ArticlePDF Available

Envisioning African Futures: Development corridors as dreamscapes of modernity

Authors:

Abstract

This critical review paper scrutinizes development corridors as ‘dreamscapes of modernity’ and showcases of ‘future-making’. I argue that corridors have become dominant blue-prints for spatial development because of a specific way in which they express, perform and implement ‘desirable futures’. I refer to three strands of conceptual debates. The first discusses how futures are ‘made’ and can be empirically approached through practices of future-making. The second looks at imaginations of African futures in relation to images of the continent itself. The third takes the empirical example of development corridors in Africa to scrutinize their meaning as ‘dreamscapes of modernity’. At the end, I will revisit recent calls for closer integration between economic geography and development studies, to which I suggest to add a concern for post- and decolonial positions and ‘theory from the south’.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Geoforum
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geoforum
Critical review
Envisioning African Futures: Development corridors as dreamscapes of
modernity
Detlef Müller-Mahn
Department of Geography, University of Bonn, Meckenheimer Allee 166, 53129 Bonn, Germany
ARTICLE INFO
Keywords:
Development corridors
Dreamscapes of modernity
Future-making
Africa
Spatial development
Decoloniality
ABSTRACT
This critical review paper scrutinizes development corridors as dreamscapes of modernityand showcases of
future-making. I argue that corridors have become dominant blue-prints for spatial development because of a
specic way in which they express, perform and implement desirable futures. I refer to three strands of con-
ceptual debates. The rst discusses how futures are madeand can be empirically approached through practices
of future-making. The second looks at imaginations of African futures in relation to images of the continent itself.
The third takes the empirical example of development corridors in Africa to scrutinize their meaning as
dreamscapes of modernity. At the end, I will revisit recent calls for closer integration between economic
geography and development studies, to which I suggest to add a concern for post- and decolonial positions and
theory from the south.
1. Introduction
Development corridors are criss-crossing the African continent.
Some exist only on paper, others have already become real as zones of
investment and accelerated growth. Regardless of their current stage of
implementation, they are powerful tools of spatial planning, with far-
reaching eects for rural populations and environments (Enns, 2018).
This critical review paper scrutinizes development corridors as
dreamscapes of modernityand showcases of future-making(Jasano
and Kim, 2015;Appadurai, 2013). I argue that corridors have become
dominant blue-prints for spatial development because of a specic way
in which they express, perform and implement desirable futures. The
approach is not meant as an alternative to political economy explana-
tions that view development corridors primarily as entry points of
global capitalism (for example Bergius et al., 2017), but rather as a
complimentary perspective. I refer to three strands of conceptual de-
bates. The rst discusses how futures are madeand can be empirically
approached through practices of future-making. The second looks at
imaginations of African futures in relation to images of the continent
itself. The third takes the empirical example of development corridors
in Africa to scrutinize their meaning as dreamscapes of modernity.At
the end, I will revisit Murphy's (2008) call for closer integration be-
tween economic geography and development studies, to which I sug-
gest to add a concern for post- and decolonial positions and theory
from the south(Comaroand Comaro, 2012).
The paper builds upon a newly founded collaborative research
centre Future Rural Africa, where researchers from the universities of
Bonn and Cologne cooperate with African partners in a long-term
program to investigate future-making and social-ecological transfor-
mation (see website www.futureruralafrica.de). The studies focus on
development corridors in Kenya, Tanzania and Namibia, assuming that
much of what aects future-making in Africa at the moment plays out
in rural areas and becomes visible there in terms of plans and projects,
societal negotiations and contestations, and multiple development ac-
tivities resulting in massive transformations of land-use and livelihoods.
2. Uncertainty, future-making, and the capacity to aspire
The future has always been an intellectual challenge, but nowadays
it seems to warrant particularly high attention due to a rising awareness
of uncertainty in contemporary risk society(Beck, 1999). Uncertainty
can be dealt with in diverse ways. One possible response uses ctional
expectations(Beckert, 2016), i.e. imaginations of future capitalist dy-
namics that are shared by economic actors (such as a collective wishful
thinking), resulting in coordinated action and simultaneous decision-
making. Another response is securitization, i.e. a strategy that attempts
to gain control over the future by silencing alternative voices and ideas
(Ahlqvist and Rhisiart, 2015). In the past, people used divination, sa-
crice, or other rituals to prepare for their future, while nowadays they
do the same by means of forecasts, scenarios, and development plans.
Future-making and development practice are closely related, because
they can both be understood as attempts to gain control over the future
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.05.027
Received 15 May 2019; Accepted 31 May 2019
E-mail address: mueller-mahn@uni-bonn.de.
