No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Who Needs Post-Development? Discourses of Difference, Green Revolution and Agrarian Populism in India
Abstract
This paper seeks to examine how the recent critiques of modern science as Eurocentric, patriarchal and neo-colonial knowledge are actually informing the agenda of new social movements in non-Western, postcolonial societies. Using the farmers' movements in India as an example, this paper explores how the discourses of 'difference' and 'local knowledges' can come to serve as a mobilizing ideology of the traditional rural elite. The paper argues that the radical critiques of science need to be rethought in order to protect the relative autonomy of scientific knowledge, which can be hydridized with local knowledges to improve the latter's ability to meet the unmet needs of Third World people in a sustainable manner.
... In the context of this paper, this desirable state or condition is the Africa-China relation. This explains why Cunningham conceives of sustainable development to mean meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (2007,28). Similarly, for Andrew Thatcher, sustainable development is primarily a social justice project focusing on equitable development to meet human needs while still recognising that the preservation of natural resource is necessary to fulfill these needs (2014, 747). ...
... For, if there is constructive and balanced relationship, then there will be sustainable and inclusive development. Moreover, the idea of post-development has been criticised on the ground that it tends to ignore the positive aspects of modernity, romanticise local communities and cultural traditions, legitimise oppression through cultural relatives (CORBRIDGE, 1998;NANGA 1999;KIELY 1999;NEDEREEN 2000). ...
My aim in this paper is to show the necessity and possibility of implementing inclusive development that is sustainable in Africa-China relations using the Conversational technique. I contend that the foremost challenges facing inclusive and sustainable developments are the dearth of constructive and balanced relationships. If a programme of development is constructive, that is, takes into consideration every relevant variable and practicable measure, it would be sustainable; and if it is balanced, that is, being fair to all groups, it would be inclusive. Michelle and Paula (2012) have proposed that inclusive development is possible through a community-based strategy. This approach is bedeviled with difficulties which conversational thinking overcomes. Conversational thinking is a new approach in philosophical cogitation developed from the African place, but universally relevant. Its significance lies in the fact that it recognises the relevance of contending variables in a given project, and creates room for their creative engagement that opens new vistas for thought, concepts and interactions. Conversational thinking prioritises relationships that exist among development variables or groups designated as either nwansa (out-group) or nwanju (in-group) and purveys strategies for making such relationships constructive and balanced. In highlighting the importance of cultivating constructive and balanced relationships and sustaining the same, I appeal to conversational philosophy as the needed pathway for the implementation of the ideals of sustainable-inclusive development in Africa-China relations. My methods will be expository, prescriptive and analytic. Keywords: Sustainability, Inclusive Development, Conversational Thinking, Chimakonam, Africa-China Relations.
... Ahora bien, el motivo de presentarse como alternativa al desarrollo y no de desarrollo bien podría deberse -en contraposición a lo mantenido por Escobar (2005)-a un fracaso en cuanto a la implementación de las propias teorías contemporáneas de desarrollo, más que a cuestiones de índole conceptual. Tal razonamiento vendría fortalecido por el escaso empeño -derivado de la creencia en que cualquier esfuerzo teórico es siempre producto de una misma visión del mundo (Nanda 1999)-, de presentar una fórmula alternativa y objetiva de aquello que se entiende por desarrollo. Este desplazamiento como "la respuesta más radicalmente ostensible a la crisis de la teoría del desarrollo" (Kiely 1999, 30) supone que cualquier consideración quede resuelta dentro de las especificidades y perspectivas culturales, restringiendo el asunto del desarrollo a una jurisdicción de etnocentrismo occidental. ...
... Empero, el hecho de que todo discurso se presente para sí en términos de objetividad (Nanda 1999) no implica que aquel quede reducido a sus propias bases, tal y como sostienen los posestructuralistas. Para el caso que nos ocupa, los posdesarrollistas han confundido tradicionalmente las razones históricas del desarrollo con sus motivaciones normativas. ...
In this article we aimed to refute the authority of post-structuralist discourse as an alternative to development. Using the analytical framework of the capabilities approach, we corroborated how from the concept of development as freedom can be overcome, without abandoning the epistemic relativism of post-developmentalism, the analytical reductionism of contemporary theories of development. Such analysis concludes that capabilities theory, in comparison with post-modern thesis, is not only more coherent normatively, but it can also be technically operative. To such end, original concepts such as "soft action" and "development trap" are incorporated to overcome, analytically, some of the empirical barriers (mainly commodity fetishism) that may interfere the success of a (sustainable) cooperation framework adapted to the challenges of development as freedom.
