Analysing the politics of development when everything about development is political

Politics is ubiquitous. Development conjures an abundance of meanings. If we take these two terms in their most expansive definitions, the ‘politics of development’ becomes conceptually amorphous. So how can we pin down the politics of development, analytically? What distinguishes it from all political or social life? We argue the politics of development is a process of contestation over the distribution of resources, authority, rights, and freedoms in a society, defined as the pursuit of alternative desired futures. Politics is not an aspect of development, it is contained within its very definition. There can be no development without contestation, and there can be no contestation without politics. This process happens everywhere and anywhere – wealthy as much as poorer countries, homes as much as parliaments – meaning it is not possible to step outside of politics, which is both an obstacle to change, and the way change happens. Everywhere this process happens, there are institutions, interests and ideas involved: formal structures and informal rules, being contested by more (or less) rational actors with competing interests, holding a range of ideas about what is right and fair. These are not conceptual abstractions, but a framework for thinking and analysis.