The example of China proves this example does not always hold true. What is happening in China today is not about democracy but a government and a legal framework that gives investors good title. Japan, Singapore, Hong-Kong and South-Korea's conversion from backward agrarian states to industrial power-houses can be termed as accelerated development under very autocratic  regimes which have only turned into democracies after prevailing economic conditions have improved.

A closer look at the underlying social dynamics in these societies might help us unlock the mystery of the democracy we all try to adopt from Western governments, a system of government alien to our culture and opposed to our traditional systems of governance. These traditional systems which were disrupted by colonialism, ought to have been allowed room to evolve as democracies , encouraged along, modified even but based on indigenous intuitions.

May be the question here would be, did  the poor human rights records evidenced in the these countries prior to their ascent impede poverty alleveation? Of particular intrest is South-Korea which grew consistently by over 12% between 1952 and the late 1970's under a dictatorial regime which then saw the emergence of chaebols that were funded by the state even through corruption and the overprotection of internal markets.

We are living, quite obviously, in different times , but this issue is of great importance as we watch how India as a the world's largest democracy measures up against China. It is clear that , the devolved powerful state governments in India have created a lot of bureacracy in approving economic growth strategies, licencing new business and even slowing down investment decisions. The net result has been a slowing of FDI inflows into  India compared to her northern neighbour.

In Kenya, we are crying devolution, ululating for CDF and now institutionalising structures around it to for its management. Will this decentralization create meaningful change or is it another beuracracy in the making? The Bomas draft also proposed a 4-tier devolved government , an ugly replication  of the Indian scenario? 

The premise for all these proposed and actual developments is that the closer government is to the people, the more accountable it is to them. Accountability after all is the corner-stone of democracy. So it follows that as central government fails, the people seek to bring it down to a level local enough that they can influence and control it. 

The question then is whether such devolution and democracy, whether the opening of democratic space results in high economic growth poverty alleviation and subsequent improvement in national well-being.