Some reflections on the concept of 'development'

From a poststructuralist perspective tracing the relation between words and meanings, the paper discusses the implicit assumptions of the concept of 'development'. It argues that the concept has Eurocentric, depoliticising and authoritarian implications which can not easily be eliminated by simply redefining it in a progressive manner. The paper also explores the productive misunderstandings arising from the different definitions of 'development' and the potential alternative concepts development researchers might be using instead

Postcolonial perspectives on 'development'

The article deals with postcolonial works in the field of development theory and policy beyond the widely discussed post-development approaches. After identifying four analytical strategies typical for postcolonial studies, it examines the works in question. Particular attention is given to the criticism that postcolonial works would neglect material practices. The article concludes that for many works this criticism is not justified, but that the empirical engagement of postcolonial approaches with institutions and processes in development policy is often inaccurate, superficial and incomplete. 'Development studies does not tend to listen to subalterns and postcolonial studies does not tend to concern itself with whether the subaltern is eating' (Sylvester 1999: 703). Christine Sylvester's well-known characterisation of the relationship between development studies and postcolonial studies may be somewhat exaggerated, it is, however, based on a sharp observation. This relationship also constitutes the topic of this article. The article's objective is twofold: on the one hand it aims to provide a - far from exhaustive - survey of works from the area of postcolonial studies that deal with 'development'. Usually this type of work is associated with the post-development school, which has been widely discussed by now, but here the focus is on other authors beyond post-development. On the other hand, the article will deal with one of the central points of criticism which has been raised against postcolonial studies: that they neglect material practices. This criticism shall be examined on the grounds of the postcolonial works in the field of 'development'. For a start, it needs to be clarified what is meant by postcolonial studies and by 'development' - and why the concept is placed in quotation marks. Therefore the first section of the article deals (very briefly) with the concept of development and the second one (equally superficially) with the field of postcolonial studies. In the latter, specifically postcolonial questions and strategies of analysis will be examined, in order to achieve some orientation faced with the multitude of works and approaches in this field. Subsequently the focus will be on the relationship between development studies and postcolonial studies. Regarding the accusation of neglecting material practices and the strategies identified beforehand, a number of postcolonial works in the area of 'development' theory and policy will be scrutinized

Development Discourse and Global History

The manner in which people have been talking and writing about ‘development’ and the rules according to which they have done so have evolved over time. Development Discourse and Global History uses the archaeological and genealogical methods of Michel Foucault to trace the origins of development discourse back to late colonialism and notes the significant discontinuities that led to the establishment of a new discourse and its accompanying industry. This book goes on to describe the contestations, appropriations and transformations of the concept. It shows how some of the trends in development discourse since the crisis of the 1980s – the emphasis on participation and ownership, sustainable development and free markets – are incompatible with the original rules and thus lead to serious contradictions. The Eurocentric, authoritarian and depoliticizing elements in development discourse are uncovered, whilst still recognizing its progressive appropriations. The author concludes by analysing the old and new features of development discourse which can be found in the debate on Sustainable Development Goals and discussing the contribution of discourse analysis to development studies. This book is aimed at researchers and students in development studies, global history and discourse analysis as well as an interdisciplinary audience from international relations, political science, sociology, geography, anthropology, language and literary studies

Im Süden nichts Neues : Statt Ausbeutung mit Almosen: Für eine emanzipatorische Politik in einer globalisierten Welt

Während Sie diesen Satz lesen, verhungern zwei Menschen. 100.000 Menschen sterben tagtäglich an den Folgen einer Unterernährung – das sind pro Sekunde mehr als einer. Das ist nichts Neues. Im Gegenteil: Das ist seit Jahrzehnten so. Genau wie seit Jahrzehnten von deutschen Regierungen beteuert wird, man wolle demnächst das in den Siebzigern von den Industrieländern gegebene Versprechen, 0,7% des BSP für Entwicklungshilfe auszugeben, erreichen. Währenddessen wurde von denselben Regierungen die neoliberale Globalisierung vorangetrieben, und in der Verschuldungskrise wurde in vielen Ländern des Südens die entsprechende neoliberale Politik durchgesetzt. Anhand einzelner Bereiche hier einige Beispiele für die Paradoxie einer weltwirtschaftlich abgesicherten Ausbeutung, die mit Almosen verschönt wird. Inhalt: Schuldenerlass Bilaterale Entwicklungszusammenarbeit Welthandel Hermes-Bürgschaften Internationaler Währungsfonds / Weltbank Welthandelsorganisation Milleniumsziele Public-Private-Partnerships Ziviler Friedensdienst Fazit Ausblic

Justice, Not Development: Sen and the Hegemonic Framework For Ameliorating Global Inequality

Starting from the merits of Sen’s Development as Freedom, the article also explores its shortcomings. It argues that they are related to an uncritical adoption of the discourse of ‘development’, which is the hegemonic framework for ameliorating global inequality today. This discourse implies certain limitations of thought and action, and the article points out three areas where urgent questions of global justice have been largely ignored by development theory and policy as a consequence. Struggles for justice on a global scale, this is the conclusion, should not take the detour of ‘development’

Vertreibung durch Entwicklungsprojekte und ihre Legitimierung: Beispiele von Weltbankprojekten aus Subsahara-Afrika

Der Artikel untersucht, wie die Vertreibung durch Infrastrukturprojekte im Entwicklungsdiskurs legitimiert wird. Drei typische Legitimationsmuster sind die Unausweichlichkeit des Fortschritts, das Allgemeinwohl und die Eigentumsrechte. Sie sind eng verknüpft mit Elementen des Entwicklungsdiskurses: der Transformation geokultureller Unterschiede in historische Stadien, dem othering vermeintlich rückständiger Gruppen, dem Konzept der Treuhandschaft und der Annahme positiver Effekte von Investitionen.This article examines how displacement through infrastructure projects is being legitimized in development discourse. Three typical justifications are: the inevitability of progress, the greater common good, and property rights. They are closely linked to elements of development discourse, including: the transformation of geocultural differences into historical stages, Othering of allegedly backward peoples, the concept of trusteeship, and the assumption of the beneficial effects of investments