ArticlePDF Available

What’s There to Mourn? Decolonial Reflections on (the End of) Liberal Humanitarianism



This paper questions the extent to which the (arguable) end of the liberal humanitarian order is something to be mourned. Suggesting that current laments for the decline of humanitarianism reflect a Eurocentric worldview, it calls for a fundamental revision of the assumptions informing humanitarian scholarship. Decoloniality and anti-colonialism should be taken seriously so as to not reproduce the same by a different name after the end of the liberal order.
Whats There to Mourn? Decolonial
Reflections on (the End of) Liberal
Olivia Umurerwa Rutazibwa
Senior Lecturer in European and International (Development) Studies, University of Portsmouth;
This paper questions the extent to which the (arguable) end of the liberal humanitarian order is something to be
mourned. Suggesting that current laments for the decline of humanitarianism reflect a Eurocentric worldview,
it calls for a fundamental revision of the assumptions informing humanitarian scholarship. Decoloniality and anti-
colonialism should be taken seriously so as to not reproduce the same by a different name after the end of the
liberal order.
Keywords: aid, (de)coloniality, development, epistemology, Eurocentrism, liberal humanitarianism
All over the globe, fascism, racism and xenophobic
nationalism are resurfacing in what we once thought
of as respectabledemocracies. Following a particularly
bleak weekend at the end of October 2018 (the election
of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, reports of worsening famine
in Yemen, Israeli bombardment of Gaza and the murder
of eleven worshippers at a refugee-harbouring synagogue
in Pittsburgh), my colleague Dr Sara Salem of the London
School of Economics tweeted: Its difficult watching
political scientists scrambling to understand whats
happening around the world today as if there havent
been peopletheorising racism, nationalism, empire
and gender for a century and warning of exactly what
we see now.
Moulded by Eurocentric knowledge systems, most of
us react to such developments with utter shock. We an
imagined citizenry of respectable democracies are
horrified and appalled at how far we have been dragged
from our liberal, more-or-less progressive self-image.
And we are invited to consider whether we might be
witnessing the end of the liberal humanitarian order.
Eurocentrism has taught us to see the potential end
of an era in every relative change in Western power.
Thinking about the role of humanitarianism today
requires that we dont reproduce or unwittingly cel-
ebrate Western-led order by mourning the end of a
history thatnever actually existed. Given past and present
non-Western experiences of liberal order, we might ask:
whats there to mourn?
My personal experiences of research and knowledge
production regarding humanitarianism have reinforced
in me an anti-colonial ethos an intellectual opposition
to coloniality, even in the most benignof research and
policy areas, like international aid and humanitarianism.
Coloniality can be understood as the perpetuation of
colonial systems and technologies of domination into
the present. As discussed by scholars such as Quijano,
Grosfoguel, Dussel and Ndlovu-Gatsheni, the concept of
decoloniality encourages systemic and historical analysis
of the organised (re)production of injustice and mass
human suffering.
Formal colonialism (which arguably existed from 1492
to the 1960s) and transatlantic enslavement are but two
means through which Europeans made themselves the
protagonists of global history. Europeans then rewrote
their history, erasing the mass human suffering they
had caused, promoting instead tales of white European
innocence (Wekker, 2016), superiority and exceptionalism.
In its destruction of life, coloniality might be considered
anti-humanitarian, and yet it is characteristic of the liberal
humanitarianism whose end we now (prematurely) are
invited to mourn.
For over two decades, I have been struggling to
make sense of humanitarian interventions. The topic
was thrust upon me by events in Rwanda in 1994.
As a teenage, second-generation Rwandan immigrant
in Belgium, I was more personally affected than fellow
classmates by the hypocrisy of the international
Journal of Humanitarian Affairs Volume 1, No. 1 (2019), 6567 © 2019 The authors
This is an Open Access article published under the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence
Open Access
Downloaded from at 04/06/2019 01:02:52AM
via free access
community: the preaching of respect for human rights,
followed by their omission during one hundred days of
mass murder before the eyes of the world. It felt like
there was more to the story than good intentions versus
regrettable outcomes.
Ever since, I have worried about the content and
purpose of (Western) humanitarian research agendas. I
became cognisant of the limited efforts to understand
how good intentions coexist with a system of inter-
national aid and intervention that seems harmful not
for the few but for the many. The silence of too many
researchers simultaneously masks and normalises the
harmful consequences of the aid system.
