Assess the challenge of Post-development theory to mainstream development paradigms Essay Example

Assess the challenge of Post Assess the challenge of Post-development theory to mainstream development paradigms Essay Assess the challenge of Post-development theory to mainstream development paradigms Essay Essay Topic: All Quiet On the Western Front The rise of Post-development theory in the late 1980s through to the 1990s advocated by scholars across the globe (Sachs, Escobar, Esteva, Shiva and Illich to name but a few) brought to the fore more radical interpretations and critiques of mainstream development paradigms. The post-development theorists set about a brutal yet arguably necessary attack upon current development practices and theories claiming to uncover some of the hidden truths behind the Western development project, as Esteva states The time has come to unveil the secret of development and see it in all its conceptual starkness (1992:7). Post-development embarked on a complete rejection of current development practice naming it a failure in every sense. However, others were sceptical, many believing that such a position was unnecessary and indeed unhelpful in terms of suggesting development alternatives, as Nederveen-Pieterse writes Post-development is caught in a rhetorical gridlock. Using discourse analysis as an ideological platform invites political impasse and quietism. In the end post-development offers no politics besides the self-organising capacity of the poor, which actually lets the development responsibility of the states and international institutions off the hook (2000: 187). Under such stark criticism the question often posed is what real challenge does post-development theory have to offer to the wider debate and reality of the development situation, if all it appears to be is semantic hot air? This paper will discuss in detail this very point, arguing that despite its at times, extreme radical view points, post-development has much to offer in terms of challenging our neoclassical interpretations and understanding of mainstream development theory. An initial overview will be given of the progression of development over the last four decades, highlighting the rise of post-development theory in the 1980s through to the 1990s. Following this, an in-depth assessment of the challenges posed to mainstream development by post-development will be given stressing the complexities associated with such challenges. Case studies and critique will be apparent throughout. Post-development theory grew out of a huge sense of dissatisfaction and disillusion with the way mainstream development theory was both constructed and operated. Such mainstream development has been seen as intrinsically linked to Neoliberal policies of economic reform and a dominant western understanding of how countries should progress and grow along the same teleological path as Western societies, the end goal of which being modernization and industrialisation. Mainstream development appeared to be constructed of a single, monolithic and imperialist vision of progress and planning as Escobar notes the idea that poor countries could move more or less smoothly along the path of progress through planning has always been held as an indubitable truth (1992:64). Post-development thinkers date the beginning of mainstream development to 1949 when President Truman made his famous speech, during which as Esteva believes, two billion people became burdened with the label underdeveloped (1992:7). Since that date development theory and practice has moved hap-hazardly through the decades along various initiatives and practices led by Western International Financial Institutions, development professionals and agencies. Development aims and goals were headed up by a number of schools of thought including the structuralists and dependency theorists of the 1960s, the modernisation and basic needs approaches of the 70s, through to the Neoliberal structural adjustment programmes of the 1980s (the so-called lost decade of development). The 1990s and into the 21st century, against the backdrop of the growing Globalisation phenomena, have heralded what is being called a more alternative and participatory approach to development theory and practice, based on a more human development and rights based approach. Scholars such as Robert Chambers have brought to the fore the importance of participatory methods to the development field, advocating methods such as PRA (Participatory Rural Appraisal) which places a greater emphasis on the role of local people in defining and solving their development problems, a realisation that villagers have a greater capacity to map, model, observe, quantify, estimate, compare, rank, score and diagram than outsiders have generally supposed them capable of (1994:1255). Despite these efforts to give development a human face many argue that such forms of so-called alternative development remain undistinguishable from the mainstream and have arguably merged, The problem is that there is no clear line of demarcation between mainstream and alternative alternatives are co-opted and yesterdays alternatives are todays institutions (Nederveen Pieterse. 