Geoforum xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
0016-7185/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Detlef Müller-Mahn, Geoforum, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.05.027
and reduce uncertainty.
In the following, I apply this idea to the observation of mush-
rooming development corridors in Africa. Like other planning tools,
they aim at shaping future conditions by simultaneously projecting
visions into the future and into space. Such visionary spatial-temporal
projections may well be called utopian, since the term utopiarefers to
atopos, a distant place like the cast-away island in Thomas Moruss
famous novel from 500 years ago. The island Utopiarepresents an
ideal organisation of state and society in harmony with the natural
environment. Utopian thinking has long inuenced political debates,
most prominently in the late 19th and rst half of the 20th century.
The future is essentially a social category, since it is based on shared
aspirations and anxieties. It does not simply emerge out of the present,
but is socially produced through practices that make it an issue in the
present. Appadurai (2013) distinguishes three practices of future-
making, namely imagination, aspiration and anticipation; in a similar
vein, Jasano(2015) describes imagination as a collective social
practice. Anderson (1983) had already pointed out in his work on
imagined communitiesthat social cohesion, the feeling of weagainst
others, and the constitution of communities essentially depend on
shared imaginations of a common future.
Making the future an object of collective imagination and commu-
nity-building, however, needs more than just vision and aspiration. It
requires performative action that creates greater visibility for some
future imaginations while silencing others. Future visions or imagina-
tions become powerful when everyone believes in them, just like
Beckert's ctional expectations, i.e., when a suciently large propor-
tion of a society or decision makers is convinced (or is made to believe)
that particular options of future developments are going to materialize,
while others are considered as not feasible, irrelevant, or undesirable.
Addressing this performative aspect of future-making requires an un-
derstanding of the way how future possibilities are discursively turned
into matters of fact, as if the future was already there.
In this context sociotechnical imaginariesplay a crucial role.
Jasano(2015: 19) denes them as collectively held, institutionally
stabilized, and publicly performed visions of desirable futures. Being
both uid and persistent at the same time, sociotechnical imaginaries
are products and instruments of the coproduction of science, tech-
nology, and society in modernity(Jasano, 2015: 19). Corridor mas-
terplans can be considered as sociotechnical imaginaries that corre-
spond with particular practices of future-making, aiming at the
conquering of underused spaces through development. However, the
question arises whose imaginations are employed, and what this does to
the local capacity to aspire.
3. Imagining African Futures
Current discourses about African futures are highly ambivalent. On
the one hand a deeply entrenched Afro-pessimism continues to view
Africa as a lost continentand hopeless case for international devel-
opment. On the other hand optimistic outlooks have become more
prominent over the past decade, expressed in notions like Africa rising
and continent of opportunitiesthat envision African economies as
power houses for a stumbling world economy. The growth and devel-
opment optimism has been driven by conspicuous institutional alli-
ances, including the IMF, the African Development Bank and other
international nance organizations, which all have an obvious interest
in positive expectations. Bright futures have also been propagated by
the African Union and national governments adhering to ambitious
national development plans like Kenya's Vision 2030. It should be
noted, however, that these optimistic outlooks cannot simply be dis-
carded as wishful thinking of development agencies and politicians,
since they are also, at least to some extent, shared by African in-
tellectuals.
Africa is the futurehas become a theme that cuts across recent
outputs from publications to arts to movies (see: Sarr, 2016, Goldstone
and Obarrio, 2016,Afrofuturism,Black Panther). One of the most
prominent authors among the Afro-optimists is Achille Mbembe, who
points out that the continent has leapfrogged technological develop-
ment at an unprecedented speed. Africa appears to have become the
last frontier of capitalism, which Mbembe (2015) sees as an opportu-
nity for abolishing internal boundaries and for the reopening of Africa
to itself. Yet, it is hard to believe that Achille Mbembe's and Felwine
Sarrs imaginations of future Africa do really coincide with the World
Bans rhetoric of the continent of opportunities.
Imagining the future of Africa cannot be dissociated from the way
how the continent itself is imagined, and by whom. Under colonial rule
and the prevailing conditions of global coloniality(Ndlovu-Gatsheni,
2014), Africa has long been the object of foreign imaginations with a
focus on underutilized resources, extreme poverty or failed states.
Against this backdrop, such imaginations can only envision positive
futures as an antithesis to the perceived present deciencies and
backwardness. Deeply entangled in global coloniality, such imagina-
tions are driven by a peculiar will to improve(Li, 2007). Prevailing
conditions of coloniality lead to practices of future-making that are
conceived as an equivalent to improvement, progress, and ordering, as
a civilizing mission, or in other words, as development.
