Why successful nations did not abandon development amid criticism

A section of the Nairobi Expressway.[File, Standard]

Transformational development is rarely comfortable and almost never free of criticism. Major reforms change established systems, demand significant resources and sometimes impose short-term costs before their benefits become visible.

It is therefore unsurprising that many countries we admire today encountered considerable resistance as they pursued the policies that ultimately transformed their economies.

Kenya has faced considerable criticism for its major initiatives in infrastructure, energy, dams and irrigation, ports, affordable housing, healthcare, agriculture, digital transformation, and human capital development. Scrutiny is both legitimate and necessary in a democracy.

The concern arises when weaknesses in an initiative are used primarily to discredit it in its entirety, with little attention given to how those weaknesses can be corrected while preserving a worthwhile development objective.

Successful economies, particularly Singapore, illustrate the importance of difficult decisions in land acquisition, housing, and urban development for economic transformation.

While Singapore’s aggressive redevelopment efforts disrupted existing communities and businesses, they were accompanied by significant improvements in living standards.

The government’s capacity to offer modern housing, sanitation, transportation, education, and job opportunities enabled residents to appreciate the long-term benefits of these reforms, ultimately fostering public confidence in the effectiveness of challenging policies for positive outcomes.

South Korea's rapid industrialisation was a complex transformation from an agrarian society to an industrial powerhouse, characterised by economic restructuring, strategic investment, and significant social adjustments.

This process faced challenges, including labour tensions and political disagreements.

However, despite changing policies and governments, the nation consistently prioritised industrialisation, exports, infrastructure, education, and technological advancement over the years.

China offers an instructive example of economic reform under Deng Xiaoping, which faced ideological resistance from those concerned that market-oriented policies, private enterprise, and foreign investment represented a departure from established principles.

Rather than settling every disagreement theoretically, China increasingly turned to experimentation, establishing Special Economic Zones as testing grounds for new approaches.

Successful policies were expanded upon, while others were modified, allowing methods to evolve through experience while maintaining a consistent strategic objective.

Vietnam followed a comparable path through its Doi Moi reforms. Moving away from rigid central planning towards a more market-oriented economy was controversial.

 Agricultural reforms, private enterprise, foreign investment and changes to state-owned enterprises challenged established thinking. Implementation was gradual, allowing authorities to learn and adjust.

As food production, employment, exports and household incomes improved, confidence in the reforms strengthened.

Successful transformation requires the ability to distinguish between the objective and the means of achieving it, a principle that is particularly relevant to Kenya.

Criticism of major initiatives often focuses on their weaknesses such as cost, financing, implementation gaps, governance concerns, or unintended consequences, which may be entirely legitimate and warrant serious attention. However, the challenge arises when implementation shortcomings discredit the development objective or call for abandoning it entirely, rather than being viewed as opportunities for improvement.

Weaknesses in affordable housing programs, healthcare reforms, and infrastructure projects should drive discussions on improvements rather than questioning their importance.

In Kenya's competitive political landscape, opposition parties focus more on exposing government flaws while those in power defend their initiatives.

This rivalry can overshadow critical national objectives, risking progress in essential areas like housing, health, and infrastructure.

Countries like Singapore, South Korea, China, and Vietnam show that governments can strengthen policies by embracing constructive criticism rather than discarding initiatives because of challenges.

These nations adjusted their strategies while focusing on long-term goals, which built public confidence through improved housing, employment, and services.

By implementing reforms that increased economic opportunities and living standards, they established credibility.

Effective governance requires clear communication, demonstrating value for funds, strong implementation, addressing concerns, and being open to evidence-based learning.

Kenya's professionals play a critical role in informing national discussions on complex issues like infrastructure, energy, healthcare, and agriculture.

Their contributions go beyond political viewpoints and involve independent, evidence-based analysis.

Experts in various fields can evaluate investment viability, scrutinise financing models, pinpoint implementation challenges, and suggest improvements.

 Their objective is not to defend or oppose the government but to help identify valuable development goals and areas were policy needs adjustment.

The proposed inclusive national conversation on Kenya's development beyond Vision 2030 emphasises the importance of collaboration among professionals, the business community, academia, faith-based organisations, civil society, and young people.

This dialogue aims to extend the debate past politics by incorporating diverse knowledge and experiences, allowing for the interrogation and improvement of ideas.

Ultimately, the goal is to foster broader national ownership of priorities that will shape Kenya’s future for generations to come.

The key lesson from successful economies is that development thrives through constructive criticism rather than outright rejection.

Nations progress when they rigorously scrutinise their actions, correct shortcomings, enhance what can be improved, and demand accountability while maintaining focus on worthwhile national objectives.

In this context, professionals must actively contribute their voices to help the country distinguish what should be deferred, what needs correction, and what should be preserved and pursued, ensuring that political competition does not hinder national progress.

The author is a TVET and Human Capital Development Expert