Post Development Theory

8/10/2019 Post Development Theory

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/post-development-theory 1/8

Post-development theory arose in the 1980s and 1990s through the works of scholars

like A. Escobar, G. Esteva etc.. Leading members of the post-development school

argue that development was always unjust, never worked, and at this point has clearly

failed. The post-development school of thought points out that the models of

development are often ethnocentric , universalist, and based on western models of

industrialization that are unsustainable in this world of limited resources and

ineffective for their ignorance of the local, cultural and historical contexts of the

peoples to which they are applied. In essence, the problem post-development theorists

see in development and its practice is an imbalance of influence or domination by thewest. Post development theorists promote more pluralism in ideas about development.

Tracing the journey of development-past present and future

The ‘past’ shall be the period after World War II, which represents the beginning of

development „as aspiration, ideology, and field of study to the mid-1980s which

signifies the „impasse‟ in development theories , the ‘present’ shall be the period of

the late 1980s to the present day and the ‘future’ shall be devoted to theories that,although present today, envision a total disengagement from the term „development‟

itself and the possibility of avant-garde alternatives.

The past of development

The post-World War II decade of development was greatly influenced by Keynesian

economic thinking, which „spread [the] appreciation of different active roles that

governments could play in steering economies‟.9 It was this notion of government-

controlled economic development that led to the rise of modernisation theory and,

later, political development.

Conceptualised as „primitive‟, „indigenous‟ and „backward‟, knowledge from the

Southern hemisphere of the globe was considered inferior to that of the North. The

prevailing binary that bolstered the reductive teleology was between the „scientific‟

knowledge of the West and the „traditional‟ knowledge of the orientalised Other.

Dependency theory still remains vital, as it exposes the widening North – South divide

and some of the reasons for its perpetuation

The present of developmentThis era in the late 1980s and early 1990s was characterised by terms such as

„Washington Consensus‟, „neoliberalism‟, and „market fundamentalism‟ and signifieda radical transformation for Keynesian economics. The failure of state intervention in

or control of the economy had revealed deplorable results by the mid-1980s. It was the

1987 UN-sponsored Brundtland Commission‟s report that brought the term

„sustainable development‟ into prominence. This publication defined the concept asdevelopment that meets the needs of today without necessarily compromising those of

future generations. The term modernization has become so commonplace that it is

now too vague to talk of „sustainable development‟ without specific reference to the

environment.



The future of development

some scholars adhering to post-development, anti-development or anti-modernist perspectives have expressed disenchantment with the term „development‟ as being

simply a „deceitful mirage‟ and „a poisonous gift to the populations it set out to help‟.

For escobar, as for all post-development theorists, notions of the „illiterate‟, the

„underdeveloped‟, the „malnourished‟, „small farmers‟, „landless peasants‟ and the

„poor‟ were discursive abnormalities (artificial constructs) created by the development

project itself in order to provide justification for structural reform, making

development indispensable.

During the first decades of the development era, and despite an array of positions,there seemed to be clear agreement on the need for some sort of development.

Modernization and dependency theories were the paradigms of the day. Slowly this

consensus started to erode because of a number of factors, both social and intellectual.

In the 1990s, post-structuralist critiques succeeded in casting a serious doubt not only

on the feasibility but on the very desirability of development.

The post-structuralists deconstructed the development which resulted in the possibility of imagining a post-development era one in which the centrality of

development as an organizing principle of social life would no longer hold. In the

second half of the 1990s, these analyses became themselves the object of moving

criticisms .

Development alternative vs Alternative to development

Development alternative means development takes place in different way where as

alternatives to development means development takes place completely in a new

phase. The post development is not interested in development alternatives ,but in

alternatives to development.

While the post development school provides a plethora of development critiques, it

also considers alternative methods for bringing about positive change. The post

development school proposes a particular vision of society removed from the

discourse of development, modernity, politics, cultural and economical influences

from the west, and market oriented and centralized authoritarian societies.

In his works, Escobar has outlined the common features of post-development thoughtand societal vision. According to Escobar, the post-development school of thought is

interested (in terms of searching for an alternative to development) in local culture and

knowledge; a critical stance toward established scientific discourses; and the defense

and promotion of localized, pluralistic grassroots movements. Grassroots movements,

Escober argues, are "local, pluralistic, and distrust organized politics and development

establishment.



Three main claims in the anti-post development literature.