1998:349). As development has crawled through the 1990s and into 2000 the gusto and courage of the post-development thinkers has merely been fuelled. Not happy with mainstream development or the alternatives it offers, post-development poses the ultimate challenge, to find not an alternative development rather an alternative too development. With its provocative statements and voice of certitude post-development challenges every development workers mind. The following discussion will draw out some of the key challenges posed by post-development including case studies and examples of development failure. Critique of these challenges will be given throughout. The collapse of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) summit held in September 2003 in Cancun marked a significant moment in time and provided a stark reminder that mainstream development is not working. At the summit unfair trade rules were met with resistance from more than 71 developing nations who refused to accept the forced agenda set by the rich nations. The result : the collapse of the talks. The failure of the rich nations to accept and negotiate resistance and the subsequent abandonment of the summit, marks what so commonly occurs within such agreements, that of Our way, or the highway! . The very same global advocates of human and economic development as a good for all showed themselves to be the very same hypocritical powers keeping developing nations trapped in crippling poverty through unfair and exploitative global trade regulations, For the developing countries, membership has not brought protection from abuses by the powerful economies, mush less serve as a mechanism of development (Bello. 2003:2). The Cancun Development Round marks a prime example of the ever apparent reality which post-development thinkers so explicitly oppose the hegemonic global dominance of the Worlds super-powers dictating progress and development based only on their terms. It is this profits before people (Kernaghan. 2001:64) attitude based on Neoliberal economics and neoclassical development theory, to which post-development is so strongly against. Mainstream economic development policies touted the world over based on economic reform, lowering of tariffs and trade liberalization in the Southern nations has been heavily criticised for its failure. Such failure has been marked by growing resistance across developing nations who are increasingly dissatisfied with World Bank and IMF Neoliberal prescriptions, and who are calling for a different development. A recent example of this cited in The Guardian, in which Lula Da Silva the elected Brazilian President states that 76% of Brazilians had voted against the current free market economic policy and in favour of a new model of development (The Guardian. 2002:14). The above example of the Cancun talks marks an entry point into a discussion of the challenges posed by post-development. Nederveen-Pieterse describes post-development as a Radical reaction to the dilemmas of development (2000:175), however whether it really is a radical standpoint is debatable, rather is it a more realistic and common-sense view from which to approach the fai de of development of the last 40 years, as the title quote from Esteva remarks In Mexico, you must be either numb or very rich if you fail to notice that development stinks (1987:1351). Post-development critiques the core basics of mainstream development theory taking overt positions on the problematisation of poverty, the portrayal of development as weste rnisation and critique of modernism and science (Nederveen- Pieterse. 2000:175). Drawing on the work of Michel Foucault on power, truth and knowledge many of the post-development thinkers challenge the imperialist, western and dominant form which, they argue, development has taken, believing that the development project was merely a form of neo-colonialism used to maintain the rich nations dominance and the poorer nations subordination, Systematic, empirical investigation of historical, geographical, and demographic conditions engendered the modern human sciences. Their aim for Foucault, was not human emancipation, but the making of docile yet productive bodies (Dreyfus Rabinow. 1983) (In Peet Hartwick. 1999:130). One of the most significant challenges posed by post-development is towards the use of modernism and technology as a development good for all. The neoclassical understanding of development draws on the lure of modern society to encourage the systematic modernisation of developing nations along western developmental paths in which industrialization, technological advance and utmost modernity can be fully embraced. For post-development thinkers, such as Illich, modernization means mass commodification and the rise of global products, a type of modernization which is suited more to the market needs of rich nations. In advocating the rise to modernity, Illich believes that a state of mind is engendered within developing nations, a state of mind which convinces them they are underdeveloped, Underdevelopment is the result of rising levels of aspiration achieved through the intensive marketing of patent products (1997:97). Thus for Illich poverty becomes planned, a scam to force developing nations into an unfair globalized economy producing foreign products for the global market and to, as Illich provocatively puts it surrender social consciousness to pre-packaged solutions (1997:97). And what of the impact the presence of such foreign firms and products have on developing nations? The impacts according to post-development, are only too apparent from the high levels of industrial pollution and environmental degradation to the use of sweatshop labour in the manufacture of global goods. A recent example in the UK press highlights the adversity of these impacts only too well as the largest Coca Cola plant in India is accused of putting thousands of farmers out or work by draining the water that feeds their wells and poisoning the land with waste sludge that the company claims is fertiliser (The Guardian. 