... Ahora bien, el motivo de presentarse como alternativa al desarrollo y no de desarrollo bien podría deberse -en contraposición a lo mantenido por Escobar (2005)-a un fracaso en cuanto a la implementación de las propias teorías contemporáneas de desarrollo, más que a cuestiones de índole conceptual. Tal razonamiento vendría fortalecido por el escaso empeño -derivado de la creencia en que cualquier esfuerzo teórico es siempre producto de una misma visión del mundo (Nanda 1999)-, de presentar una fórmula alternativa y objetiva de aquello que se entiende por desarrollo. Este desplazamiento como "la respuesta más radicalmente ostensible a la crisis de la teoría del desarrollo" (Kiely 1999, 30) supone que cualquier consideración quede resuelta dentro de las especificidades y perspectivas culturales, restringiendo el asunto del desarrollo a una jurisdicción de etnocentrismo occidental. ...
... Empero, el hecho de que todo discurso se presente para sí en términos de objetividad (Nanda 1999) no implica que aquel quede reducido a sus propias bases, tal y como sostienen los posestructuralistas. Para el caso que nos ocupa, los posdesarrollistas han confundido tradicionalmente las razones históricas del desarrollo con sus motivaciones normativas. ...
Con este artículo se ha pretendido refutar la autoridad del discurso posestructuralista como alternativa al desarrollo. Haciendo uso del aparato analítico del enfoque de las capacidades se corroboró como desde la concepción de desarrollo como libertad se consigue superar, sin necesidad de abandonarse al relativismo epistémico de la corriente posdesarrollista, el reduccionismo analítico de las teorías contemporáneas de desarrollo. De tal examen se concluyó que frente a las tesis posmodernas, la teoría de las capacidades es no solo más coherente normativamente, sino que también lo puede ser en términos operativos. Para esto último, se incorporan conceptos inéditos como la soft action (acción suave) y la “trampa de no desarrollo” con el que superar así, analíticamente, algunas de las barreras empíricas (fundamentalmente el fetichismo de la mercancía) que pudieran obstaculizar el éxito de un marco de cooperación (sostenible) adaptado a los retos del desarrollo como libertad.
... A further problem with post-development theory's focus on the local and 'grassroots' movements, is that some post-development theorists seem naïvely to believe that local and grassroots movements will necessarily act in the interests of the poor and marginalised. Nanda (1999) discusses agrarian populism in India, arguing that the example of farmers' movements in India shows the danger of trusting in 'local groups' to solve the problems of the poor in the Third World. While these groups have adopted an anti-imperialist, anti-state and anti-development stance similar to the one advocated by post-development theory, Nanda (1999, pp.16-18) argues that these groups cannot be understood to be serving 'propoor and progressive ends'. ...
... intended audience is often outside academia, jars with the more careful, analytical style of their critics. With regard to the criticisms relating to the inadequate presentation of alternatives and the politics of post-development theory, I am sympathetic to the postdevelopment theorists, although I think that the points made in this respect by Nanda (1999;, Corbridge (1998a) and Gidwani (2002) The position that I adopt in this thesis, then, is clearly one adopted in the light of a critical engagement with the post-development debate as a whole, rather than on the basis of an exclusive preference for either post-development ideas or the criticisms levied at these ideas. It is thus a position that, while certainly sympathetic to post-development theory, can hardly be described as being loyal or completely committed to it. ...
... lso been charged with a uniform rejection of modernity and development without acknowledging its successes, like increased life expectancy(Corbridge 1998;Parfitt 2011), or with idealizing local communities as "noble savages" who do not want development or modernization(Storey 2000), which leads to critiques of the theory as culturally relativistic.Nanda (1999) criticizes postdevelopment theory for creating a static and essentialist view of traditional cultures.The ownership paradigm is not inherently problematic because it promotes development and modernity, but rather because of the ways in which it masks the continued asymmetrical power relations between OECD countries and aid-dependent Afr ...
What is ownership of development and how does it operate in aid-dependent Africa? This dissertation examines the various power structures and agents that shape development in aid-dependent Africa through the lens of Ownership of Development. Using Burkina Faso and Kenya as country case studies and the health sector as the standard case for comparison, I argued that the ownership paradigm precludes the end of the development industry making the teleological ends of development exist only as a chimera, while the inherent discourse reifies the underdeveloped subject in Africa. I develop this argument based on seventy-five original interviews with government officials, civil society organizations, and donors in Burkina Faso and Kenya’s health sector.
... It was time, the Post-Development authors argued, to look for alternatives to development which could be found in grassroots movements and in the informal sector of the periphery. Many critics have criticised or even rejected the Post-Development stance , Nanda 1999, Nederveen Pieterse 2000. Most of the criticisms can be argued to be only valid for what could be called the neopop ulist variant of Post-Development ). ...