1) Post-development critics presented an over-generalized and essentialized view ofdevelopment, while in reality there are vast differences within various development

strategies and institutions.

2) They romanticized local traditions and local social movements, ignoring that the

local is also embedded in global power relations and that, indeed, many struggles

today are about access to development.

3) They failed to notice the on-going contestation of development on the

ground.

Some critique s o f post-development

In the name of the real

This strategy is practiced mostly by authors of Marxist orientation . It restates the

primacy of the material over the discursive. For these authors, the problem is not so

much with development, even less so with modernity, than with capitalism. The

critical modernism espoused by some of these writers is commendable in many ways,

yet it can be said that it arises out of their unwillingness to accept the poststructuralist

insight about the importance of language and meaning in the creation of reality.

In the name of better theory

This strategy comes chiefly from fellow post-structuralist, which makes it the most

puzzling. It says something like: „You represent development as homogenous while it

is really diverse. Development is heterogenous, contested, impure, hybrid; it is

subverted at the local level‟. This assertion is undoubtedly true. However, these

authors fail to acknowledge

a) that their own project of analyzing the contestation of development on the ground

was in great part

made possible by the deconstruction of the development discourse

b) that the post-structuralist project was a different one that of „slaying the

development monster‟, to paraphrase Gibson-Graham‟s metaphor in their debunking

of capitalocentrism in political economy

(2)They did not try to represent „the real‟ (of the Third World). This was everybody

else‟s project, and part of the problem from the post-development perspective.

In the name of the people

This is perhaps the most problematic strategy, and takes different forms. It mightsuggest that post-development advocates do not understand power that what is at

stake is livelihood and people‟s needs, not theoretical analyses.

Fifty years of development thinking: paradigms lost

After the World War II developmental paradigms shared at least three characteristics:

1. The essentialisation of the Third World and its inhabitants as homogeneous entities.

2. The unconditional belief in the concept of progress and in the make ability of

society.



The Western notion of progress would only cause environmental pollution because itmeant industrialisation, it would sever indigenous peoples from their cultural roots

and expose them as helpless victims of a global, exploitative capitalism that, through

manipulation in the media, urged them to consume the wrong things for the wrong

reasons with money they did not have.

State also plays a central role within development studies, being an interdisciplinary

social science. The importance of the state became visible in modernisation theories,

dependency theories, and even in world-system theories. Many participants in the

globalisation debate seem to agree on the decreasing economic, political and culturalimportance of (nation)state. In a political sense there is an increasing importance of

international political organisations which interfere politically and also militarily in

particular states. Economically, the state is seen as disappearing as an economic actor

through privatisation supported by deregulation. Culturally, the idea of a national

identity is in favour of cosmopolitanism on the one hand and/or the fortification of

ethnic, regional and religious identities on the other hand.

Paradigms regained with post development

Diversity vs inequality

The very essence of development studies is a normative preoccupation with the poor,

marginalised and exploited people in the South. In this sense, inequality rather than

diversity or difference should be the main focus of development studies such as

inequality of access to power, to resources, to a human existence-in short, inequality

of emancipation. There is no doubt that there is a diversity in forms, experiences and

strategies for coping with inequality which deserves to be an integral part of the

domain of development studies. There is also no doubt that globalisation will

contribute to new forms of inequality and new forms of resistance. Nevertheless,

inequality which should constitute the main focus within the explication of

development studies.

Progress vs Risk management

The solution to underdevelopment is often astonishingly naive in its simplicity, ie let

the poor in the Third World forget about needs which resemble our own needs. Let

them forget about wanting a standard of living which the North has, let them forgetabout wanting a decent house, access to health care, employment, etc. Because these

needs draw them into the development process.A concept like global risk society just at the moment when the risks which the North

has always been able to export to the South now also threaten the industrialised nation

states. Furedi's third objection is that the concept of risk society invokes the image of

risks being evenly spread. Pointing towards the global dimensions of risks does nottake away the fact that certain nations-or more specifically certain categories of

people-are more risk prone than others. Risk is unequally distributed geographically

and sociologically, and thinking otherwise draws away attention from the necessity of

emancipatory projects directed at the global underclasses.



