Developmental leadership: putting inclusiveness first

24th September 2015

Policymakers have long struggled with how to address the myriad challenges that plague fragile states. Some argue that building institutions is key. Others argue that other things matter more, such as establishing more legitimate processes to choose leaders, or improving the quality of political settlements. Still others look to human rights as the solution.

Yet we should not be blinded to the common objective of all these approaches: increasing inclusiveness in historically highly exclusive environments.

Stronger institutions would help the state serve more people equitably. Better political processes would help more people to participate. Better political settlements would yield more inclusive governments focused on broad-based development. Stronger human rights protection would ensure better treatment for those typically excluded or victimized.

The need for more inclusiveness also lies at the heart of the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Both see inclusiveness as crucial for the promotion of stability and development.

None of this emphasis is accidental. Precisely because they lack social cohesion and robust institutions, fragile states are organized around exclusion and inequality. Political and social dynamics make these problems systemic and intractable—keeping countries unstable and underdeveloped in the process.

"Precisely because they lack social cohesion and robust institutions, fragile states are organized around exclusion and inequality."

Countries such as Nigeria, South Sudan, Yemen, Iraq, and Pakistan have been unable to change their own longstanding exclusive dynamics despite substantial aid. While more robust states continue to reduce violence and poverty and, in all probability, make substantial progress towards the SDGs, fragile states like these are likely to be increasingly left behind. Already some two-fifths of global poverty is concentrated within the borders of fragile states even though they account for only one-fifth of the world’s population. The global poverty side of this ratio is not expected to fall. It is predicted to rise to two-thirds by 2030.

One could say that the developing world is rapidly diverging into two groups—states robust enough to maintain order and promote development, and states too fragile to do either. So why is it that almost everything the development community seeks to accomplish assumes that countries are either beyond fragility, or can become so within a reasonable period?

Only innovative approaches that yield more inclusive governments, social dynamics, or institutions—and ideally some combination of all three—can hope to catalyze the kind of internally generated reform that these countries desperately need. And transitions – started by the end of a conflict, a repressive regime’s demise, or a similar critical juncture – offer the best opportunities for such change.

How these windows of opportunity can be used to promote inclusiveness is the theme of a new publication I have co-authored with Mark Freeman. It offers practical ideas for how leaders at all levels of society can make the most of these periods. These are the moments when they can strengthen social cohesion, equity, and a sense of common nationhood while managing the tensions and divisions that a transition inevitably brings to the fore.

We argue that inclusiveness is the most important priority for transitions because, however difficult in practice, it is the only realistic way for fragile states to break the dysfunctional societal and institutional patterns that hold back change.

Every context is unique, and our framework is not intended to be a how-to guide. Instead we hope it offers developmental leaders a compass to help them prioritize and judge policies and actions. It suggests practical ways forward on inclusive policy-making in 10 priority areas, including the political, economic, administrative, legal, security and sociocultural spheres.

"In times of transition, fragile and conflict-affected states need to find a new national path marked by more inclusive and cohesive practices."

In times of transition, fragile and conflict-affected states need to find a new national path marked by more inclusive and cohesive practices; an enduring social covenant and social contract where either is absent or broken; and a more inclusive, overarching political identity and reality.

Over time, these factors can contribute to more responsive and accountable governance; to economic policies which generate shared growth and widespread benefits; to security and legal systems that work more equally for everyone; and to a social and cultural ethic that unites diverse populations and reduces discrimination and longstanding grievances.

This is undeniably difficult, but as countries like Spain, Chile, South Africa and Tunisia show, it is possible even in deeply divided societies to create the conditions for a more inclusive state and society. During a transition, determined political, social and business leaders who are genuinely willing to forge relationships and agreements with their adversaries can do much to help inclusiveness take root as a national good of enduring benefit to all citizens.

Certainly, every conceivable alternative is more likely than not to perpetuate the vicious cycle of exclusion and conflict that holds back fragile states.


Image: Tunisia protests 2013 (Photo: Tarek Mrad, Flkr)


Leave a comment

The views expressed in Opinions posts are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of DLP, the Australian Government or DLP's partner organisations.