Senegalese economist and writer Felwine Sarr (2016) makes a
strong appeal for decolonizing the imagination of African futures, and
for a better rooting of the African economies in their respective so-
ciocultures(Sarr, 2015). He argues that [w]e need to stop mimicking
and dare to reinvent…” (Sarr, 2016), referring to African traditions and
their suitability to nd solutions for contemporary problems. He asks
to challenge the model provided by the colonizer, i.e., to be inventive
and creative in designing African futures. In his critique of Western
concepts of development, Sarr contends that models should not simply
be introduced because they have been successful elsewhere, () there
is no buy-in from people here. Yet, the argument should not be mis-
understood as a naïve romanticization of an African past, but as a call
for independent thinking. Knowledge production and development on
the African continent that are largely elite-driven projects tend to copy
models of modernization from other parts of the world and paste them
into African contexts, without suciently taking account of African
tradition, culture and vision. According to Sarr (2016), there are al-
ternative ways of shaping African futures, since our governments are
not hand-bound to follow the orders of global capitalismand he con-
cludes: We should not necessarily adopt a solution found in Europe.
Sarr's position is shared by other critical African intellectuals, but it
is certainly not in line with the dominant practice of development. This
raises the question how alternative African futures may look like, who
formulates them, and whether there is space for them to unfold under
the dominant architecture of power. In other words: Can Africans
create African futures within a modern world system structured by
global coloniality?(Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2014: 181)
4. African development corridors as dreamscapes of modernity
Development corridors are planning tools for spatial development,
using road and transport infrastructure for better linkages between
rural peripheries and urban growth poles. The literature oers a wide
range of denitions, each focussing on particular aspects (Gálvez
Nogales, 2014, Gálvez Nogales and Webber, 2017, Reeg, 2017). Hope
and Cox (2015) for example distinguish between dierent types of
corridors according to the level of regional integration, from simple
road and transport corridors through agricultural or industrial growth
corridors to integrated economic corridors.
The initial idea of conceptualizing development corridors as plan-
ning tools builds upon the observation that roads have always been
carriersof innovation and growth impulses. Early publications high-
light the concept's response to the problematic spatial inequality of
development (Gaile, 1977), and present it as a strategy to combine
regional rural development policies with the creation of growth centres
D. Müller-Mahn Geoforum xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
2
(Richardson, 1978). The concept was rst applied for transboundary
axes of communication and economic development for European in-
tegration (Pottier, 1963). Its applicability for African regional devel-
opment had already been discussed in South Africa in the 1980s before
it was used for the implementation of the Maputo Johannesburg
transboundary corridor in the early 1990ies, i.e. shortly after the
abolishment of Apartheid and the end of the Mozambican Civil War
(Geyer, 1988). Quite obviously, this corridor between the two neigh-
bouring countries did not only serve economic purposes, but also po-
litical interests on both sides. After its successful implementation, the
example was soon adopted by the Southern African Development
Community (SADC) in 1996 to become a blue-print for another 14 new
corridors, and again only a few years later in 2000 the member states of
the African Union's New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD)
took over the model to promote development corridors all over the
continent as a solution for prevailing economic and spatial disparities.
The last two decades saw the adoption of growth corridors in the
national development plans of many African countries. Prominent ex-
amples are the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania
(SAGCOT), which was launched as the backbone of Tanzanias agri-
cultural transformation agenda of agriculture rst(Kilimo Kwanza), or
the Lamu Port-South Sudan-Ethiopia Transport (LAPSSET) corridor as
part of Kenyas Vision 2030. Corridor planning generally goes along
with the promise of winwin situations, i.e. the enhancement of eco-
nomic growth, income generation and improved well-being of the in-
habitants, and positive environmental eects. Corridor implementation
may, however, also be subject to sudden change, for which the recent
experience of SAGCOT is an interesting example.
At rst sight, the mushrooming of development corridors in Africa
and other continents looks like an impressive success story of regional
planning and integration. After its rst practical application in Europe,
the approach was implemented in Southern Africa and then adopted all
over the continent, and also in other emerging regions in the Global
South. The most spectacular example at the moment is the Chinese New
Silk Road project. This remarkable career can be taken as a typical
example of a travelling model, i.e. an idea or concept that was in-
ventedfor a particular purpose and geographical setting, and later
translated to other purposes and settings (Behrends et al., 2014).
However, I would argue, the adoption of that model for corridor-based
regional development initiatives all over Africa does not necessarily
prove that it has really been successful.