The manner in which people have been talking and writing about 'development' and the rules according to which they have done so have evolved over time. Development Discourse and Global History uses the archaeological and genealogical methods of Michel Foucault to trace the origins of development discourse back to late colonialism and notes the significant discontinuities that led to the establishment of a new discourse and its accompanying industry. This book goes on to describe the contestations, appropriations and transformations of the concept. It shows how some of the trends in development discourse since the crisis of the 1980s - the emphasis on participation and ownership, sustainable development and free markets - are incompatible with the original rules and thus lead to serious contradictions. The Eurocentric, authoritarian and depoliticizing elements in development discourse are uncovered, whilst still recognizing its progressive appropriations. The author concludes by analysing the old and new features of development discourse which can be found in the debate on Sustainable Development Goals and discussing the contribution of discourse analysis to development studies. This book is aimed at researchers and students in development studies, global history and discourse analysis as well as an interdisciplinary audience from international relations, political science, sociology, geography, anthropology, language and literary studies.
... PD has been confronted with a number of criticisms (see above all, Blaikie, 2000;Corbridge, 1998;Kiely, 1999;Lehmann, 1997;Nanda, 1999;Nederveen Pieterse, 1998Storey, 2000), the most important of which shall be reiterated here. ...
While the Post-Development school in development theory tried to bury the concept of ‘development’, this attempt turned out to be unsuccessful. A closer investigation reveals that different post-development texts reproduce the polysemy of ‘development’ in their criticism of it, attacking different phenomena subsumed under this heading. Development theory, on the other hand, was also premature in declaring post-development obsolete fifteen years ago. By examining the works of two prominent authors, this contribution shows that the critics of post-development have adopted central arguments of that approach. It concludes by identifying some points of convergence between post-development and its (progressive) critics in development theory.
... 6 Post-development theory does not say that only organisations which endorse x and y should be supported, but rather seems to imply that as long as the group is rooted in the community in which it works, its efforts are legitimate and likely to be beneficial. Critics rightfully point out that there is insufficient reason to believe that all new social movements will truly act in the interests of the poor and oppressed (see Nanda 1999Nanda , 2002Storey 2000). Because some post-development theorists seem to place their faith in such move-55 Matthews: Responding to Poverty and the Post-Development Debate ments without providing sufficient criteria for judging which local groups really will advance the interests of the poor, post-development theorists have been accused of washing their hands of the fate of the poor and thus taking up a politically irresponsible position (see Kiely 1999). ...
How can we take on board the many valuable insights of post-development theory without seeming to advocate indifference and inaction in the face of the misery that many people in the world experience daily? In this paper, I provide a partial response to this question. I begin by looking at some of the alternative strategies offered in post-development literature and set out to show that while there are several problems with these alternatives, to read post-development theory as advocating indifference or inaction is to read it uncharitably. Sec-ondly, I draw on the experiences of the non-governmental organisation (NGO) Enda Graf Sahel in Dakar, Senegal to suggest some ways in which the insights of post-development theory, or some versions of post-development theory, can be taken into consideration without leading to inaction or indifference in the face of the suffering of those who occupy a less advantaged position in contemporary relations of power and privilege.
... Social reality is seen as consisting of multiple perspectives (Hannigan, 1995) that interact discursively. Beginning with an emphasis on acts of speech, discourse analysis came to focus on the cultural meanings of texts (Manning, 1992). More recently, discourse has been seen to include seemingly nondiscursive practices and elements, such as regulations and policies, that enter into the discursive process (Black, 2002;Hay, 1996). ...
Among the various transgenic crops being researched and developed for India, Bt cotton is the only crop commercialized at present. Social actors in various professions and positions have been expressing their expectations of what will or will not happen if agrifood biotechnologies are or are not commercially introduced. In their discourse, these social actors have identified diverse and complex issues extending from questions of equity (how the benefits of commercialization will be distributed between growers in different social and economic strata, and how the environmental or health risks will be distributed and redistributed among different groups in the population) to questions of development (how to improve agricultural productivity so as to meet the growing food demands, and how to maintain national autonomy in agricultural technology). This article explores the discourse concerning Bt cotton in India by examining the interpretations advocated by various social actors. The concept of frame is used to analyze the content of print media and interviews. Analysis of the Bt cotton discourse shows that the dominant actors have shifted over time away from government and industry officials and toward farmers, and that the dominant frame has shifted over time from governmental process to economic impact.
... (iv) What kind of critique of Western science? Post-development critiques of "Western" science tend to essentialize what they opposed, blurring distinctions among competing epistemologies, the varieties of Western scientific practices, and ignoring the pitfalls of "indigenous" knowledges and their potential abuse by local elites (Nanda 1999). These "critiques" call for "the end of science," for the curtailment of its trail of "disturbing odours" over the last two centuries (Alvarez 1992: 221;Sbert 1992) without considering the differing extents to which scientific practices are forms of social constructivism which change in accordance with new discoveries, paradigm shifts and their constellations vis-a-vis social institutions (Beck 1992) (Beck, Giddens and Lash 1994). ...
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Alberta, 2002. Includes bibliographical references.