The scholarship and advice I was exposed to as my
early academic career developed prompted me to explore
the contradictory logic of international aid empirically:
I set out to make a database of the EUsethical
behaviour (sanctions, funding, declarations and military
and humanitarian interventions, in relation to human
rights and democracy) between 1999 and 2007 towards
the countries of sub-Saharan Africa. I did not find any
patterns that could fully explain the EUs action or
inaction: not a countrys size, nor its former colonial
masters, its natural resources, the Member State presid-
ing over the EU, nor even the African target countrys
human rights or humanitarian situation. After a stint at
the European Commissions Directorate General of
External Affairs, I also came to reject simplistic accounts
about the absence of good intentions of the people
devising and implementing aid policies.
IrealisedthatIand mainstream IR with me had
operated on an assumption that external involvement in
the affairs of the developing world, if well intentioned
and effective, was desirable, indispensable even. Letting go
of this assumption opens up a world of possibilities for the
study of intervention. Doing so, I reconsidered the
conventional narrative that attributes the genocide against
the Tutsi in Rwanda to non-intervention, and came to see
that the (post)colonial run-up to genocide was a story of
too much intervention, even in the name of democracy.
During my doctoral research, I rediscovered the case
of Somaliland. A self-declared independent republic
in the north-western corner of Somalia, Somaliland
had declined US and UN interventions at the beginning
of the 1990s, apart from specific assistance (the clean-up
of landmines, for example). Instead, it took care of its
peace-building process internally and with its diaspora.
Over the years, even thoughthe international community
had found its way to the capital, Hargeisa, Somaliland had
arguably become the most stable democracy in the
region, even as it awaited international recognition of
its independence. It seemed to me, therefore, that the
most salient question was not how intervention could be
more effective and efficient, but whether it was necessary
in the first place. Was Western presence itself constitutive
of the problems facing hostcountries?
In her recent book Decolonising Intervention: Inter-
national Statebuilding in Mozambique (2017), Meera
Sabaratnam offers a compelling feminist decolonial
analysis of international statebuilding in the postcolony.
She foregrounds in-country critiques of foreign presence
via the concept of protagonismo; and she reflects on
disposability (of the beneficiaries), dependency (on the
interveners) and entitlement (of the interveners) as
constitutive of interventions and not just technical
glitches. If only I had had access to this work when I
began my inquiry into humanitarianism.
I now include Sabaratnams book as a core text for
final-year undergraduate students reading International
Development Studies and International Relations at
the University of Portsmouth. My module on Rethink-
ing Aid and Developmentexplores the implications
of decolonial engagement with ideas and practices of
international solidarity. Students have said: We should
be assigned readings like this from year one.So I ask the
question here: What if we were to start our humani-
tarian conversation with Sabaratnam?
Of course, other works have questioned the value
of international intervention. But it is necessary to
reflect on the consequence of their marginality in the
canon. Privileged research agendas shape academic
career paths; and, increasingly, careers in the real world
shape academic disciplines. In this context, the margin-
alisation of critical decolonial perspectives in research
and in practice becomes mutually reinforcing.
A decolonial approach to humanitarianism challenges
Eurocentric analyses, foregrounding the experiences and
knowledges of the intended targets of humanitarian aid.
It poses questions not so much about the political will,
operational implementation and technical capabilities of
humanitarians as about the perpetuation of colonial
power relations in seemingly benevolent activities.
Decoloniality asks: where do we start the story? Who
has the microphone and who usually doesnt? What do
we consider expertise? What are the implications of
Eurocentric bias in knowledge production? Do our
practices and knowledge systems contribute to the
struggle against colonial power relations?
As we reflect on the potential end of liberal order,
decoloniality questions what we mourn. With humani-
tarianism itself being redefined, decolonial perspectives
can contribute to an understanding of the relevance of
the good intentions of humanitarians to the aspirations
of their intended beneficiaries. They can provide an
antidote to the colonial amnesiaof liberal humanitar-
ians and, therefore, provide a basis for the critical
interrogation of, and contribution to, humanitarian
endeavours in the service of life and dignity and not
Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
(2019) 1/1
Downloaded from at 04/06/2019 01:02:52AM
via free access
merely of survival. They can challenge not only the
ideological character of a given order but also the power
relations essential to it something that the local turnin
humanitarian thinking has not done, despite discussion
of shifting power.