The numerous corridor projects across the continent have so far
been quite diverse with regard to their performance and current state of
implementation, with some projects apparently doing quite well, some
struggling with failure, and many not even getting beyond an early
stage of planning. Even if spatial integration and development have
positive economic impacts for the countries involved, they may also
have disadvantages for local populations (Paul and Steinbrecher, 2013).
Contrary to the initial goal of development corridors to ease spatial
inequalities, there may be winners and losers along the corridor
(Gálvez Nogales and Webber, 2017, 30).
Against this backdrop, some recent publications call for a new
generation of growth corridors that serve as territorial tools for agro-
industry development(Gálvez Nogales and Webber, 2017), value-
chain integration and the attraction of investment in publicprivate
partnerships as part of neoclassical spatial development initiatives
(Dannenberg et al., 2018). The role of transport infrastructure and
growth corridors for development is the object of controversial debates.
While development agencies and international nancial organisations
like the World Bank see infrastructure and technologies as a pre-
requisite for development, critical voices rather view them as entry
points for the penetration of foreign capital (Murphy, 2008: 860). What
is critical about the implementation of development corridors and the
elaboration of national development strategies is the question of au-
thorship and ownership. The Kenyan newspaper Daily Nation (2015)
comments on this question: While a national dream is conceived by
people, Vision 2030 was not conceived internally by Kenyans but ex-
ternally by McKinsey & Company of South Africa that has been con-
ceiving and selling national visionsto African countries like Kenya.
Ours is Vision 2030, Rwanda's Vision 2020, Burundis's Vision 2025,
Tanzania's Vision 2025, and so forth.As this comment points out,
foreign-produced visions are marginalizing African imaginations,
dominating local capacities to aspire, and conquering the future. De-
velopment corridors may be understood as dreamscapes of modernity
in the sense of Jasanoand Kim (2015), but the modernity they envi-
sion is not necessarily the one imagined by the people living there.
5. Approaching geographies of the future
Development corridors are powerful tools of future-making in rural
Africa, because they appear attractive to investors, policy-makers, and
to some extent also to the wider public. They are presented and enacted
as dreamscapes of modernity, for example in maps, cartoons, and
drawings. What makes them problematic is the fact that they do not
originate from the needs and imaginations of their inhabitants, but from
foreign blueprints. Their design reects travelling models, i.e., socio-
technical imaginaries that have originally been designed for other re-
gional and societal contexts and are now applied for the integration of
African peripheries into the global capitalist system.
However, this understanding of development corridors leaves some
questions open that require further studies. First, the fact that devel-
opment corridors have not been designed by local populations does not
necessarily mean that they are generally disadvantageous or against
local interests. By interpreting them as travelling models, I simply want
to draw the attention to the circumstances under which the model
travelsthrough contested elds of interest and multi-layered power
structures, and to the asymmetric power relations between the Global
North and South that determine the translation of such models into
space.
Second, I would like to raise the question what makes African fu-
tures or positions genuinely African. I have referred to positions of
post- and decoloniality that call for African visions and approaches of
future-making. Building upon a critique of Eurocentric historicism and
teleology, decolonial initiatives propose changes to the perspective of
theory-making to be an ex-centric site(Bhabha, 1994: 6). Yet, I think it
requires further clarication what makes theory (and the con-
ceptualization of development) actually be from the South, and what
gives this position more truth and legitimacy than others. Hence, I
suggest that we need to overcome North-South binaries from both di-
rections, which requires an ex-centrictheory-making not only as
theory from, but also theory with the South.
Third and my nal point is that the future and its translation into
space should matter to (economic) geographers, especially in studies of
the relationship between the Global North and South. Along with the
need to understand the spatial dynamics of the diverse economies in the
Global South, there is also a need to appreciate Southernagency, and
the way how individuals and societies envision and shape their own
futures.
Acknowledgements
This paper was inspired by debates in the DFG-nanced
Collaborative Research Center (CRC-TRR 228) Future Rural Africa.It
benetted greatly from comments by the guest editors of this special
issue.
References
Ahlqvist, T., Rhisiart, M., 2015. Emerging pathways for critical futures research:
Changing contexts and impacts of social theory. Futures 71, 91104.
Anderson, B., 1983. Imagined communities. Reections on the origin and spread of na-
tionalism. Verso, London, New York.
D. Müller-Mahn Geoforum xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
3
Appadurai, A., 2013. The Future as Cultural Fact. Essays on the Global Condition. Verso,
London.
Beck, U., 1999. World risk society. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Beckert, J., 2016. Imagined futures. Fictional expectations and capitalist dynamics.
Harvard Univ. Press, London.
Behrends, A., Park, S.-J., Rottenburg, R., 2014. Travelling models. Introducing an ana-
lytical concept to globalisation studies. In: Behrends, A., Park, S.-J., Rottenburg, R.