This paper investigates the post-development narrative, taking into account its primary foundations, strengths, and weaknesses. The paper is divided into six sections. After the introduction, the second section discusses the paper's methodology, and the third section examines the development and fundamental principles of post-development. The fourth segment explores some of the criticisms posed by post-development theorists against development. The post-development alternatives and contributions are examined in the fifth part. The paper's conclusion provides a summary of post-development's fundamental principles and a roadmap for future growth. References Escobar, A. (2004). Beyond the Third World: Imperial Globality, Global Coloniality and Anti-Globalization Social Movements. Third World Quarterly, 25(1) 207-230. Esteva, G. and Prakash, M.S. (1998). Grassroots Post-Modernism. Remaking the Soil of Cultures. London: Zed Books. Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Escobar, A. (1984). Discourse and Power in Development: Michael Foucault and the Relevance of his work to the Third World. Alternatives, 10: 337-400. Gulalp, H. (1998). The Eurocentrism of Dependency Theory and The Question of Authenticity: A View from Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 19(5): 951-961. Latouche, S. (2011). Veers Une Societe D’abondance Frugale. Paris, France: Fayard. Latouche, S. (2010). De-growth. Journal of Cleaner Production 18(6): 519-522. Latouche, S. (2009). Farewell to Growth. Cambridge. Polity Press. Latouche, S. (2004). Why Less should be so much More: De-growth Economics. Le-Monde Diplomatique. Latouche, S. (1986). Fault-il refuser le Development? Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Marglin, S. A. (1990). Towards the Decolonization of the Mind, in Marglin, A. F. and Marglin, S. (eds), Dominating Knowledge, Development, Culture and Resistance, pp 1-28. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Mies, M. and Shiva, V. (1993). Ecofeminism. London. Zed Books. Mignolo, W. D. and Escobar, A. (eds). (2013). Globalization and Decolonization Option. London: England, Routledge. Nanda, M. (1999). Who need Post-Development? Discourses of Difference, Green Revolution and Agrarian Populism in India. Journal of Development Studies 15(1), 1-31. Nandy, A. (1986). The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self under Colonialism. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Power, M. (2003). Rethinking Development Geographies. London: England: Routledge. Rahnema, M. and Bawtree, V. (eds) (1997). The Post-development Reader. Cape Town: South Africa. David Philip. Rist, G. (1997). The History of Development: From Western Origins to Global Faith. London: Zed Books. Sachs, W. (2002). Fairness in Fragile World: The Johannesburg Agenda. Development 45(3): 12-17. Sachs, W. (ed) (1992). The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power. London: Zed Books. Schuurman, F.J. (1993). Beyond the Impasse: New Directions in Development Theory. London: Zed Books. Sally, J. M. (2017). Post-Development Theory. Oxford Research Encyclopaedia of International Studies. Sharp, J. and Briggs, J. (2006). Post-Colonialism and Development: New Dialogues? Geographical Journal, 172(1): 6-9. Simon, D. (2006). Separated by Common Ground? Bringing Post-development and post-colonialism together. Geographical Journal, 172(1): 10-21. Simon, D. (2003). Dilemmas of Development and Environment in a Globalising World: Theory, Policy, and Praxis. Progress in Development Studies, 3(1): 5-41. Simon, D. (1997). Development Reconsidered: New Directions in Development Thinking. Geografiska Annaler Series B. Human Geography, 79(4): 183-201. Storey, A. (2000). Post-development Theory: Romanticism and Pontius Pilate Politics. Development 43(4): 40-46. Ziai, A. (2007). Exploring Post-development: Theory and Practice, Problems and Perspectives. London: Routledge.
This paper argues that nationalist ideology influenced the writings of Goan elites who joined their Indian counterparts. The latter glorified the pre-modern history, literature, art, and architecture of India as a response to the colonial assertions of its superiority. In the case of Goa, the colonial authorities propounded the concept of Goa Dourada, or golden Goa under Portuguese rule. The local elites countered this concept through ‘Goa Indica’, thus exhibiting the relationship of colonial Goa with colonial India. In the process, the scholars such as Menezes Braganza, Panduranga Pissurlencar, and Adeatado Baretto discussed the contribution of ancient Indians to the field of science and technology. The glorification of ancient Indian science and technology contributed to the rise of ‘pseudo-science’, which is considered a byproduct of the anti-colonial movement. However, the rise of ‘pseudo-science’ was an unavoidable development, particularly in the colonial period. The Goan historians, while reconstructing the history of science, followed their counterparts in British India to show that Goa was a part of India. Scholars were able to achieve national unity in the pre and post-colonial periods by studying science and technology.
The debates on the sustainability of development have a long history. Although the Brundtland Report popularized "sustainable development", this slippery concept sidelined previous critiques of development and has been compatible with a wide range of conflicting agendas. A notable example of this contradiction is the uncritical promotion of capitalist growth in the pursuit of social justice and ecosystem health by the sustainable development goals. In contrast to this reliance on the "one world" of Euroamerican market economies, this special feature presents 12 case studies of "alternatives to sustainable development". These case studies question the anthropocentric universalism of the development project and enact radically different relational ontologies, often gathered under the conceptual umbrella of the "pluriverse". They focus on territorial, community, and network initiatives that intend to move methodologically beyond discourse analysis with a situated and empirical analysis of how pluriversal practices might flourish as well as generate tensions. We identify three frictions with capitalist modernity emerging from these contributions: (1) how alternatives to sustainable development relate to state institutions, (2) how they engage with the distribution of surplus, and (3) how they unsettle scientific epistemologies, at times regenerating past resources-and at other times radical futures. With this special feature, we hope to re-politicize the debates on the science and practice of sustainability, and weave the contributions of anticolonial and indigenous science studies into neo-Marxist and post-development critiques.
