Devlopment

Understanding Development For much of the world beyond the United States and Europe, the promise of economic prosperity post-war was revealed in one world: development. It was development that categorized nations into hierarchies in locating Third World countries at the bottom. Third world countries lack of development was attributed to inadequate technology, cultural backwardness, and undeveloped political and economic institutions. Development is seen as a process of transition from poor to rich, backwards to modern, uncivilized to civilized (Escobar, 38). This essay does not argue for what is the appropriate strategy for deployment; rather it challenges the concept of development. The first section discusses the birth of the theory of development, beginning with the discovery of global poverty after the Second World War. The second part explores development has been constructed in institutional practice. The third section turns to discussing the discourse of development. Invention of Poverty Most western concepts relating to economics or governance roots in the European renaissance during the enlightenment age when many scholars exchanged ideas. However, as Escobar mentions development is a recent phenomenon that was constructs post World War II (Escobar, 23). This birth of development started with the discovery of poverty. Poverty on a global scale was invented after World War II; before 1940 it was not an issue. This invention was recorded in the first World Bank reports. In the book, Planet Dialectics it states “according to the UN bureau of Statistics, average income per head in the United States in 1947 was over $1400, and in another 14 countries ranged between $400 and $900. For more than half of the world's population, however, the average income was less - and sometimes much less - than $100 per person” (Sachs, 1999). Poverty in this report was defined as any nation that was incredibly below the US economic standard and categorized Third World people as what they are lacking and expected to become. This concept of salvation is through development gave justification to intervention (Escobar, 25). However, there were two side tracks for development in the American Foreign policy as Escobar mentions. In the Marshall plan the rules of capitalism did not apply to Europe. The 19 billion in US foreign assistance was given to Europe with no strings attached (Escobar, 33). On the other hand, the Third World countries had a separate treatment. Institutions were developed for them such as, IMF which represented as the “negative Marshall Plan” (Escobar, 33). Whatever nation that was suffering from poverty, the solution was economic development. There wasn’t an alternative way of thinking about poverty such as; poverty is the result of many years of colonization. Western experts were gong to devise “Models for national, regional and sectoral planning” for Third World countries to solve their poverty problem (Escobar, 38). These experts saw poverty as a scientific problem that required engineering and natural sciences to solve it. They completely ignored the historical, economic, and political background of Third World nations. Development in Institutional Practice The solution to the problem of poverty was economic growth. The ideology of development was established by west to assist poor nations in attaining what the rich nation had. An example given by Escobar is the economic mission, arranged by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for Columbia (Escobar, 24). Colombia was "al-ways willing to be the first guinea pig for the experiments of the international development community” (Escobar, 131). The participants of this mission were fourteen international experts in diverse fields relating to public administration. Their study of Colombia concluded that the national government needed capital investment to build infrastructure. Technology was also an area in which Colombia needed assistance. The social and cultural factors in Colombia were ignored and development was a top down approach. Development was viewed as bring light to Colombia. According to Ruth and Jon in their essay, Deconstructing Development, they divided the developmental objectives in the Third World Countries into four phases since the 1950’s. In the 1960’s in addition to working towards economic growth, “poverty alleviation and distributional equality were added” (Gordan, 29). Next in the 1970’s, “Basic Needs” such as, food, education and healthcare were added. In the 1980’s the focus was on balancing gender inequality and environmentalism. Finally in the 1990’s globalization became the central point. This was a summary of the evolution of development and their objective for underdeveloped nations (Gordan, 29). Ruth and Jon both argue that the early plans for economic growth meet very little success. The gap between the rich and poor only increased. The 1980’s development led to the structural adjustment programs that were to eradicate poverty. However, it led to the opposite and living standards began to fall back. Basic needs were cutback in government spending. One African scholar James Ferguson in his book Global Shadows, critiques the Structural Adjustment Programs in Africa for the depoliticization of poverty. The Conventional Understanding that a national economy is for each state, thus poverty is a problem, which causes lies at the national level (Ferguson, 51). The state made bad policies that led to national economic troubles, which in return guided them to poverty. Ferguson argues that poverty should not be attributed to the nation state, but the trans-nationals relationships and the role of supranational organizations should be taken into account (Ferguson, 64). The problem is never attributed to development process or the institution, rather the blame is put on the state or the people. Discourse of Development Development can be examined as an idea or concept in both theory and practice. Many scholars are drawn on different perspectives on the project of development. In Tuckers discussion on the myth of development, he states; ‘Development is the process by which other peoples are “dominated, and their destinies are shaped, according to an essentially Western way of conceiving and perceiving the world; it is part of an imperial process whereby other peoples are appropriated and turned into objects”. Development is a fundamental part of the process ‘whereby the developed countries manage, control and even create the Third World economically, politically, sociologically and culturally’(Munck, O’Hearn, 1) In the European colonization of the Third World Countries, they perceived the colonized as backward people that they needed to be civilized, thus they directly ruled the colonies, economic, political and social order in the name of civilizing committing large scale atrocities. Similar to Said's discourse of Orientalism which theorizes that the dominant, which in this case is the west acts in an imperialistic and ethnocentric manner for the purpose to define their own identity in contrast to the “other” (Said, 6). In the context of development, the west is at the pinnacle of civilization and the Third World people need to practice development to be like the west. The “Other” is lacking and inferior in need of western intervention. The assumption is that undeveloped countries have the opportunity to develop and catch up to being modern (Gordan, 77). This assumption is a direct parallel to the colonial discourse that justified itself as bringing civilization to the dark world. In addition, in the framework of the International Development agencies, such the example of Colombia, it can be argued that it is similar to the colonial missions of the past. Instead of the colonized being referred to or labeled as “Uncivilized” and ‘Backward’, it was replaced with underdeveloped (Gordan, 79). Missions were sent to Colombia to plan a strategy of development and if they follow it, it would bring the nation into salvation. In other words, Colombia was a child that needs an adult guidance from the west (Escobar, 30). Escobar doesn’t discuss the knowledge paradigm that is created in the construction of the theory that the information for development must come from a foreign expert. Foreign experts of development were privileges while the locals were silences. This process does not allow the Third World scholars to produce their own solution and view of their problems in their societies (Gordan, 82). Conclusion In conclusion, many of the Third world nations would continue to strive to become developed, however they will be caught in a cycle in which the west will always gain the upper hand. What if we were to eradicate the concept of development since it continues to be used a form of domination over the weak' However, other similar projects such as socialism, democracy and International law would also be abandoned since they were also used for that same purpose. I would argue for the position of Tucker that believes we should rethink the concept of development to redress the problems not in a west centered perspective, but an equal production of knowledge for diverse scholars of the south (Munck, O’Hearn, 15) Work Cited Escobar, Arturo. Encountering Development: the Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1995. Print. Ferguson, James. Global Shadows: Africa in the Neoliberal World Order. Durham [N.C.: Duke UP, 2006. Print. Gordan, Ruth E., and Jon H. Sylvester. "DECONSTRUCTING DEVELOPMENT." Wisconsin International Law Journal 22.1 (2009): 1-87. University of Wisconsin Law School. Web. 27 Oct. 2010. . Munck, Ronaldo, and Denis O'Hearn. Critical Development Theory: Contributions to a New Paradigm. London: Zed, 1999. Print. Sachs, Wolfgang. Planet Dialectics: Explorations in Environment and Development. Halifax, N.S.: Fernwood Pub., 1999. Print. Said, Edward W. Orientalism. New York: Vintage, 2003. Print.