SALI 6010: Module 1: Introduction An Overview of the Main Issues:

1. SALI 6010: Module 1: IntroductionAn Overview of the Main Issues: What is ‘development’? How have ways of ‘seeing’ ‘development’ tended to shape ‘development theory and policy’? What are the contemporary dilemmas of development studies/discourse? What are the contemporary objectives of ‘development’? What is the state of ‘development’ in the world and the region? Looking back- Looking ahead: Whither the ‘development project’?

2. What is development? What characteristics do you associate with ‘developed’ and ‘less developed’ countries? Are countries really classifiable? What develops? Whose development is it? Who and what have defined it? Consider here alternative forms of social life and their viewpoints For what end is development? Is there an end to it? How are these chosen or determined?

3. What is development? Are small countries supposed to have the same features as large countries when it comes to mapping their state of ‘development’? Can rich countries lack ‘development’? Is ‘development’ the negation of ‘poverty’? Or is it, its Father? sibling? No real relation? But then, what is poverty? Who are the ‘poor’?

4. The challenge of ‘development’ When we speak of the ‘challenge of development’ what has been meant by that? Post war US perspective provided by Harry Truman in his inaugural presidential address: “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 the underdeveloped areas.” quoted in Gilbert Rist, The History of Development, (1997:41) Should one take the US model of ‘development’ or ‘progress’ as the defining template for what attaining a ‘ state of development’ should look like?

5. The Idea of ‘Development’ Is the Western discourse on development neutral? “ … [it] inevitably contained a geopolitical imagination that has shaped the meaning of development for more than four decades. …It is implicit in expressions such as First and Third World, North and South, center and periphery. The social production of space implicit in these terms is bound with the production of difference, subjectivities and social orders.” Escobar, Encountering Development, (1995:9)

6. The History of ‘Development’ To the extent that Escobar is correct, it implies that a study of ‘development’ is first of all an effort of raising awareness of the processes and powers involved in the construction of the “idea of ‘development’”? That is, if the idea of ‘development’ is neither self evident nor universal, where did (does) it come from? And what ways of thinking and seeing come with it?

7. The History of ‘Development’ The origin of the idea of development is founded in the rationalism and humanism of the 17th to 19th century, as Potter et al note in Geographies of Development ( 1999:4): “ During the Enlightenment period it was believed that by applying rational and scientific thought to the world, change could become more ordered, predictable and valuable. Those who could not adopt to such views became thought of as ‘traditional’ and ‘backward.’” The work and writing of Sir William Petty (late 17th century) on taxes and national accounting, Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations, 1775), David Ricardo, ( theories of distribution and international trade), Karl Marx, ( theory of capitalist accumulation, contradiction and crises), and Émile Durkheim’s, Max Weber’s and Talcott Parsons’ social theories of modern society, provided the conceptual grid for much of later approaches and perspectives on the nature of modern development.

8. The History of ‘Development’ The contemporary (post-war) view of ‘development’ emerged with The post-war rise of the Keynesian inspired development planning for both colonial and post-colonial growth, given the success of the European Marshall plan. (Note: Countries often worked with a simplified view of Harrod and Domar’s dynamic growth equations, where growth is a function of the level of investment/savings and justified their state interventions by noting the problems of market failure and imperfect equilibriums, e.g. Poverty traps); the US post war foreign policy agenda. Both of which prompted the emergence of the Dual economy, structuralist and modernization frameworks for discussing the success and failures of “Third World” development.

9. The Quest for ‘Development’ The ideas for “catching up” to the West which underpinned these early approaches were a powerful stimulus for newly independent states to seek to exceed their negative endowments from a colonial past. The First wave development strategies of the post-colonies was led by the “ developmental state” whose object was to break out of the conditions of ‘backwardness’ or ‘underdevelopment.’ The pivotal emphasis was on realizing growth as the evidence of the emergence of a modern economy, identified by the rise of an urban capitalist industrial sector ( as distinct from an agricultural/rural economy).

10. Questioning ‘Development’? The growth of inequities and poverty or the failure to take of into “ self sustained growth” in these newly independent states provoked grass-roots and intellectual critiques of the development paradigm and the state’s development policies for “catching up.” A Sharp distinction is drawn between growth and development, in the debate over how to measure the well being of the inhabitants of a country, or their experiences of “progress.”

11. What should development mean? The measure of growth as proxy for social and economic welfare/ progress criticized on grounds that aggregate income measures such as Gross domestic product ( GDP) per capita ( income per head) suppresses ( inter alia) : Distributional inequities Non-market transactions ( eg in the informal economy) Quality of life experiences, e.g. in terms of health education, life expectancy, infant mortality Environmental quality and sustainability. Major consensus is shaped around the need to move to define development beyond growth.

12. Rethinking ‘development’- key shifts Central shift in defining development from outcome to process variables. Moving away from utilities, based on income and consumption, to a focus on what individuals are able to do and be, as later to be measured or evaluated by Sen’s freedoms and capabilities approach to development. Sen’s work underpins the rise the UNDP’s human development approach and its many human development indices. Associated with this shift are the critiques from Marxist, Plantation and dependency schools, feminist, grass-root ‘alternative development’ or ‘anti-development’ social movements as well as post- structuralist critiques of the certainties of modern society and modern development.