Post-development theory usually engages with examples from Latin America and India and investigates alternative concepts and practices by progressive social movements. This article addresses a post-development concept which originates in Iran, Gharbzadegi or occidentosis, which after the Islamic revolution in 1979 was promoted by the anti-Western Iranian government. It argues that the instrumentalization by right-wing governments should not distract from the emancipatory potential of post-development concepts.
Seit nunmehr einem Vierteljahrhundert geht unter dem Namen „post-development“ ein Gespenst in der Entwicklungstheorie um. Während die klassischen post-development-Texte ihren Fokus primär auf Mexiko, Kolumbien und Indien richteten und die neuere Debatte um buen vivir v.a. Ecuador und Bolivien in den Blick nahm (siehe auch PERIPHERIE Nr. 149), lassen sich alternative, auf nichtwestliche Traditionen Bezug nehmende Vorstellungen einer guten Gesellschaft auch in zahlreichen anderen Ländern finden. Zwei davon möchten wir in unserem Beitrag genauer betrachten. Allerdings möchten wir im Unterschied zu den klassischen Beispielen Fälle untersuchen, in denen die Alternativkonzepte nicht von oft als links angesehenen Basisbewegungen, sondern von politisch rechts stehenden Regierungen vertreten werden: in Thailand und im Iran. Diese Fallauswahl scheint zu der These zu passen, dass post-development letztlich ein reaktionäres, rückwärtsgewandtes Konzept sei. Dieser These möchten wir widersprechen. Unsere Zielsetzung im vorliegende Beitrag ist es, die Instrumentalisierung antiwestlicher, entwicklungskritischer Konzepte in den untersuchten Ländern durch reaktionäre Regierungen zu analysieren, ohne ihren emanzipatorischen Gehalt zu übersehen – letztlich zielen wir auf eine Rehabilitierung von vermeintlich rückwärtsgewandten post-development-Konzepten ab.
This innovative book responds to an existing demand for taking Africa out of a place of exception and marginality, and placing it at the center of international relations and world politics. Bringing together a number of scholars from various disciplinary backgrounds to stage a critical intervention into the problematic ways Africa is accounted for in the dominant discourses of international relations and global politics, it challenges the structural and epistemic biases of IR that render the contributions of the continent invisible, and situates the continent as a global region that exists beyond notions of lack, disorder, and failure. Through these interventions, the volume contributes to a rethinking of IR, and the conditions of possibility for imagining a world otherwise beyond frames that fetishize Africa paradoxically as transparent and invisible.
Marta Iñiguez de Heredia is Marie-Sklodowska Curie Fellow at the Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals, Pompeu Fabra University, Spain.
Zubairu Wai is Associate Professor of Political Science at Lakehead University, Canada.
Africa’s place in the world has been closely linked to the idea of development. Building on post-development theory’s critique of development, Matthews’ chapter asks whether and how we can move beyond development in Africa. She argues that contrary to the wishes of some post-development theorists, we cannot retrieve, discover, or create something that is purely not-development, entirely non-Western, and fully outside of coloniality. However, this does not mean that we ought to acquiesce in the face of the powerful discourses that have come to dominate the way in which we talk about Africa. The chapter tentatively explores some possible ways in which development can be both resisted and reappropriated in creative ways.
Few books in the history of development studies have had an impact like The Development Dictionary – A Guide to Knowledge as Power, which was edited by Wolfgang Sachs and published by Zed Books in 1992, and which was crucial in establishing what has become known as the Post-Development (PD) school. This special issue is devoted to the legacy of this book and thus to discussing PD.
During the course of the 1990s, the Post-Development school emerged as an innovative though controversial approach in development studies. The article examines its critical reception in the textbooks and the extent to which its authors and arguments have become influential. It argues that the relationship between development studies and Post-Development is characterised simultaneously by (sometimes explicit, sometimes implicit) rejection and integration. Examining a number of current development studies textbooks, it illustrates the growing influence of Post-Development arguments and how they have been tacitly or consciously taken up while often rejecting Post-Development per se.
For the first time, the UK research evaluation system, known as the Research Excellence Framework, considered ‘measures’ of impact in the 2014 review. Here, we focus on impact case studies that had an engineering and international development orientation. We found that writers of impact case studies commonly chose to employ an ecological modernization (economic, environmental, and social value) discourse to shape value claims. We also found that the type of engineering and international development research that appears in impact case studies tends to be high tech, best-with-best, and exclusive, rather than low tech, humanitarian, and inclusive.