Without these perspectives informing research and
policy agendas, whatever comes next is unlikely to be
very different for those previously robbed of power and
voice. Mourning the end of an order responsible for mass
human suffering, while that suffering continues, then
becomes an indulgent act of self-delusion.
Dussel, E. (1993), Eurocentrism and Modernity (Introduction to the
Frankfurt Lectures),Boundary 2, 20:3, 6576.
Dussel, E. (2008), Twenty Theses on Politics (Durham, NC: Duke
University Press).
Grosfoguel, R. and Cervantes-Rodriguez, A. M. (2002), Introduction:
Unthinking Twentieth-century Eurocentric Mythologies: Universal
Knowledge, Decolonization, and Developmentalism, in Grosfoguel,
R. and Cervantes-Rodriguez, A. M. (eds), The Modern/Colonial/
Capitalist World-System in the Twentieth Century: Global Processes,
Antisystemic Movements, and the Geopolitics of Knowledge (Westport,
CT: Praeger Publishers), pp. xixxix.
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J. (2012), Coloniality of Power in Development
Studies and the Impact of Global Imperial Designs on Africa,
Australasian Review of African Studies, 33:2, 4873.
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J. (2018), Racism and Blackism on a World Scale,
in Rutazibwa, O. U. and Shilliam, R. (eds), Routledge Handbook of
Postcolonial Politics (London: Routledge), pp. 7286.
Quijano, A. (2000), Coloniality of Power and Eurocentrism in Latin
America,International Sociology, 15:2, 21532.
Quijano, A. (2007), Coloniality and Modernity/Rationality,Cultural
Studies, 21:23, 16878.
Rutazibwa, O. U. (2018), On Babies and Bathwater: Decolonizing
International Development Studies, in de Jong, S., Icaza, R. and
Rutazibwa, O. U. (eds), Decolonization and Feminisms in Global
Teaching and Learning (London: Routledge), pp. 192214.
Sabaratnam, M. (2017), Decolonising Intervention: International Statebuild-
ing in Mozambique (London: Rowman & Littlefield International).
Wekker, G. (2016), White Innocence: Paradoxes of Colonialism and Race
(Durham, NC: Duke University Press).
Whats There to Mourn?
Downloaded from at 04/06/2019 01:02:52AM
via free access
... Alongside this is sometimes a feeling that I am not doing the most helpful thing for the people I am engaging with, that external involvement, regardless of how well intentioned it is, might not be what is desired (Rutazibwa, 2019). That academic articles and research are not very helpful, and that the people I am asking questions of are sceptical about the fact I am here for a few weeks/ a month/ 3 months, and that I am not committed to being present long-term and to overcoming the structural failures they face. ...
... The humanitarian sector, for example, has long affirmed that the people we support must be at the centre of the response, and have meaningful input on the decisions that affect their lives. Yet, the current architecture of large-scale 'traditional' humanitarian organizations is based on decision-making and funding structures that lead to bureaucratization of assistance and hierarchical systems that are based on tales of white Western innocence, superiority, and exceptionalism (Konyndyk, 2019;Rutazibwa, 2019). It reproduces Western-led initiatives that perpetuate unequal power relations instead of challenging them. ...
... Like you, I often wonder if the approaches forced upon us by the humanitarian system's incentive structures and power dynamics prevent us from truly achieving the aspiration of shifting power to local actors or intended targets of humanitarian aid. In light of this we can, and should, question the role and place of liberal humanitarianism in the world today (Rutazibwa 2019). I have often asked myself if we (re)produce injustices and human suffering by working in a system that inherently reproduces colonial structures. ...
Full-text available
This intervention consists in a conversation between an activist-scholar engaging in research questioning the conditions facing refugees and asylum seekers in Greece and an activist leading an ngo supporting displaced people. We reflect on our own positionality working in this area and on the role of academia and the humanitarian sector more generally. We explore different approaches to knowledge production that challenge the exploitative practices associated with both academic research and humanitarianism.
... This has found renewed contemporary expressions in the discursive practices of the humanitarian-development-industry complex that uses liberal state and peacebuilding (Rutazibwa 2019), crisis and emergency (Mertens and Pardy 2017) and 'emerging African countries' (Péclard, Kernen, and Khan-Mohammad 2020), silencing alternative modes of living and knowing. The current political dynamics of Uganda, Burundi, DRC, and Rwanda are, moreover, deeply entangled with the unfolding and long-term consequences of what has been termed 'Africa's world war' (Prunier 2008). ...