13. DEVELOPMENT STUDIES IN QUESTION  “ The conventional model of development is in doubt…it is becoming increasingly clear that the way we have thought about development in the past is no longer adequate. There is no room for ‘business as usual’. The present is characterized by a triple crises … The first is the crises of the state… the second is the crises of the market…the third is that of science… This triple crises calls for a redefinition of development that takes into consideration the lessons of the past.” (UNDP, 1995, p6, quoted in Thomas, C., 1996, p. 235)  

14. PARADIGMS LOST? The essentialisation of the Third World and its inhabitants as homogenous entities;   The unconditional belief in progress and the makeability of society; The importance of the nation-state as the analytical frame of reference and the political and scientific confidence in the power of this state to realize human progress. Schuurman (2002, p. 8)

15. What is development, again? Competing views of development increasingly populate the project of development. From Theotonio Dos Santos ( 1968) “ Development means advancement towards a certain well defined general objective, which corresponds to a specific condition of man and society [which]…can be found in the most advanced societies of the modern world.” To…..

16. Re-defining the problem of ‘Development’ James Lamb ( 1973) If there is to be a possibility of choosing a human path so that all human beings may become the active subjects of their own history, it must begin at the level of new analysis. Development should be a struggle to create criteria, goals and means for self-liberation from misery, inequity and dependency in all forms. Crucially, it should be the process a people choose which heals them from historical trauma, and enables them to achieve a newness on their own terms”

17. Re-defining the problem of ‘Development’ Dudley Seers: The questions to ask about a country’s development are therefore: What has been happening to poverty? What has been happening to unemployment? What has been happening to inequality? If all these have become less severe than beyond any doubt there has been a period of development for the country concerned. (Dudley Seers, 1972)

18. Re-defining the problem of development Amartya Sen (1998) “It is not hard to see why the concept of development is so essential in general. Economic problems, do, of course, involve logistical issues, and a lot of this is undoubtedly engineering of one kind or another. On the other hand, the succes of all this has to be judged ultimately in terms of what it does to the lives of human beings.” Joseph Stiglitz (1998) “It used to be that development was seen as simply increasing GDP. Today, we have a broader set of objectives, including democratic development, egalitarian development, sustainable development, and higher living standards.”

19. New Agenda setting The critical questioning of the ‘development project’ has stimulated new agenda setting as well as new goal setting. Consider here some of the issues being pressed by the ‘alternative development’ movement: DEMOCRATIZING GLOBALIZATION BUILDING PARTICIPATION FOR NATIONAL & SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT EQUITY FIRST HUMAN RIGHTS JUSTICE

20. New Agenda setting In light of the new shifts in perspectives on the nature and valued ends of development, the world has witnessed the rise of a global agenda setting process being partly mediated by the United Nations. Other mediators are/have been, of course, the so called Bretton Woods Institutions, namely the World Bank ( IBRD) and the International Monetary Fund ( IMF). These institutions now seek to work closely with the UN and the WTO to foster a Pro-poor and good governance growth agenda, after the failures of structural adjustment engendering an implicit global cross-conditionality between these institutions concerning development. This UN intervention is being promoted under a “human rights” based regime of social justice. NB: The human ‘right to development’ promulgated in 1986. The New status quo for global development objectives is presented in the UN Millennium summits and the Millennium development goals, MDG’s. ( see slides)

21. New challenges and issues Paradoxically, the effect of the radical critiques of the development project was to shake development studies to its core, [see Schuurman (2000)],and open spaces for the rise in 1980’s of a new hegemonic paradigm for modern ‘progress,’ namely neo-liberal globalization. In effect development was seen as being less a product of nation-state initiatives ( although this is still hotly being debated), and more due to the effects of integration into the world economy, or world system, primarily through open market processes. The primary institution for driving this new consensus has been of course the World Trade organization. This began however with 80’s Structural adjustments

22. New Challenges and issues The WTO under-pinned model of neo-liberal global development resurrects all the traditional issues raised in the critiques of development. For example, The role of the market versus the state, or other institutional conditions, for effectively operating markets. The problems of structural differences between states, for example because of the size or the structure of the economy The problems of markets not being optimal because of the absence of the perfectly competitive conditions for ‘utility’ and ‘profit’ maximization. Consider here, market concentration and power, informational asymmetries, and the role of conflict and inequity in shaping possible market outcomes and opportunities; and The role of agriculture in meeting the goals of sustainable human development. NB the basis for the repeated failure of the WTO Doha round

23. The more things change the more they remain the same? More generally, while adding to the weight of criticism as to the effectiveness of the nation-state interventions versus market for ensuring global wellbeing, the WTO may also be criticized for, (as development studies practitioners were): Essentializing developing countries peoples and problems by working with such crude categories as developed, developing and least developed, which ignore the issues of small size for example; and Promoting an unconditional belief in modern progress and the instrumental makeability of society ( again from the top down).

24. Challenges and Issues for the 21st Century Can the UN and WTO mechanisms of global governance which both assume the inevitability of western models of development guide the world to new levels of prosperity and human well being? What should one make of the Global good governance agenda promoted by the World Bank? Are corrupt nation states the harbinger of the demise of development? What chances does the world have for redressing the pervasive ‘crises of development’ that range from unprecedented levels of global inequalities, informalization and urbanization, to human insecurity ( in a conflict prone world) and environmental vulnerability. (See Slides) Can there be ‘development by the people, of the people, for the people’?