(Eds.), Travelling Models in African Conict Management. Translating Technologies
of Social Ordering. AEGIS 13, Brill, pp. 140.
Bergius, M., Benjaminsen, T.A., Widgren, M., 2017. Green economy, Scandinavian in-
vestments and agricultural modernization in Tanzania. J. Peasant Stud. 32 (1), 128.
Bhabha, H.K., 1994. The Location of Culture. Routledge, New York.
Comaro, J., Comaro, J., 2012. Theory from the South or, How Euro-America is
Evolving Toward Africa. Boulder.
Dannenberg, P., Diez, J.R., Schiller, D., 2018. Spaces for integration or a divide? New-
generation growth corridors and their integration in global value chains in the Global
South. Z. f. Wirtschaftsgeographie 62 (2), 135151.
Enns, C., 2018. Mobilizing research on Africás development corridors. Geoforum 88,
105108.
Gaile, G.L., 1977. Towards a strategy of growth paths. Environ. Plann. A 9, 675679.
Gálvez Nogales, E. 2014. Making economic corridors work for the agricultural sector.
Agribusiness and Food Industries Series 4, FAO Rome.
Gálvez Nogales, E., Webber, M. 2017. Territorial tools for agro-industry development a
sourcebook. Rome.
Geyer, H., 1988. The terminology, denition, and classication of development axes.
South African Geographer 113129.
Goldstone, B., Obarrio, J. (Eds.), 2016. Essays on Crisis, Emergence, and Possibility. Univ.
Chicago Press.
Hope, A., Cox, J., 2015. Development Corridors. Coey International Development/DFID.
Jasano, S., 2015. Future imperfect: Science, technology, and the imaginations of mod-
ernity. In: Jasano, S., Kim, S.-.H. (Eds.), Dreamscapes of Modernity. Sociotechnical
Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power. Univ Chicago Press, Chicago, London, pp.
133.
Jasano, S., Kim, S.-H. (Eds.), 2015. Dreamscapes of Modernity, Sociotechnical
Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, London.
Li, T., 2007. The will to improve. Governmentality, development, and the practice of
politics. Duke University Press, Durham, London.
Mbembe, A., 2015. Interview with Achille Mbembe at http://www.okayafrica.com/
achille-mbembe-african-futures-interview/ of 09 Nov 2015, last accessed 03.12.2018.
Murphy, J.T., 2008. Economic geographies of the global south: Missed opportunities and
promising intersections with development studies. Geogr. Compass 2 (3), 851873.
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S.J., 2014. Global coloniality and the challenges of creating African
futures. Strategic Rev. Southern Africa 36 (2), 181202.
Paul, H., Steinbrecher, R., 2013. African Agricultural Growth Corridors and the New
Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition. Who benets, who loses? EcoNexus Report.
Pottier, P., 1963. Axes de communication et développement économique. Revue
économique 14 (1), 58132.
Reeg, C., 2017. Spatial development initiatives potentials, challenges and policy lesson.
With a specic outlook for inclusive agrocorridors in sub-Saharan Africa. DIE Studies
97, Bonn.
Richardson, H., 1978. Growth centers, rural development and national urban policy: A
defense. Internat. Regional Sci. Rev. 3 (2), 133152.
Sarr, F., 2015. Economics and Culture in Africa. In: Monga, C., Lin, J.Y. (Eds.), The Oxford
Handbook of Africa and Economics: Vol. 1: Context and Concepts. Oxford University
Press, Oxford, pp. 122.
Sarr, F. 2016. Afrotopia. Éditions Philippe Rey, Paris.
D. Müller-Mahn Geoforum xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
4
... Yet what happens when the planned infrastructure does not materialize has so far attracted little attention. This is astonishing in so far as it is not uncommon that infrastructure projects are delayed or cancelled, so that dreamscapes remain dreams, and futures do not unfold as promised (Müller-Mahn 2020). In this article we argue that future-making nevertheless takes place, i.e., even if projects deviate from what was originally imagined, or are abandoned altogether. ...
... The Isiolo Resort City was promoted in a highly performative manner, featuring Las Vegas-style images. However, the Crocodile Jaw Dam failed to be seen as a 'dreamscape of modernity' (Müller-Mahn 2020). This perception gap arose because the dam's ultimate purpose-to serve the Isiolo Resort City-seemed vague, more a political spectacle (Lesutis 2022) than future reality, and of limited relevance to the development of other components of the transport corridor. ...