2003). The plant employing only 141 people has been condemned by the charity ActionAid as an example of the worst kind of inward investment by multinational companies in developing countries (The Guardian. 003). In the face of such modern catastrophe and technological disaster, such as that of the big D Development Dam projects of the last two decades (including the Indian Sardar Sarovar Project in which over 200,000 people have been displaced, 56% of whom are tribal people (Kurian. 2000:843)), the post-development thinkers call on tradition, self-sufficiency and locally based forms of appropriate technology to resist, challenge and provide alternatives to the domina nt ideologies of modernism touted by global technocrats. The well documented work of Norberg-Hodge writing on Ladakh in the trans-Himalayan region of Kashmir, highlights the importance post-development theory places on traditional ways of life as a means to provide alternatives to development and challenge modernity. Writing on Ladakh, Norberg-Hodge notes how life has changed since external development forces have become increasingly significant in Ladakhi life, When I first lived among Ladakhis in the early 1970s, they enjoyed Peace of mind. The pace of their lives was relaxed and easy. An important element in this stress-free lifestyle was the fact that they had control over their own lives. Over the last thirty years however I have watched as external forces have descended on the Ladakhis like an avalanche, causing massive and rapid disruption (2001:112). She writes of the self-sufficient life which was led before development intervention, and as Rahnema and Bawtree She feels that western society has much to learn from the traditional lifestyle of the Himalayan people of Ladakh (1997:22). However, this challenge to modernism and technology and its call to more traditional ways of life does not go un-criticised. The post-development school is indeed heavily criticised for its over-romanticisation of the past, which some argue serves to artefact people and cultures, as Corbridge writes Post-development romanticises the soil cultures of the social majorities and provides poor empirical documentation of its claims (1999:145). Post-development theory also falls weak in its challenge to modernism and technology in its failure to recognise the liberating effects they may have, for example the use of cyber-technology by the Mexican Zapatistas in gaining international support and recognition, or the Kyapos use of video cameras and planes to defend their culture and ancestral lands in the Brazillian rainforests (an example cited in Escobar, 1995, implying the somewhat contradictory nature of the scholars arguments). One of the key criticisms of the post-development challenge to modernism and technology is that many believe they do not suggest adequate alternatives and merely rely on a glorification of the local, as Nederveen-Pieterse comments on the work of Norberg-Hodge, What is the point of declaring development a hoax (Norberg-Hodge. 1995) without proposing alternatives (2000:188). A further significant challenge presented by post-development is that towards the all encompassing concepts of global good, an example of which is sustainability. Since the early introduction of the concept in the Brundtland Report and its increasing prominence through international summits such as the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, Sustainability and sustainable development have become key buzz words within the development field heralded as a more integrated development goal in terms of achieving long term social, economic and environmental goals for present and future generations. However, as with many initiatives it appears that as increasing numbers of development agencies and organisations jump on the sustainability band wagon, it is proving to be another development good based merely on rhetoric. Indeed misuse of the concept has resulted in it becoming seen as another hegemonic Western discourse. An example of this can be seen in the number of inappropriate environmental projects which have sprung up in developing nations as a result of western use of sustainable development as a powerful interventionist tool. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) in association with the World Bank has been guilty of this, using un-realistic Eco-development projects in India to conserve the environment and create National Parks for Tourist purposes. The projects, carried out with little consultation from local people have resulted in the displacement of indigenous peoples from forest lands. The projects are imposed on the local communities by foreign environmentalists whose initiatives go against the basic livelihoods of those who depend on the forest resources for survival. The use of grand theory and concepts such as sustainable development again become what the post-developmentalists are so against, the imposition of development from centralised, distant bureaucracy which make decisions for communities they have never consulted (Source:2). Esteva writes on sustainability, .. in its mainstream interpretation, sustainable development has been explicitly conceived as a strategy for sustaining development, not for supporting the flourishing and enduring of an infinitely diverse natural and social life (1992:16). As the above example of sustainability highlights, post-development thinkers challenge the use of grand meta-narratives which are so commonly used within mainstream development paradigm. One of the main critiques of post-development is that it offers no alternative, it merely rejects current practice. Schurrman (2000) comments on the loss of central paradigms in development and poses the questions as to whether post-modernism, post-development and globalisation are capable of offering new and exciting paradigms? What Schurrman fears is that perhaps they are not, and as old paradigms are lost, new ones remain absent (Schurrman. 