Full-text available
The contributions of this special issue explore the concept of colonial durabilities in a bid to unearth both the concrete and invisible sites through which coloniality continues to circulate and materialise in the African Great Lakes Region (GLR). Colonial durabilities, we argue, are non-linear dynamic processes that suffuse the realities and structures of international and national politics, as well as the conduct of daily life. These become particularly evident in the knowledge economy of the GLR, in endeavours as broad as state building and everyday practices, within international development and peacebuilding interventions, and in academic theorising, methodologies and writing formats. We introduce the papers in this special issue that urge us to address an important question: Can we truly decolonise if we do not fully understand the coloniality of the present and its effects? We argue a careful investigation of the structural conditions that enable coloniality to actively form and re-form is essential to accurately understand real-world ramifications of asymmetrical power relations, a crucial aspect of the process of decolonisation. Lastly, we reflect on avenues for re-thinking the effects of colonial durabilities and to work towards generating anti-/de-colonial knowledges to perhaps achieve ‘epistemic freedom’.
... DiH staff and volunteers also commonly defined their work and identity in opposition to the mainstream and established aid sector, which they accused of being absent or too slow and inflexible in their responses, or of treating humanitarianism as a job rather than a calling. *** Studies of humanitarian organisations or interventions often start with a definition and history of humanitarianism, typically referring to the genealogies presented in the seminal work of DidierFassin (2012) or MichaelBarnett (2011), or the critique of humanitarianism's colonial legacies presented by Lester and Dussart (2014; see alsoRutazibwa 2019). However, in recent years, several scholars have problematised these "Western" or "Euro-centric accounts" and criticised the "northern appropriation of the humanitarian label." ...
Following the so-called refugee crisis unfolding on the Greek islands in 2015, a multitude of citizen-led agencies emerged to mitigate or contest the EU’s policies of securitisation and containment. This dissertation explores the trajectory of one of these initiatives: a Norwegian humanitarian volunteer organisation Dråpen i Havet (A Drop in the Ocean, DiH). Established by a mother-of-five with no prior experience in humanitarian or social work, DiH aspires to “make it easy” for ordinary people to help refugees in Greece, but has undergone a process of partial professionalisation, leading to larger responsibilities inside and outside Greek refugee camps. The organisation also tries to scale up their acts of care and hospitality to the Norwegian state and to influence co-nationals who do not share their humanitarian sensibilities. The dissertation is based on 18 months of ethnographic fieldwork in Greece and Norway. Chapter 1 discusses the emergence of a new humanitarian geography and the rise of “Fortress Europe.” Chapter 2 and 3 trace DiH’s trajectory from spontaneous volunteering to “NGOization” and explore the organisation’s shifting and contested efforts to “fill humanitarian gaps” on Europe’s southern border. Chapters 4 and 5 examine DiH’s widespread appeal amongst Norwegian citizens and the organisation’s vision of volunteering as a transformative experience. These chapters also explore volunteers’ pathways to help refugees in Greece and ambivalent experiences of returning home and negotiating different worlds and relationships. Chapter 6 analyses DiH’s political turn and efforts to witness and mobilise for more inclusive asylum policies and positive public orientations towards refugees in Norway. The conclusion discusses the redemptive potential of volunteering. Taken together, the chapters challenge enduring representations of humanitarian actors and volunteers as “rootless cosmopolitans” or “transnationals” motivated by either selfish or altruistic concerns to help distant strangers. Conversely, the dissertation shows that DiH staff and volunteers felt deeply ashamed by Norwegian affluence and their government’s restrictive asylum policies and increasingly worried over the moral health and future of the Norwegian state and society. The dissertation argues that DiH staff and volunteers can be understood as “cosmopolitan nationalists,” called to help as indignant and ashamed Norwegian citizens and mobilising against what they perceive as an illicit, inward-looking nationalism. Drawing on feminist and anthropological work on the politics of affect, the dissertation analyses shame (skam) as both culturally and politically contingent, expressed on personal and collective levels and simultaneously on behalf of and against the nation. Contrary to popular and scholarly assumptions, DiH staff and volunteers experience shame as largely productive and self-affirming. However, the dissertation argues that its political force is hampered by its reliance upon (and reproduction of) a sanitised and romanticising national narrative. While primarily a contribution to the study of humanitarianism, nationalism and border politics, the dissertation addresses anthropological and philosophical debates on ethics, affect, cosmopolitanism and liberalism. It further provides windows into changing and increasingly fragmented and hostile humanitarian and political landscapes on the fringes of Europe. Analysing volunteers’ post-utopian and redemptive aspirations, the dissertation identifies “sticky attachments” to national and humanitarian frames and imaginaries yet also some cracks and openings.
