Development has been interpreted in different ways by different people. However, this study embraces both traditional, dependency and the contemporary or new development thinking.
By extension, traditional development means the capacity of national economy, whose initial economic condition has been more or less static for a long time, to generate and sustain an annual increase in its Gross National Product (GNP) at a fairly progressive level (Todaro and Smith, 2003). However, to this researcher, development within this context is purely economical and the economic index as above may not necessarily reflect the living conditions of the people in Nigeria’s privatization process. It is the conception of this researcher that the benefits of privatization policy in Nigeria should extend to all segments of the society. This process is referred to as trickle-down effect. Besides, development by implication can only be given the rightful coloration in terms of change, new innovation and meanings it brings to the lives of the people (Rogers, 1969).
Going by the foregoing analysis, development can be used as a synonym of westernization. This means for a nation-state to subsist, it must therefore embibe the cultures and traditions of the western capitalist worlds of Europe and America. In the light of the above, Ake (2001) pointed that development is modernization and the latter is equal and proportional to the former. To Ake (2001), development is an off-shoot of capitalism and the two concepts are mutually reinforcing. Thus we can clearly see from his school of thought that:
… In its most common form, modernization theory posits an original state of backwardness or underdevelopment characterized by, among other things, a low rate of economic growth that is at least potentially amenable to alteration through the normal process of capital. This original state of backwardness is initially universal. According to the theory, the industrialized countries have managed to overcome it. All the other countries could conceivably overcome backwardness too it they adopted appropriate strategies… (2001:18).
From the foregoing, it can be deduced that development can be made possible through the replication of western paradigm of socio-economy development. But the gap in this literature as it relates to Nigerian privatization process is that virtually all economic measures used in developing countries are merely packaged and delivered to us from the West. And these packages are alien to African cultures and practices. Therefore, the options can scarcely find a fertile ground to subsist in the African soil. Therefore, privatization, inspite of its seemingly relevant postures, may not yield the required results in terms of national growth, development and sustainability.
However, the disappointing performance of most Third World countries of Africa, Asia and Latin American may well suggest the move towards a new thinking of development practices. This is to say that mere increase in per capita income without a corresponding equity and fairness in the distribution of socio-economic good could bring about disparity, poverty, disease, hunger, illiteracy, high level social malaise, exam malpractice, corruption in both high and low places, epileptic power supply and gross indiscipline in the Nigerian system as a whole (Ake, 2001).
These phenomena can aptly be described as growth without development which shows that every other approach to national development is traditional and fall short of acceptable standard of socio-economic development thinking. Hence there is every need for a shift in paradigm in order to properly address development problems of Third World countries.
According to Seers (1969):
The questions to ask about a country’s development are therefore: what has been happening to poverty? What has been happening to unemployment? What has been happening to inequality? If all three of these have declined from high levels, then beyond doubt this has been a period of development for the country concerns. If one or two of these central problems have been growing worse, especially if all three have, it would be strange to call the result ‘development’ even if per capita income doubled (1969:32).
From the above excepts, development therefore means the welfare, equality and sustainability of the people at large. Thus, the meaning of development is one that makes people the target or end of development. Development is thus the process by which people create and recreate themselves and their life circumstances to realize higher levels of civilization in accordance with their own choices and values (Ake, 2001). From this context, development can be seen as multidimensional process involving major societal changes in terms of social structures, popular attitudes and national institutions, as well as the acceleration of economics growth, the reduction of inequality and eradication of extreme poverty.
Conversely, Rodney (1972) sees development from the point of view of the individual in terms of skill acquisition and development, increased capacity, greater freedom, creativity, self-discipline, responsibility and material well-being. At the societal level, development entails the ability of man to take his destiny in his own hands. Therefore, development means an overall social process which is dependent upon the outcome of man’s effort to subdue his physical or natural environment. Conversely, development at whatever level of analysis precludes unequal relations and contact between the forces of capital and peripheral nation-states. This is the result of dependency in Third World today. Of course, this is the direct consequences of numerous austerity measures adopted in undeveloped world including the emerging trends of privatization policies, (Offiiong, 2003).