Through an ethnographic account of the decision-making process of the World Social Forum (WSF) and its governance structures, specifically the International Council and the Local Organising Committee, the micro-politics of the alter-globalisation movements will be explored. Looking at the debates around whether the WSF should be an open arena or become an actor, the paradox of the “tyranny of structurelessness” will be presented. More accurately, this paper exposes the asymmetry between the values and the practices of the WSF process by analysing the role of “social movement entrepreneurs” and the complex constellations of conflicting interests. Theoretical claims of horizontal consensual and open decision-making are used to eliminate any democratic procedure, paving the way to highly unequal oppressive power relations that dominate the deliberative space of encounter between different movements. The paper questions the capacity of the World Social Forum to articulate alternatives to neoliberalism, and to present different and more democratic ways of doing politics. After having unmasked the oppressive power structures within a social movement claiming to fight against them, this paper advocates for moving beyond the WSF discursive dichotomy of “neoliberal/anti-neoliberal”, and calls for a Gramscian resistance to the hegemonic neoliberal discourse played through direct transformative engagement with the institutions of our society. This paper offers a detailed view inside the black box of decision-making processes within social movements contributing to the academic as well as the activists’ debate on their governance. This analysis is particularly relevant in the light of the global occupy and anti-austerity movements, which have been making similar claims to those of the WSF of being a leaderless initiative, without any political affiliation, and using consensual methodologies, thus facing some of the same shortcomings and challenges.
This book investigates the parallels between mainstream development discourse and colonial discourse as theorized in the work of Homi Bhabha, Gayatri Spivak and Edward Said. Aiming to repoliticize post-colonial theory by applying its understandings to contemporary political discourses, author April Biccum critically examines the ways in which development in its current form has recently begun to be promoted among the metropolitan public.
James Rochlin reflects on the development, the environment and Ecuador's oil patch. Ecuador's history of development is marked by a pronounced reliance on the primary sector, from cocao to bananas, and most recently to a focus on the extractive industry within the context of the global commodity boom of the new millennium. The state's historic failure to escape development schemes linked almost solely to the agro-mineral-petroleum sector has spelled wild cycles of economic boom and bust. Regarding wild fluctuations in the economy, Ecuador suffered a crisis in 2007-8 that was minor compared to the 1998-2000 catastrophe. In the latter debt crisis, a drop in commodity and especially oil prices in 2008 led the government to proclaim it could not meet its debt commitments. What is important to underscore is that petroleum production had bankrolled President Correa's populist platform.
As an early development practitioner, Harry Johnston came to Uganda intending to develop a socially responsible capitalism – his ‘new boot’ for the Baganda. He negotiated this intent into the 1900 Uganda Agreement and expected that, once implemented, these conditions would lead naturally to the desired ends. What happened was something quite different. Baganda chiefs negotiated their own goals into the Agreement, and their actions, along with those of Baganda farmers and workers, produced very different results than that which Johnston envisioned. In effect, his intent to develop was subsumed by the contingent process of development. While interesting in itself, this story informs recent development debates. Some post-development theorists, while attempting to provide a practical alternative to modernist development, appear to incorporate assumptions similar to those under which Johnston operated. However, if these laudable attempts are to succeed, they must learn from Johnston's experience and account for development's contingent nature.
The institutional set-up embedded in the World Bank's Accountability Framework reconfigures and fragments the sites of political negotiation within and across the nation state. Additionally, key development actors' mobility across institutional and geographical sites of political negotiation escapes any form of accountability. Once assessed in specific social contexts, institutional models are thus subject to transgressions and negotiations, opening up spaces for resistance.
Zusammenfassung??Die von der deutschsprachigen Entwicklungstheorie kaum beachtete Post-Development-Kritik formuliert eine fundamentale Kritik an Projekt, Konstrukt und Begriff der ?Entwicklung?. In der Rezeption herrscht weitgehende Einigkeit ?ber die theoretische Einordnung der Texte als an Foucault angelehnte Diskursanalysen sowie ?ber bestimmte ?Standardvorw?rfe?. Eine n?here Betrachtung offenbart jedoch erstens, dass Post-Development mehr Gemeinsamkeiten mit einer traditionellen Ideologiekritik als mit einer poststrukturalistischen Diskursanalyse aufweist, und zweitens, dass man streng genommen zwei Varianten des Post-Development unterscheiden muss: eine neopopulistische mit potenziell reaktion?ren politischen Konsequenzen und eine skeptische, die sich ?postmoderner? Theorieelemente bedient, eine gro?e Schnittmenge mit postmarxistischen und radikaldemokratischen Ans?tzen aufweist und ein emanzipatives Projekt formuliert.