Article
Full-text available
State-led infrastructure development plays an increasingly important role in social transformation, especially in the Global South, which is also pushing the topic on research agendas in the social sciences in general and in development geography in particular. However, large infrastructure projects are often not completed as originally planned, and they may even end before implementation. This raises the question of how infrastructure and social transformation are related, especially if plans do not materialize. The paper presents an empirical approach to capturing the co-evolution of these two spheres of change in terms of a 'political arena of infrastructure development'. The arena is defined as a socially constructed space of contestation and strategic collaboration at an intermediate scale, characterized by a specific composition of temporality, spatiality, and performativity. Its focal point is the infrastructure development project, which characterizes the arena as a site of future-making. By conceptualizing the co-evolution of infrastructure and society in terms of a political arena, we highlight the contestation and strategic alliances of infrastructural futures. The concept offers insights into the contentious politics of infrastructure development, resource conflicts and land-use interventions from a political ecology perspective. We apply the concept to the case of the Crocodile Jaw Dam project in Kenya, which was repeatedly proposed in development plans, but has never materialized to date. Serving as a heuristic, the concept of political arenas of infrastructure development guides the research process, helping to identify key topics and dynamics within the socio-political landscape of infrastructure projects.
... Infrastructure can simultaneously be understood as immaterial 'dream' (Jasanoff & Kim, 2015;Müller-Mahn, 2020) 'enchantment' (Harvey & Knox, 2012) and material reality (see for example : Haines, 2018). Construction workers do not only translate these dreams into material reality through their labour, they also dream about the very infrastructural reality they helped create. ...
Article
Full-text available
This article proposes that future-making is hard work. Drawing on examples of work on and around infrastructure projects in East Africa, we show how people orient themselves towards the future through both imagination and material practices. We argue that work navigates between apparent opposites, and identify three antagonisms that are particularly relevant to our argument. First, we discuss how labour mediates between material reality and anticipatory imagination, extending this argument to include a mediation between material present and immaterial future imaginaries. Second, we show how labour can oscillate between visible, even spectacular, performance of labour and employment, and the invisible work of often marginalised people. Finally, we argue that while labour is often characterised by exploitative dynamics, it also offers possibilities for resistance – as well as promises of liberation – through organised labour in various forms. We conclude that (organised) labour, particularly around infrastructure projects, has the potential to make marginalised futures visible and real, thus challenging dominant imaginaries and material realities of the future inscribed by infrastructure master plans. These arguments are illustrated by vignettes collected during fieldwork on the Nairobi Express, along the proposed Lamu Port-South Sudan-Ethiopia-Transport (LAPSSET) corridor in Kenya and around a dam construction site in Tanzania.
... Drawing from different theoretical and conceptual backgrounds these works have started to pay attention to the lived realities of such megaprojects, emphasizing their situatedness in time and space. They analyze how the projects' histories partly uphold imperial and colonial legacies (Enns and Bersaglio, 2020;Kimari and Ernstson, 2020), how they affect land rights (Enns, 2019;Sulle, 2020), foster im/mobility (Enns, 2018(Enns, , 2019 and land grabbing (Kaarhus, 2011;Regassa et al., 2019); showcase the (contested) visons and imaginaries attached to these megaprojects (Mosley and Watson, 2016;West and Haug, 2017;Müller-Mahn, 2019;Müller-Mahn et al., 2021) and interrogate their effects on the everyday life of affected populations (Aalders et al., 2021;Hauer, 2021;Mkutu, 2022). In sum, attention has been paid to the spatial repercussions that megaprojects induce (Dannenberg et al., 2018;Regassa et al., 2019), the temporal reorientation and visions for development they convey (Mosley and Watson, 2016;Chome, 2020), and the conflicts and connections among different social groups they provoke or amplify (Enns, 2019;Chome et al., 2020;Hauer and Nielsen, 2020;Korbéogo, 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
Corridors entail and promote pervasive logics of (dis)connectivity. Over the years, corridors have become increasingly predominant across a range of spaces, places and territories. Their prevalence reflects a critical global shift in planning approaches, urban-regional governance, investment trends, circulation regimes and broader urbanisation processes. This article engages with this paradigm shift to critically interrogate the term corridor and its various usages and dynamics, considering its analytical purchase and socio-spatial dynamic for urban studies. We provide a genealogical reading of the term corridor, examining its usage and conceptualisation in different contexts, to ask what these different interpretations and analytical functions of the corridor can offer to urban studies today. Through this critical review, we assert that the meaning and usage of corridors are permeated by heterogeneity and multiplicity that define their current dynamic. This leads us to problematise their linear delineations across space (and time). Thereafter, we offer a typology of different corridors, which helps us to address its analytical valence for urban studies and social science. We conclude by setting out four research directions in scholarship that offer a platform to develop further research imperatives and debates in relation to the growing urban corridorisation and its effects on urbanities, cities and everyday life.