Seth D. Kaplan

Seth D. Kaplan

Seth D. Kaplan is a professorial lecturer in the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University and Senior Adviser to the Institute for Integrated Transitions. He is co-author with Mark Freeman of IFIT's Inclusive Transitions Framework.

Read more

Related items

Medellin - more than a miracle

From the most murderous city on earth to 'a new global standard for urban policy': the politics of change in the wake of crisis

Opinion by Cheryl Stonehouse4th March 2014

Parliamentary strengthening: the IDC report

Having presented evidence to the UK's International Development Committee, what of the final report?

Opinion by Tam O'Neil9th February 2015

Inclusive political settlements: who and what gets included, and how?

First of six posts on political settlements by researchers, policymakers and practitioners.

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal13th July 2015

Forgotten South Sudan tangled in factionalism and failed politics

A toxic blend of complex historical identity politics and short-term elite politicking

Opinion by Jonathan Fisher4th September 2014

Developmental leadership: putting inclusiveness first

Inclusiveness should be the first step towards building more robust states.

Opinion by Seth D. Kaplan24th September 2015

The inclusiveness test: making change work

Guest post for openDemocracy

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal4th November 2015

What do we do on Monday? Political settlements in theory and practice

The value of the political settlements framework

Opinion by Edward Laws15th July 2015

It's all about inclusion, but how?

Guest post for the World Bank

Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal6th April 2016

Welcome to DLP's blog

Welcome to DLP's new blog on politics, power, policy and developmental leadership

Opinion by Heather Marquette10th December 2013

Somaliland's route to peace

What can we learn from Somaliland's approach to peacebuilding? 

Opinion by Sarah Phillips12th December 2013

Neither 'good guys' nor 'bad guys': Positive engagement with armed groups

Final post in a series on 'Power, politics and positive deviance', theme of DLP's 2016 Annual Conference.

Opinion by Suda Perera5th February 2016

Indonesia and the political settlements trap

The challenges of 'resettling the settlement'

Opinion by Graham Teskey17th July 2015

Politics - the problem and solution to poor services?

Why - and how - does politics trump everything else in service delivery?

Opinion by Claire Mcloughlin13th March 2014
Opinion by Susy Ndaruhutse11th September 2014

Being 'there': Bermuda Triangulation

Fieldwork in fragile places part 2: data difficulties

Opinion by Suda Perera6th November 2014

Pacific power: new femininities and women's leadership in the Pacific

The educated, internationally connected women who are changing the way 'development' is done

Opinion by Ceridwen Spark24th June 2014

The challenge of realising Pacific democracies' development potential

How can Pacific democracies deliver for their citizens?

Opinion by Julien Barbara8th July 2016
Opinion by Suda Perera19th December 2016

Shuffling the decks: quick fixes versus long-term stability

Guest post for Development Progress on 'post-conflict' DRC

Opinion by Suda Perera22nd January 2015

‘Crows who come in search of dollars’: NGO legitimacy in conflict zones

Do political dynamics affect NGO legitimacy more than performance?

Opinion by Oliver Walton19th August 2014

What's in a name? Leadership as more than the 'big men' and 'big women' of history

Looking beyond 'The Leader' for a deeper understanding of how change happens

Opinion by Heather Lyne de Ver11th February 2014

Being 'there': reflections on fieldwork in the DRC

Fieldwork in fragile places part 1: the security dilemma

Opinion by Suda Perera5th November 2014

What is transformative leadership?

Guest post in University World News

Opinion by Chris Roche15th April 2016

Two remarkable transitions: lessons from Oman and Somaliland

Political settlements and international power structures

Opinion by Sarah Phillips20th July 2015

Authoritarianism, democracy and development

What does the evidence say?

Opinion by Tim Kelsall27th November 2014

The seeds and roots of change

Guest post on leadership networks for Governance for Development

Opinion by Heather Lyne de Ver1st December 2014
Opinion by Alina Rocha Menocal24th November 2014

Security and justice – the mismatch between policy and practice

What hinders more politically nuanced security and justice programming?

Opinion by Shivit Bakrania21st July 2014

Education, development, and the problem with consensus

Why rethink the international consensus on 'quality basic education for development'?

Opinion by Michele Schweisfurth7th April 2014