... Through structural adjustment, large, multinational financial institutions have enforced unjust debt collection and trade deals that exacerbated inequalities (Hickel, 2018). Misguided contemporary programs and policies have, inter alia, created dependency on the people or resources deployed in an intervention, endowed practitioners and academics with the power to establish such interventions, and treated the beneficiaries of interventions as disposable (Rutazibwa, 2019). ...
Despite decades of global development programming, poverty persists in the low-and-middle-income countries targeted by these efforts. Training approaches to global development must change and the role of engineers in these efforts must evolve to account for structural and systemic barriers to global poverty reduction. Rapid growth in Global Engineering graduate programs in the United States and Canada creates an opportunity to unify efforts between academic institutions and ensure that programs align with the sector's needs as identified by practitioners. To build consensus on how to equip engineering students with the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary, we convened practitioners, faculty and graduate students for a two-day workshop to establish an agreed-upon Global Engineering body of knowledge. The workshop was informed by a pre-event survey of individual participants and representatives of participating academic institutions with graduate programs in Global Engineering or a related field. Through the workshop breakout sessions and post-event work by the authors, we developed the following priority learning objectives for graduate education in global engineering: Contextual Comprehension and Analysis; Cross-cultural Humility; Global Engineering Ethics; Stakeholder Analysis and Engagement; Complex Systems Analysis; Data Collection and Analysis; Data-driven Decision Making; Applied Engineering Knowledge; Project Design; Project Management; Multidisciplinary Teamwork and Leadership; Communication; Climate Change, Sustainability, and Resilience; Global Health; and Development Economics. Although technical skills are central to preparing the next generation of Global Engineers, transversal and interdisciplinary skills are equally important in equipping students to work across sectors and account for barriers to global development and equity.
... This endorsement calls on us to interrogate our motivations for global health beyond the ideas of charity, aid, altruism, or wanting to "do good"-ideas that may be too reductionist, too accepting of the status quo of a "global North and global South" binary, and that normalize the deep economic injustices that have created global power and resource imbalances. 36 Instead, by decentering ourselves in our motivations and reimagining global health as a work of global solidarity, we can engage in the idea of global health as global justice, a form of social empathy that relates to others in their efforts to overcome oppression and diminish suffering. 37 Unlike aid or charity, solidarity goes beyond the notion of helping others and adopts a commitment to eliminating oppressive systems. ...
The movement to decolonize global health and address power inequities among its actors is not new. Founded on the work of colonized and marginalized people themselves, initiatives at universities, schools of public health, and international development organizations have emerged to call for anti-racism and anti-colonialism within the field. US Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) have been less vocal in this wider discussion, despite their large engagement in the field through clinical, research, and medical education activities. As global health practitioners currently based at an AMC, we believe that it is important to critically evaluate our practices. We therefore propose three starting questions for our colleagues and students to consider and act upon as they adopt and navigate a praxis in anti-racism and anti-colonialism as foundational principles in global health. These questions call on us to closely examine the legacies of racism and colonialism in global health, the value placed on different ways of knowing in this field, and our motivations for engaging in this work. They are presented as a tool to reexamine global health, challenging the constructed binary of the "global South" and "global North," and the perceived ideas of poverty and resource scarcity as the natural immutable reality of the global South.
Full-text available
What assumptions underpin the concept of ‘localisation’ as employed by the mainstream, international humanitarian sector? This paper offers a partial answer to this multi-faceted question. It first considers the meaning(s), or lack thereof, of localisation. It presents coloniality and ‘mirroring’ as two concepts important to understanding the limitations of localisation. It then considers locally led aid in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK, or North Korea), using the example of the Eugene Bell Foundation (EBF). The paper argues that assumptions around the actors involved in local response, as well as assumptions around the existence of NGOs and the normative belief that non-state actors could and should play major roles in response, demonstrate the limits of localisation.
In this chapter, the authors explore what more-than-human approaches can contribute to development research, teaching and practice. The authors believe that this work is timely as development studies and practice have yet to engage with more-than-human insights in any significant way. They first develop the concept of more-than-human development before analysing the challenges it poses to how we conceptualize and approach core development concerns such as community and empowerment. They then reflect on the ramifications of the concept for practice and policy, before finally exploring how to incorporate more-than-human approaches into pedagogy.
