Development

1. Development Introduction to Global StudiesXIDS 2301

4. What does this frequently used word mean anyway? j

5. The Concept of “Development” --Countries have only been though about in this way for around 60 years—as “developed”, “underdeveloped”, “developing”, “less developed”, “least developed”, etc. --Popular origin of the concept was speech by Harry Truman (Jan. 20, 1949) “We must embark on a bold new program for making the benefits of our scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas. The old imperialism – exploitation for foreign profit – has no place in our plans. What we envisage is a program of development based on the concepts of democratic fair dealing.” Defines the problem of “underdevelopment”: need for “improvement and growth”, i.e. poverty (lack of material resources), lack of technical know-how and practices, not industrialized, not urbanized Defines the process of development: outside “help”, i.e. spatial diffusion of the Western (North American, European) way of thinking, of doing things, of living; strategies to “catch up”

6. The Concept of “Development” --“Development” became a discourse an interlocking vocabulary, set of institutions, and field of technical expertise that imagined the world in a particular way Discourses are powerful b/c they define problems and solutions and shape actions and policies, and those actions and policies “harden” or give life to and thereby reproduce the underlying ideas --Development discourse Some countries are “undeveloped”, “underdeveloped”, “backward”; others are “developed”, “advanced”, “modern”—Truman speech, Rostow’s model The World Bank (IBRD)– “a vital source of financial and technical assistance to developing countries around the world” (www.worldbank.org) (also, UNDP, FAO, IMF, etc.) The field of “development economics”—expertise in how to achieve economic growth and social change in “less developed countries”

7. Modernization Theory --in a general sense, most popular approach to development thinking in North America and Europe (“the West”) --says the all countries occupy positions on same spectrum of development (ranging from “traditional” to “modern”)  an important implication of this is that there is a universal path to “development” and that the goal is to look and be like countries at the “modern” end of the spectrum --those on the “traditional” (or less developed) side can “develop” themselves by adopting characteristics of those at the “modern” (or developed) end --Rostow’s “stages of economic growth” model is very influential The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto (1960)

8. Rostow’s Stages of Economic Growth Traditional society (limited productivity, heavily agricultural) Preconditions for takeoff (emerge from “external intrusion”, productivity still limited, economic “progress” is seen to be needed for public good; need for nation state as political framework is apparent) The takeoff (agriculture gets mechanized, new production methods, expanding class of capitalists develops) The drive to maturity (output increases faster than population, specialization and international trade) Age of high mass consumption (production shifts to consumer goods and services, real incomes can purchase more than food and shelter, quality of life becomes most important) Beyond mass consumption (increased value given to nonmonetary aspects of life) “modernization”“development”

9. Rostow’s Stages of Economic Growth --You can “hear” Modernization Theory and Rostow’s model in present-day arguments about structural adjustment, economic integration, the role of markets in global and domestic governance, TNCs, foreign investment, and even US military strategy

10. Critiquing Development --most forceful critiques have emerged from those living in the Global South, those who have experienced the “development” process When we consider what is happening both in our country and in other parts of the world, we are forced to take another look at the idea of development at top speed at any cost. Let us forget for a moment the crimes and stupidities that have been committed in the name of development from Communist Russia to India . . . and let us look at what is happening in the United States and Western Europe: the destruction of the ecological balance, the contamination of lungs and of spirits, the psychic damage to the young, the abandoning of the elderly, the erosion of the sensibilities, the corruption of the imagination . . . Under the present circumstances the race toward development is mere haste to reach ruin.” Octavio Paz, The Other Mexico: Critique of the Pyramid (1972) --when you “propagate” development, here is what “we” encounter: Violence of colonialism, gunboat diplomacy, wars between superpowers, impoverishment, external control over domestic affairs, the dissolution of indigenous institutions and cultures, and environmental deterioration

11. Critiquing Development --two (of many) alternative points of view (alternatives to Modernization Theory) 1) Dependency Theory Based on Andre Gunder Frank’s idea of “development of underdevelopment”— “underdevelopment” is not an original condition but a result of economic integration with the West (i.e. countries do not develop in isolation of each other, including European countries) Frank observed that the places that were most “developed” in Latin America were those with the weakest ties to Europe Those that were most strongly tied to Europe “depended” on it for markets, productive inputs, capital, consumer goods, advice and expertise An appropriate development strategy for countries would be one that involves disconnecting from the larger system and in order to develop internal capacities (such as, import substitution industrialization)

12. Critiquing Development --two (of many) alternative points of view (alternatives to Modernization Theory) 2) Post-Development Theories The very concept of “development” should be abandoned  it is not an innocent word “Development” has produced material wealth for some and that is not enough to justify it Ignores fact that different societies have different histories, geographies, cultures, institutions, conceptions of the good life  they do not, indeed should not, follow the same path Disempowers those not considered “developed” by convincing them to devalue their own knowledge, values, institutions, and cultures; leading to acceptance of external interventions and controls Is destructive of the social and physical environment  “development thinking” cannot even recognize the damage it causes (e.g. think about the ecological consequences of externalities, the social impacts of devaluing local knowledge (with particularly harmful effects on women), and upending relationships of reciprocity and mutual obligation (e.g. destroyed famine prevention systems)) You cannot eat GNP!