State vs civil society

The central role of the (nation)state has become de-emphasised in favour of civil

society, local government, or a combination of both. Where national states in Third

World countries have failed to institutionalise democracy and a start a decent

economic development, local government is now supposed to be able to do just that in

a synergetic collaboration with actors from within civil society and with

representatives of national and international capital. In the economic science we see

the rapidly increasing interest in economic sociology. In the political sciences

emphasis is increasingly placed on local government, and cultural studies concentrates

on new, hybrid forms of identity construction. Many of these new developments cometogether in the study of civil society.

Sustainable development

Most people use sustainable development interchangeably with ecologically

sustainable or environmentally sound development.

This interpretation is characterised :

(a) “sustainability” as being understood as “ecological sustainability” and (b) a conceptualization of sustainable development as a process of change that has

(ecological) sustainability addes to it list of objectives.

In contrast sustainable development is some times interpreted as “sustained growth”

“sustain change” or simple “successful” development.

(a)contradictions and trilarities

Sustainable development simple mean “ development that can be continued either

indefinitely or for the implicit time period of concern. Some equate development with

GNP growth. The point is the development is a process of directed change.

Definitions of development embody:

(i)the objectives (ii) the means of achieving these objectives

Distinction between these objectives and means is not made in development rhetoric

which led to “sustainable development” frequently being interpreted as simply a

process of change that can be continued for ever. Development is taken synonymous

with growth in material consumption even today-sustainable development would be

sustaining the growth in material consumption. The growth in percapita consumption

of certain basic goods is necessary in certain regions of the world in short term.

(B) the concept of sustainability originated in the context of renewable resources such

as forests or fisheries, and has subsequently adopted as a slogan by environmentalmovement. Some call ecological sustainability as “the existence of the ecological

conditions necessary to support human life at a specific level of well being through

future generations”.

They actually focus on the ecological sustainability – the biophysical laws or patternsthat determine environmental responses to human activities and human‟s ability to use

the environment. There are social conditions that influence the ecological

sustainability or un sustainability of the people – nature interaction.

Barbier defines social sustainability as “the ability to maintain desir ed social values,traditions, institutions, cultures, or other social characteristics”. A war destroying



human society would probably be an example of social unsustainability, and in turn

may have social or ecological causes.(C) sustainable development=development +sustainability

Ecological sustainability is a desired attribute of any human activities that is the

goal the developmental process. Given an ever changing world , the specific forms of

and priorities among objectives , and the requirements for achieving sustainability

would evolve continuously.

3. The concept of sustainable development

(A) evolution of objectives

The term sustainable development came in to prominence in 1980, when theInternational Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN)

presented the world Conservation Strategy( WCS) with the over all aim of achieving

sustainable development through the conservation of living resources. United Nations

Environmental Program (UNEP) concept of sustainable development was said to

encompass

(i) Help for the very poor because they are left with no options but to destroy

their environment,(ii) The idea of self-reliant development, within natural resource constraints,

(iii) The idea of cost effective development using non traditional economic

criteria.

(B)The premises of sustainable development

Many environmental problems in developing countries originate from the lack of

development, that is from the struggle to over come poverty. The environmental

quality and economic development are interdependent and in the long term, mutually

reinforcing.

Environment-society link is based on following premises:

(i)Environmental degradation:

- Environmental degradation is already taking place in the in third world countries

which affecting millions of people and posing threat for the coming generations.

-Environment degradation is very often caused by poverty because the poor have no

option but to exploit resources for short term survival

(ii)Traditional development objectives:

- providing basic needs and increasing the productivity of all resources in

developing countries and maintaining the standard of living in the developed countries-These objectives do not necessarily conflict with the objective of the ecological

sustainability.

Policy perceptions-inconsistencies and inadequacies

sustainable agriculture – Agriculture is one of the foundations of human society and

a major activity at the human – environment interface. Attempts to operationaliseecological sustainability have focussed significantly on agriculture. “agroecology” is

being proposed as the foundation for sustainable agriculture. moreover the ability of a

pattern of agriculture to simultaneously provide fair returns to the farmer and labourer,

and to satisfy the needs of the non agricultural population in an ecologically sound



manner depends not only on ecological interactions but also on complex social

conditions.Tropical forests- tropical deforestration has been an item on the agenda of first world

environmentalists for a long time. Rooted initially almost wholly concern about wild

life and biological diversity , the movement to save the worlds tropical forests broaden

as the understanding of the phenomena became more sophisticated in terms of the

social context of forest use and the political economy of deforestration.

Post Development Theory

Documents

Transcript of Post Development Theory