Article
Full-text available
This article examines the smallpox vaccination programme in postcolonial Tanzania from the 1960s to the early 1980s as part of the postcolonial future making in preventive medicine. The article departs from extant scholarship on smallpox vaccination in postcolonial Tanzania, which depicts the intervention as a success, while relegating to the background challenges associated with the intervention. The article argues that the smallpox vaccination programme registered challenges and successes that offer lessons for combating of future epidemics. The achievements of the programme were due to the adoption of specific public health policies, namely mass vaccination and public health education as well as reception of external assistance from the World Health Organization and donor countries, the use of ten-cell house structure, and political mobilization. The obstacles included administrative, transport, and cultural problems. The article adds to the historiography of public health in Tanzania, and it has the potential of offering lessons on dealing with present and future epidemics, especially Covid-19 and Mpox.
Article
Full-text available
Development corridors are linear programmes of infrastructure and agriculture aiming to facilitate rapid socio-economic development. In Africa, they are a major development activity, with 88 underway or planned corridors. Drawing from extensive literature and insights gleaned from a 4 year research programme, this review scrutinizes the impacts of development corridors on people, wildlife and ecosystems in Kenya and Tanzania, proposing solutions to achieve better outcomes. The overarching goal was to discern the principle challenges emerging from the practical execution of the prevailing corridor model. The holistic approach taken, assessing the development corridors paradigm through an integrated ecological, social, and economic lens, provides novel insights that have not been possible using more traditional—siloed—research approaches. Eight key challenge areas are identified: impact assessments processes; coherence across international, national and local planning; governance; inclusivity; equality; impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services; incorporation of future climate risks; and integrated water resource management. Poorly planned and implemented corridors detrimentally impact livelihoods and ecosystems. They lack a sustainable development vision, detailed social, environmental or climate risk assessments, and develop incrementally in policy and corporate spaces. There is also often a disconnect between investors and recipient governments, with some investors funding what governments request without applying internationally-recognised safeguards, and governments lacking capacity and resources to enforce regulations. We make recommendations for addressing these challenge areas. These aim to enhance impact assessment efficacy; integrate local perspectives into effective and inclusive corridor planning; overcome siloed project development and implementation; anticipate future development projections; and prioritise landscape preservation for enhanced ecosystem services and climate resilience.
Book
Full-text available
Agro-industry has the potential to become an engine of economic growth in many developing countries. Efforts made to generate or attract investment in the sector need to consider that geography matters in realizing this objective. In other words, territorial specificities, local supply links, the existence of an enabling environment and a well-developed business community are all crucial factors that need attention when intending to attract investment. Territorial approaches to foster agroindustrial investment at local, country and regional levels are becoming increasingly relevant. Governments are acknowledging the extent to which place-specific factors (endowment of natural and other productive resources, and social, institutional and knowledge capital) influence agro-industrial development outcomes. As a consequence, a number of instruments to attract agro-industrial investments into specific locations are becoming mainstream, namely agrobased corridors, clusters and special economic zones, as well as agro-industrial parks and incubators. These tools have the potential to enhance value addition, deliver jobs, increase exports and provide markets for new and existing producers in the targeted territories. However, confusion exists in the use of these terms since planners and practitioners sometimes utilize them interchangeably, thus ignoring the specificities of the investments, policies and processes required, and the expected outcomes delivered by each tool. Furthermore, their implementation poses a number of challenges that can, in extreme cases, lead to failure. In order to understand better the potential benefits and challenges of these tools, this Sourcebook considers their nature and objectives, the approaches used to implement them and the practices that have led to both successful and unsuccessful outcomes. After extensive analysis and comparison of global experiences, the book concludes that these territorially based investment promotion tools have potential for catalytic impact, but planners need to make sound choices that respect demonstrated principles and follow good practices for effective design and implementation.
Article
Full-text available
Growth corridors have been an instrument of economic development for decades but have gained new attention in regional economic development policies in recent years, e.g., in Sub-Saharan Africa or Southeast Asia. They are seen by policy makers and private businesses as catalysts of regional economic integration, pushing traditional businesses into increasingly complex international value chains. However, the outcomes of such development initiatives are still barely understood. Critics argue that development policies are based on simplified models that are unable to sufficiently address the complexity of regional development. Policies on value-chain development, for example, can lead to conflicts, external dependencies, land rush, and a polarization of wealth. Growth corridors often go hand-in-hand with socio-economic transformations and land-use conflicts. This paper first discusses the theoretically possible desired and undesired regional socio-economic effects of modern corridors. Second, we illustrate the potential and challenges to realize integrative (or inclusive) development by contrasting three growth corridors: the SAGCOT growth corridor in Tanzania, the Walvis Bay-Ndola-Lubumbashi Development Corridor (WBNLDC) in Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe, and the growth corridors in the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS).