2000) The post-developmentalists would challenge this significantly, as Escobar points out By now it should be clear that there are no grand alternatives that can be applied to all places or all situations (1995:222), reiterated by Foucault who believed that all global theories such as modernization theory, Marxist mode of production theory, or world systems theory, to be reductionist, universalistic, coercive and even totalitarian (Peet Hardwick. 999: 132). These concepts and theories constructed within a western world view are strongly rejected as they challenge the scale at which mainstream development theory and practice operates, calling for more localized, grassroots-specific, bottom-up approaches. The ultimate challenge posed by the post-developmentalists to mainstream development is that of its failure, as Sachs famously puts it, The idea of development stands like a ruin on the intellectual landscape. Delusion and disappointment, failures and crimes have been the steady companions of development and they tell a common story: it did not work (1992:1). From the widening of inequality to the increased spread of HIV/Aids post-development theorists condemn mainstream development to failure. Examples such as the work of Ferguson (1994) on development failure in Lesotho based on rural development called The Thaba-Theska Project funded by the World Bank and Canadian International Development Agency in 1974, or even recent pieces in the Press such as an interview with Michael Buerk in the January edition of the Radio Times, in which he comments on his visits to Ethiopia in 1984 compared to a recent visit in 2004 in which he states The fact is that there are twice as many people hungry in Ethiopia today as there were in 1984 (Michael Buerk. 004:153), all point to failure. Despite the stark truth of development failure in some cases, others argue that such a negative standpoint and utter rejection of development does not ring true across the whole of the developing world, where examples of success and progress have been made. Corbridge offers the following critique, Post-development gives no hint of the extraordinary accomplishments that have defined the age of development, or of the historically unprecedented increases in life expectancies for men and women that have been achieved since 1950 (In India, life expectancies at birth increased for men from 46-60 years between 1965 and 1990, and for women from 44 to 58 years (Corbridge. 1999:145). Criticised for their generalisation of development, overtly pessimistic view points, romanticisation, unproblematised view of social movements and a complete rejection of development, post-developmentalists have themselves not preceded unchallenged. Indeed their tendency to deconstruct rather than reconstruct and the absence of alternatives does make many wary of the fruitfulness of such a standpoint (see Nederveen-Pieterse 2000). However, the beauty of post-development lies not in its answers but in its lack of answers. Post-developmentalists challenge the global super powers and International Financial Institutions such as the World Bank and IMF; they challenge civil society to resist, in similar ways to those of the Mayan indigenous population who through the rise of the Zapatistas have appealed for an end to 500 years of oppression and 40 years of development (Esteva. 994:302) and who call for greater recognition of indigenous rights; they call on NGOs, development Agencies, charities and development practitioners to rethink the way they operate, to question and to challenge the work they are doing; they challenge not only Western scholars but also those of the Third World, in particular on what Peet and Hardwick call Intellectual Dependency Theory (1999:137) a challenge to Third World scholars to move away from the dominant ideologies of Western discourse towards more critical and creative thinking on th e issues facing developing countries; they also pose challenges to themselves, to their body of knowledge which indeed does not provide answers. However, ultimately post-development challenges us, both our mind set, ways of thinking and assumptions. To conclude it must be stated that despite its obvious drawbacks, post-development successfully provides a series of provocative challenges to mainstream development paradigms, indeed Corbridge sums up the power of post-development and the opportunity it provides for future change, Post-development keeps the raw nerve of outrage alive post-development thinkers force us to confront our own prejudices about the agendas of development and the shocking failure of some aspects of the development project. They also provide a human touch that is too often missing in development studies (1999:143).