Thinking on International Development: Towards Three Dialogues (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Development: A Distinct and Challenged Policy Domain
2020
The European Union (EU) is widely recognized to be a major actor in international development cooperation. First, this chapter discusses key issues and debates on EU development policy. Secondly, the uniqueness of this policy domain, compared to other EU policies in this volume, is highlighted. Thirdly, the chapter elaborates two main policy-making domains: the EU as a donor itself and as a coordinator of member states' policies. Overall, the EU follows the regulatory and distributional modes in its role as a donor, and when it seeks to coordinate member-state policy, the policy coordination mode is to the fore. Moreover, intensive transgovernmentalist features appear in both domains. The conclusion summarizes the main trends and future challenges.
Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science, 2020
This paper examines development policies in the fight against inequalities and global justice using alternative and critical theories, establishing the connections between the capitalist system and development policies as a social phenomenon inherent to it, and thus examining if these policies can address their abstract motivations and goals of justice and equality. The general findings of the paper suggest that development policies contribute to the intensive and extensive expansion of capitalism, as an instrument to impose and never confront Western economic’ interests. Moreover, the concepts of "charity discourse" and "development imperative" are introduced as the ideological foundations of development policies, which serve both to extend the idea that the struggle against inequalities and injustice generated by the capitalist system can and must be resolved within the framework of this system, and as as a device of social control and hegemony production from Western societies to the rest of the world.
Third world quarterly, 2005
In the fast-moving world of development policy, buzzwords play an important part in framing solutions. Today's development orthodoxies are captured in a seductive mix of such words, among which 'participation', 'empowerment' and 'poverty reduction' take a prominent place. This paper takes a critical look at how these three terms have come to be used in international development policy, exploring how different configurations of words frame and justify particular kinds of development interventions. It analyses their use in the context of two contemporary development policy instruments, the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). We show how words that once spoke of politics and power have come to be reconfigured in the service of today's onesize-fits-all development recipes, spun into an apoliticised form that everyone can agree with. As such, we contend, their use in development policy may offer little hope of the world free of poverty that they are used to evoke.
The globalization and development reader: perspectives on development and global change
2007
This book is an intellectual tour de force. It considers the contemporary Keynesian intellectual counter-revolution with regard to the political economy of underdevelopment. The basic thesis of the work is that there were two economic epochs in the postwar period. The first constituted the golden age of capitalism (1945-1973), to borrow a phrase coined by Cambridge (UK) Keynesians. The second period, post-1980, was not so benevolent an age. The global growth record of all countries and regions during the golden age was phenomenal-nobody disagrees. In the second phase since 1980 there has been considerable divergence in global growth and income, mainly because of economic collapse in Africa and Latin America, making the last two decades of the twentieth century lost decades for some. Again there is no disagreement with that-the question is why. Writers such as Amartya Sen talk about capabilities and rights without much reference to the costs of their provision. Jeffrey Sachs speaks of the big-push fundamentalism of increasing aid (mainly to Africa). Bill Easterly outlines the abject failure of development assistance. Dani Rodrik advocates a more eclectic and technocratic 'identify the constraints to growth' approach. Paul Collier elucidates on the povertyconflict traps of the bottom billion along with possible Iraq/Afghanistan-like protracted interventions to prevent conflict re-igniting. In this book Amsden argues that the first postwar era succeeded because developing countries were left alone to pursue independent strategies of economic development that were also 'demand' driven, while during the second phase they were subjected to colonial style prescriptions dictated by the structural adjustment syndrome; something that morphed into poverty reduction strategy papers (PRSPs), which is really structural adjustment in drag. Both periods, Amsden argues, were driven by American dominance of an empire, unprecedented in its sheer size and extent. The golden age has been described as the era of 'Pax Americana'; the post-1980 globalization phase is likely to be remembered as less benign. Throughout history empires last while they are seen to provide security and prosperity in return for the tribute they exact. Underlying the thinking behind the second phase was the market fundamentalism of the 'Washington Consensus' quartet, something that has latterly changed its emphasis to institutional quality. The Washington consensus 'high priests' are curiously unforthcoming in producing a popular version of their own solutions to the world's contemporary economic predicament. Could they be a tad embarrassed by their failure to deliver? What is missing in Amsden's analysis is the fact that the earlier American and Western laissez faire (or in Richard's Nixon's words: 'don't give a damn') attitude to the home-grown development strategies of the third world was predicated on a genuine fear of countries adopting, in whole or in part, the alternative Soviet model. In fact, countries like India did rather well by playing off the two superpowers.
Building global policies: development assistance, a source of inspiration?
Despite the two disadvantages of being intertwined with colonial policy, and of addressing far-off targets, official development assistance grew into a global policy in order to establish its local legitimacy. The history of global development assistance policy shows a contrast between very old instruments and very recent objectives, following a long consolidation process. The search for legitimacy gave rise to increasing advocacy work and strategic productions, originally intended for developing countries, which turned into a source of inspiration for the domestic policies of donor countries. The global nature of development assistance also means that it constitutes a form of multidimensional policy. Norms developed into a very complex group and their role very much increased, acting to constrain the very objectives of development assistance.