Book
Full-text available
Literaturverz. S. [337] - 365
Article
Can Africans create African futures within a modern world system structured by global coloniality? Global coloniality is a modern global power structure that has been in place since the dawn of Euro-North American-centric modernity. This modernity is genealogically and figuratively traceable to 1492 when Christopher Columbus claimed to have discovered a 'New World'. It commenced with enslavement of black people and culminated in global coloniality. Today global coloniality operates as an invisible power matrix that is shaping and sustaining asymmetrical power relations between the Global North and the Global South. Even the current global power transformations which have enabled the re-emergence of a Sinocentric economic power and deWesternisation processes including the rise of South-South power blocs such as BRICS, do not mean that the modern world system has now undergone genuine decolonisation and deimperialisation to the extent of being amenable to the creation of other futures. Global coloniality continues to frustrate decolonial initiatives aimed at creating postcolonial futures free from coloniality. The article posits that global coloniality remains one of the most important modern power structures that constrain and limit African agency. To support this proposition, the article delves deeper into an analysis of the architecture and configuration of current asymmetrical global power structures; unmasks imperial/colonial reason embedded in Euro-North American-centric epistemology as well as the problem of Eurocentrism; and unpacks the Cartesian notions of being and its relegation of African subjectivity to a perpetualstate of becoming. Within this context, Africans have emerged as fighting subjects for a new world order that is decolonised, deimperialised, open to the emergence of new humanism and African futures.
Book
'Imagined Communities' examines the creation & function of the 'imagined communities' of nationality & the way these communities were in part created by the growth of the nation-state, the interaction between capitalism & printing & the birth of vernacular languages in early modern Europe.
Article
Across Africa, development corridors – networks of roads, railways, pipelines and ports that facilitate the movement of commodities between landlocked production areas, processing zones and global markets – are being built at an unprecedented pace. In mainstream development discourse, these mega-infrastructure projects have been framed as an effective way of creating conditions that are attractive to investors while simultaneously driving inclusive economic growth and development. Yet, recent geographic research on new development corridors has revealed certain tensions and inconsistencies in this win–win narrative, drawing attention to cases where the spatial reorganization of land that has accompanied corridor development has introduced new patterns of spatial exclusion and immobility. This article shows how approaching the study of development corridors using the new mobility paradigm – paying attention to uneven and conflicting mobilities along new corridor routes – stands to generate important empirical and theoretical insights about peoples' lived experiences with corridors, as well as about the trajectories of power enacted through corridor development. Ultimately, it is argued that applying the new mobilities paradigm in future research on development corridors may help researchers to better understand emergent forms of spatial exclusion and immobility created by new corridors.
Article
Capitalism is an economic and social order oriented toward the future. In this paper, I describe the unfolding of the temporal order of capitalism and relate it to the restless dynamism of capitalism we have observed since the Industrial Revolution. Since the future is open, actors are confronted with the uncertainty of the outcomes of their decisions. What can expectations be under conditions of uncertainty? To answer this question, I introduce the notion of fictional expectations which can be used to describe decisions made under conditions of an open and uncertain future. In the paper's penultimate section, I apply the concept of fictional expectations to the analysis of four crucial processes of capitalism: money and credit, investments, innovation, and consumption. The main thrust of the paper is that in order to understand economic action in capitalism, actors' perceptions of the future need to take center stage. Not only history matters, but also the future matters.
Article
‘Green economy’ is a broad concept open to different interpretations, definitions and practices ranging from the greening of current neoliberal economies to radical transformations of these economies. In Africa, one emerging and powerful idea in the implementation of the green economy seems to be to use a green agenda to further strengthen development as modernization through capital-intensive land investments. This has again reinvigorated old debates about large-scale versus smallholder agriculture. Influential actors justify large-scale ‘green’ investments by the urgency for economic development as well as to offset carbon emissions and other environmental impacts. In this contribution, we discuss the case of the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania (SAGCOT) to give examples of how the green economy may materialize in Africa. SAGCOT is presented by the Tanzanian government as well as investors and donors as a leading African example of an ‘investment blueprint’ and as a laboratory to test green growth combining profitable farming with the safeguard of ecosystem services. In particular, we discuss three Scandinavian investments within SAGCOT, their social implications and their discursive representations through the public debates that these investments have generated in Scandinavia.