This review article considers the political effects of the construction by postcolonial/postmodern theory of an emancipatory project embodying an alternative modernity. It is argued that, in the case of the north Indian peasantry, what is perceived as a subaltern hybridity entails a paradoxical combination: namely, science‐driven technology with an irrational, pre‐scientific worldview. The latter elements, according to postcolonial theory, correspond not just to an authentically indigenous knowledge emanating from an undifferentiated ‘people’ but also to the way in which in non‐Western societies resist the continuing dominance exercised by erstwhile colonial masters through a system of Enlightenment/Western values. Epistemologically, however, such a backwards‐looking critique of science, technology and development has much in common with the discourse of the political right.Postcolonial Developments: Agriculture in the Making of Modern India, by Akhil Gupta. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998. Pp.xv + 407. £14.95 (paperback). ISBN 0 8223 2243 7Rivalry and Brotherhood: Politics in the Life of Farmers in Northern India, by Dipankar Gupta. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997. Pp.230. £12.99 (hardback). ISBN 019564 1019Peasants, Populism and Postmodernism: The Return of the Agrarian Myth, by Tom Brass. London and Portland, OR: Frank Cass Publishers, 2000. Pp.xii + 380. £18.50 (paperback). ISBN 0 71468000 1
The postdevelopment school has criticized development projects for their inherent power relations and their authoritarian implications. However, since the 1980s a transformation in development discourse can be observed that includes an emphasis on participation and civil society organizations. Through the analysis of several development projects, the article pursues the question of whether this transformation can also be observed on the level of projects—and on the level of inherent power relations. From a poststructuralist perspective, it argues that “development” functions as an empty signifier that can be filled with almost any content but constrains its form.
Where analysis concludes that a context is characterised by high risk, as in thecase given HIV/AIDS in South Africa, individual choice and freedom are often negated, for instance, by social scientists when they resort to the statistical logic of large numbers. Ironically, given that knowledge and rationality are arguably related, the choice and freedom of the individual deemed not to have knowledge about a given issue, is questioned and soon negated. By focusing on the black people in South africa, as a key example, it is argued that such analyses and solutions deny the existential possibilities of the people. The aim of this article is to affirm an individual's possibilities. The situation of the individual who communicates is recalled to argue against approaches that variously seek to blame the individual.
In the time of HIV/AIDS, ideas such as those of Søren Kiekegaard should be engaged to advance understanding of the limitations and possibilities of the individual who communicates. In the trasition from understanding to acting on information on HIV/AIDS, the individual has the freedom to choose. This is humbling for communication scientists and practioners who seek to prevent the further spread of HIV/AIDS.
The post‐development critique of development discourse has by now been widely discussed and criticised. Post‐development texts have been interpreted as a cynical legitimation of neoliberalism or a futile romanticisation of premodern times; more sympathetic critics have at least acknowledged its potential to criticise the shortcomings of development theory and policy. There is, however, widespread agreement on the assumptions that post‐development can be seen as a Foucaultian critique of development and that it forms a sort of theoretical school. This article is concerned with challenging these assumptions by showing that 1) post‐development only employs (if at all) a rather impoverished version of Foucault's discourse analysis; 2) there are in fact two variants to be found under the heading post‐development—a sceptical and a neo‐populist one—and most of the criticisms are only valid for the latter. Whereas neo‐populist post‐development has reactionary political consequences, sceptical post‐development uses elements of postmodern and post‐Marxist theory and can best be described as a manifesto of radical democracy in the field of development studies. For scholars interested in emancipation, the point is to identify the crucial differences between post‐development sliding into (sometimes reactionary) neo‐populism and post‐development converging with theories of radical democracy.
RESUMEN
Este trabajo conecta el análisis de traducción en la Téoria de Red de Actores de la Sociología de la Ciencia con la Antropología del Desarrollo, a in de considerar el pro ceso por el cual los proyectos de desarrollo efectúan cambios en el conocimiento y la práctica de la agricultura andina. El enfoque de la traducción es en los deseos y necesidades de los campesinos andinos cuando estos se comprometen con organiza ciones de desarrollo agrícola no gubernamentales que tratan de difundir las tecnologías de la agricultura cientíica. Recurriendo a datos etnográicos obtenidos en los Andes del sur del Perú, este trabajo sigue las construcciones del deseo y la necesidad que hacen el desarrollo tan plausible cuanto problemático, dadas las diferencias entre el saber del personal de proyectos de desarrollo y el saber local. Se concluye que en los casos en que estas diferencias convergen en nuevos amalgamas de conocimiento del desarrollo y prácticas locales, los híbridos emergentes deben ser tanto historicizados como politiza dos, en vez de ser simplemente interpretados como mezclas sincrónicas de prácticas culturales.
