a priority for politicians with an underlying agenda designed to out-manouevre dissent and all statements of protest.