This article explores the foundational role of race in humanitarianism, its historical geographies, genealogy, and contemporary practice. I pay particular attention to the work of Sylvia Wynter on the overrepresentation of (white bourgeois) Man in modernist understandings of the human that form the basis of humanitarianism in the present. Building on Wynter I offer an alter‐historical geography of humanitarianism, locating its genus in the voyages of 1441 and 1492 that unsettles other critical work on the colonial origins of humanitarianism as both a normative and instrumental form of governance and their geographies. In following what Wynter terms a “human view”, I explore the racist orderings of Rational Man and his irrational, racialised ‘others’ that work to structure humanitarianism’s subjects. Alongside this I consider the parasitic relations of humanitarianism to the negation of life enacted through the genocide of Black and Indigenous peoples, arguing humanitarianism’s claims to save lives and relieve suffering cannot be divorced from conquistador violence. I argue that grappling with what Wynter calls “category problems” is necessary as humanitarianism — or huManitarianism — faces the contemporary challenges raised by Black Lives Matter that undermine and question its universalist legitimacy.
Ontological parochialism persists in International Relations (IR) scholarship among gestures towards relational ontological reinvention. Meanwhile, the inter-polity relations of many Indigenous peoples pre-date contemporary IR and tend to be substantively relational. This situation invites rethinking of IR's understandings of political order and inter-polity relations. We take up this task by laying out necessary methodological innovations to engage with Aboriginal Australia and then showing how conventional and much recent heterodox IR seek to create forms of ‘escape’ from lived political relations by asserting the powerful yet problematic social science mechanism of observer's distance. This demonstrates a need to take Aboriginal Australia as a system on its own terms to speak back to IR. We next explain how Aboriginal Australian people produce political order on the Australian continent through a ‘relational-ecological’ disposition that contrasts with IR's predominant ‘survivalist’ disposition. The accompanying capacity to manage survivalism through relationalism provides an avenue for engaging with and recasting some of mainstream IR's survivalist assumptions, including by considering an Aboriginal approach to multipolarity, without attempting ‘pure escape’ through alternative ontologies. We thus argue that while it is necessary to critique and recast dominant IR, doing so requires putting dominant IR and Indigenous understandings into relational exchange.
The globalization of the world is, in the first place, the culmination of a process that began with the constitution of America and world capitalism as a Euro-centered colonial/modern world power. One of the foundations of that pattern of power was the social classification of the world population upon the base of the idea of race, a mental construct that expresses colonial experience and that pervades the most important dimensions of world power, including its specific rationality: Eurocentrism. This article discusses some implications of that coloniality of power in Latin American history.
Introduction: Unthinking Twentieth-century Eurocentric Mythologies: Universal Knowledge, Decolonization, and Developmentalism
  • R Grosfoguel
  • A M Cervantes-Rodriguez
Grosfoguel, R. and Cervantes-Rodriguez, A. M. (2002), 'Introduction: Unthinking Twentieth-century Eurocentric Mythologies: Universal Knowledge, Decolonization, and Developmentalism', in Grosfoguel, R. and Cervantes-Rodriguez, A. M. (eds), The Modern/Colonial/ Capitalist World-System in the Twentieth Century: Global Processes, Antisystemic Movements, and the Geopolitics of Knowledge (Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers), pp. xi-xxix.
Coloniality of Power in Development Studies and the Impact of Global Imperial Designs on Africa
  • S J Ndlovu-Gatsheni
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J. (2012), 'Coloniality of Power in Development Studies and the Impact of Global Imperial Designs on Africa', Australasian Review of African Studies, 33:2, 48-73.
Racism and Blackism on a World Scale
  • S J Ndlovu-Gatsheni
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J. (2018), 'Racism and Blackism on a World Scale', in Rutazibwa, O. U. and Shilliam, R. (eds), Routledge Handbook of Postcolonial Politics (London: Routledge), pp. 72-86.
On Babies and Bathwater: Decolonizing International Development Studies
  • O U Rutazibwa
Rutazibwa, O. U. (2018), 'On Babies and Bathwater: Decolonizing International Development Studies', in de Jong, S., Icaza, R. and Rutazibwa, O. U. (eds), Decolonization and Feminisms in Global Teaching and Learning (London: Routledge), pp. 192-214.