This article examines a work of the French post-development thinker Serge Latouche, L'autre Afrique: entre don et marché (AA) (1998), in order to illustrate the normativity of post-development thought. The discussion is divided into two parts. Firstly, the article clarifies the general framework of Latouche's post-development thought by mapping his work in the currents of French social and political thought, especially the Anti-Utilitarian Movement in Social Sciences. Secondly, the article scrutinizes the underlying themes of several normative arguments in AA. I will show that, for Latouche, singularity is a fundamental category in exploring a post-development society. In particular, the article discusses the manner in which Latouche infers normative principles from his reflections on the singularity of the excluded people in African societies. In analyzing his normative claims such as ‘the self-limitation of developed societies’ and ‘the recognition of the other Africa as an authentic partner’, I will demonstrate that the normativity of his post-development thought is grounded on the Aristotelian ethics of phronesis, Illich's ethics of conviviality and Lévinas’ ethics of responsibility. The article concludes that Latouche's post-development thought paves the way for a post-Heideggerian ethics of coexistence.Journal of International Relations and Development (2009) 12, 31–57. doi:10.1057/jird.2008.25
Technology blending can be defined as the constructive integration of emerging technologies with traditional low-income, small-scale sectors or for the production of basic-needs goods and services regardless of the scale of operations. As the word "blending' implies, the injection of new technology must not result in the total or nearly complete displacement of prevailing production techniques. Rather, a significant complement of original infrastructure, equipment, and organizational procedures should remain more or less intact. In the first section we explain what technology blending is and how it can be differentiated from other levels of technology. The next section reviews the socioeconomic impacts of newly emerging technologies with particular attention paid to the consequences of technology blends. The third section examines diffusion patterns of new technologies, while the final section suggests priorities for actions designed to extract the full benefits from technology blending. -from Authors
Politics in the rural areas of Uttar Pradesh has been transformed by the emergence of a powerful farmers' movement with strong support among the prosperous peasantry. Studies of farmers' movement have placed a different emphasis on the importance of class and caste factors, as well as drawn attention to the important role of the middle peasants in agrarian mobilisation. This study attempts to situate the nature of and shifts in the farmers' movement in the context of agrarian transition and political change in UP. A central paradox is that although the movement was dominated by and reflected the economic interests of surplus producing farmers, its principal mobilising ideology and strategy during the campaigns was non-economic. It was embedded in existing caste and religious cleavages. For this reason, the movement was soon overtaken by the sway of Hindutva politics in western UP. Two particular factors, the intensification of caste and communal politics, are considered in explaining the rise and decline of the movement. It is argued hat the fortunes of the farmers' movement are crucially influenced by larger social forces which are reshaping political processes in north India. This aspect has been neglected in most of the analyses of the farmers' movements.
Debates and struggles over national agricultural policy in India reveal a clear distinction between the leaders of the farmers' movements in Uttar Pradesh, whose programme is producer oriented, and Sharad Joshi, whose demands include not just higher crop prices for producers but also higher wages for rural workers. Criticising the Nehruvian development path, which involves extracting surpluses from agriculture by the price mechanism a consequence of which is faltering growth and the immiseration of rural workers, Joshi maintains that rural labour will benefit from higher crop prices. Arguing that economic growth in the agrarian sector is generated not just by wage labour but also by the unpaid labour of petty commodity producers and women, Joshi's view is that the retention of surpluses in the agrarian sector will lead to increased capital accumulation in agriculture and labour-intensive rural industries.
This article examines programmatic, strategic and ideological ambiguities in the discourse of the farmers' movement in Karnataka and Maharashtra. It focuses specifically on the way in which both the KRRS and Shetkari Sanghatana claim to be 'new' agrarian mobilisations, how they identify potential/actual membership and alliances, the manner in which they confront and/or collaborate with the state, and in particular how they conceptualize externally-derived exploitation. The latter is linked to the continued existence in India of a subordinated 'weak' capitalism which perpetuates not only colonial dependency on foreign capital but also endemic rural poverty and urban bias, and the eradication of which requires either a 'Khadi Curtain' or an 'Operation Ryot'. That is, inter-national egalitarianism based on non-exploitative relations (favourable terms of trade and remunerative prices).
Together with the environmental and women's movements which emerged in India during the 1980s, the farmers' movement is viewed as part of a new and authentically grassroots form of apolitical/anti-state mobilisation. However, it is argued here that the peasant/gender essentialisms invoked in the discourse shared by the new farmers' movement, ecofeminists and some sections of the left, have been those associated historically with the politics of populism/nationalism. In the the Indian context, such idioms are particularly supportive of the neo-populist communal/nationalist discourse of the political right. One consequence of this discursive fusion has been the reproduction of a politico-ideological space that has now been (re-) occupied by the BJP/VHP/RSS.
Addressing the issues of gender and development in the 1990s seems to us to require a return to major debates about the nature of political and economic power, the role of gender and the character of development. These debates have seen significant advances in the last ten years. A thorough grounding in this new (and old) thinking is needed before new syntheses can be constructed. To that end this paper explores the implications of new thinking in the areas of global restructuring, development and feminist analysis in the hope that this will inspire a more open, inclusive and multifaceted approach to the teaching, research and practice of development, especially for women.