• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Thomas Carothers"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Democracy and Governance"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "democracy",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "DCG",
  "programs": [
    "Democracy, Conflict, and Governance"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Other

The Elusive Synthesis

Over the past twenty years, democracy promoters and development practitioners have become increasingly interconnected and the distinctions between the two communities have become blurred.

Link Copied
By Thomas Carothers
Published on Oct 19, 2010
Program mobile hero image

Program

Democracy, Conflict, and Governance

The Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program is a leading source of independent policy research, writing, and outreach on global democracy, conflict, and governance. It analyzes and seeks to improve international efforts to reduce democratic backsliding, mitigate conflict and violence, overcome political polarization, promote gender equality, and advance pro-democratic uses of new technologies.

Learn More

Source: Journal of Democracy

The Elusive SynthesisDuring the past three decades, international assistance to support democracy and the larger, older domain of development aid have operated side-by-side in some hundred countries around the world. Yet their relationship with each other often has been uncertain and in flux. When democracy aid began playing a substantial role on the international stage in the 1980s, it did so at arm’s length from aid for socioeconomic development. Democracy promoters were ambivalent, even wary, about the methods and values underlying development aid, while the attitudes of developmentalists toward this new political-aid endeavor were sometimes even more strongly negative.

The separation began to narrow in the 1990s. Post–Cold War optimism about the apparent triumph of market economics and liberal democracy, as well as about the complementarity of these two goals, gave rise in Western policy circles to the view that an integrated approach to both political and economic development aid might be valuable as well as possible. This new context, as well as programmatic evolution within both communities, prompted democracy promoters to begin building bridges to the socioeconomic side and developmentalists to do the same toward the political.

Those bridges widened in the most recent decade as developmentalists embraced a general imperative of “taking politics into account,” while democracy promoters accepted the need to “help democracy deliver.” The distinctions between the two practitioner communities blurred, in terms of both organizational boundaries and the activities on the ground. The growing overlap and interconnections between democracy aid and socio- economic aid present an analytic puzzle of considerable practical import: Do the growing ties between the two domains constitute a process of integration or even synthesis? What are the most important areas of common ground and the most significant differences? And what are the effects on this ill-defined relationship of recent changes in the broader international context, such as democracy’s global woes and the heightened visibility of nondemocratic development success stories?
 

"The Elusive Synthesis" was published as part of a Democracy Support and Development Aid trio in the Journal of Democracy. Please also read the responses, "The Case for Principled Agnosticism" by Brian Levy and "Getting Convergence Right" by Kenneth Wollack and K. Scott Hubli.

This forum grew out of a workshop organized in April 2010 on democracy and development by the Bernard Schwartz Forum on Constructive Capitalism at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.

About the Author

Thomas Carothers

Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program

Thomas Carothers, director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, is a leading expert on comparative democratization and international support for democracy.

    Recent Work

  • Paper
    Post-U.S. International Democracy Support: Aspiration in Search of Substance

      Richard Youngs, Thomas Carothers

  • Article
    How Anger Over Corruption Keeps Driving Global Politics
      • McKenzie Carrier

      Thomas Carothers, McKenzie Carrier

Thomas Carothers
Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Thomas Carothers
Political ReformDemocracyForeign Policy

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    France and Germany Need Their Own Situation Room

    The Franco-German relationship is on the rocks again. But unlike previous moments of tension, the epochal changes on the world stage require that both step up investment in their bilateral ties.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does Pashinyan’s Parliamentary Victory Mean for Armenia’s Future?

    Pashinyan’s pro-European party has been re-elected with a decisive victory. But the pro-Russian opposition could still slow Armenia’s progress toward peace with Azerbaijan and rapprochement with Europe.

      Mikayel Zolyan

  • Europe trade economy container supply chains
    Paper
    From Trade Dependence to Geopolitical Leverage: The EU in an Era of Weaponized Interdependence

    As geopolitical rivalry weaponizes global supply chains, the EU’s true vulnerability lies in emerging-risk imports. For these goods, suppliers are growing more concentrated, substitution more difficult, and political risk is looming.

      Sinan Ülgen

  • Pashinyan surrounded by supporters while speaking to reporters
    Commentary
    Next Steps Toward Peace After the Armenian Elections

    It’s time to build momentum, and Ankara is the venue of the next opportune diplomatic window to do this.

      • Garo Paylan

      Alper Coşkun, Garo Paylan

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    European Security Strategy: In Search of a New Ambition

    The EU is putting together a new security strategy to meet today’s myriad challenges. But for any proposal to be effective, the union needs to grapple with its identity and ambitions.

      Pierre Vimont

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.