Anthropology and Development; Culture, Morality and Politic ic a looaliced World – Crewe and
Axeloy
Prefaie
- The pursuit of development has become a global concern, no one is unafected.
- All cultures, moralites, languages, rituals and symbolic practces relate to what is already there.
Therefore is the world of development subject to considerable tensions as diferences emerge in the
interest and attudes of its diverse peoples.
- In this book the authors explore anthropology’s varied engagement with and understandings of
insttutons and social groups.
- Anthropological perspectves ofer ways of understanding the value judgements, social realites and
social practces that make up the world of aid and development.
- The book seeks to make anthropology simpler and development more complex. The aim is to
engage critcally with development and suggest perspectves and practces that may discourage
development practtoners from taking lazy shortcuts.
Chapter 1 – Introduitonn hope and decpair
Key points chapter 1:
Outlining of diferent theoretcal bases by which policy-makers, scholars and practtoners
have sought to understand development
Hoe ways of thinking about development infuence practce
Points of similarity between globalised narratves and how these common assumptons may
limit understanding of the complex reality of change
Outlining the basis of recent anthropological approaches to the study and practce of
development
- Viewed from the comfort of social and geographical distance, economically ‘poor countries’ are
conjured up as places of unrelentng misery by the US and European media. This book will engage
with a range of representatons and realites through close-up examinatons of everyday experience,
rather than giving polarised pessimistc depictons and exaggerated promises permited by distance.
- This book considers ‘the spaces in between’, the gap that exists between the past and the future,
between policy and practce, developed and developing or between success and failure. In the space
between these binary oppositons lies the real world of aid and development.
- But what actually is development? The concept is hard to defne.
- The term development was originally used to refer to processes of social and economic change
- Some see development as a natural process, others as a planned intenton. Also, it is hard to
separate natonal development from internatonal aid.
Development as easy
- The peoples and natons of the underdeveloped needed to improve and grow. The soluton was
obvious: development could be efected by the export of money, technology and expertse from the
developed to the developing world. (Truman’s vision)
1
,- This vision is a simple one in the sense of identfying the goal of a world freed from poverty, disease
and oppression. But, in more than half a century since Truman’s plans, the results materialised only
for some. Substantal diferences have emerged to account for this failure and suggest what the goals
of development should be and how they might be achieved.
- The problems and solutons to development have been simplistcally defned, as if development
were easy, and even misconceived. Goals set by the UN are impossible to achieve and to naïve.
- Development is shown as easy – with impossible visions, ambitous targets and positve reports –
whereas it is fraught with difculty, diference and confict.
Development as modernity
- Afer WWII states in Asia and Africa became independent. During this tme, development thinking
was dominated by the noton of a straight forward route leading to the goal of modernity.
- To modernisaton theorists and proponents, development can be achieved by mimicking the
historical experience of the industrial states of Europe and North America.
- An important theory is Rostow’s theory in which he describes his ‘Stages of Economic Growth’
- The belief is that the defcits of underdevelopment could be made good by a simple replicaton of
historical conditons of the already developed. Large-scale and capital-intensive infrastructure was
the means by which development was to be achieved.
- Such explicit modernisaton theory has long since fallen out of intellectual fashion in some circle.
However it persists in the mainstream in subtler forms.
Development as control
- Challenging evolutonary assumptons of modernisaton theory, the noton of forced dependency
pointed to an alternatve understanding of relatonships of development and underdevelopment
- Recogniton of unequal trade relatons between the global North and South grew into a more
general critque of the noton of a straightorward linear progression towards development.
- The countries of the global South were actvely underdeveloped through involvement in an unequal
and exploitatve global economic system.
- Dependency theory was rooted in the convicton that development as conventonally practsed was
no more than an exercise in power. Through development, powerful internatonal actor were able to
impose their interests. -> a contnuaton of colonialism by other means
- Also, various other strands of development theory have put the spotlight on control (feminists,
environmentalists)
- Against the backdrop of the Cold War, aid and development were used to reinforce politcal
interests; not only the economic but also the security concerns of the donor countries have shaped
internatonal development. Development and security concerns have merged.
Development as empowerment
- Many critcs atributed the failures of development to the top-down nature of development
processes. The arrogant assumptons underlying modernisaton theory, reliance on natonal statstcs
and blueprint standardised policy prescriptons doomed development to bringing benefts only to a
few.
2
, - Partcipaton has become so much part of the orthodoxy that all donor agencies require any
initatve to have at least an element of PRA or its equivalents.
- The PRA approach is popular within the Bank, and especially its assumpton that empowerment
involves individual rather than collectve transformaton. It can be interpreted as improving
processes through consultaton to get beter results, rather than forcing the Bank to give atenton to
class, power or gender inequality.
- The critque of partcipaton is that it is inherently fawed; in fact, the more partcipatory a method
claims to be, the more it will mask local inequalites. Sharing through partcipaton does not
necessarily mean sharing in power. Incorporaton, rather than exclusion, is ofen the best means of
control.
- Top-down commitment to others’ empowerment is highly contradictory because if people are given
the space to empower themselves they tend to work outside expected parameters.
- Development agencies are not promotng partcipaton in an open-ended way, but heralding
partcipaton within highly constrained limits to ensure that their own goals are met.
- Empowerment can only genuinely challenge power structures if it is explicitly politcal, but then stll
it can create an ‘inclusion delusion’, obscuring the power limits it leads to.
Development as discourse
- Words work to shape thought and acton, and practces determine the way we think about them.
- Discourse is a claim to truth, it normalises and makes natural. The analysis of the discourse in the
world of development gave rise to a powerful ‘post-development’ critque.
- Post-development theory emerged out of the critcism of development project, the insttutonal
arrangements that produced them and the theories that justfed them. Critques pointed to the ways
in which partcular practces and ideas were naturalised and, therefore, depolitcised.
- The power of discourse lies in its ability to order and defne, words and concepts shape ideas, policy
and practce and reshape the objects they describe.
- Through the constructon of hierarchical frameworks for acton, development becomes equated
with westernizaton. This denies diferences between countries and makes globalizaton a process of
homogenizaton.
- Failed projects get replicated because although they may fail for the people, they succeed for the
state. Success of development is feared.
- As a result there are many movements fghtng for a beter, greener, fairer future.
Moving beyond discourse
- Key assumptons of discourse theorists:
Mainstream and discourse theories maintain a sharp dichotomy between the global North
(agent) and South (object)
Both see development as a monolithic enterprise that is easily defned and internally unifed.
Local agency is limited
- Post-development discourse is unconvincing because it atributes the idea of development with a
narrow, singular meaning and consistency that are not matched either in theory or in policy.
- Anthropologists have adopted diferent, critcal perspectves that recognize the varied possibilites
of development, while acknowledging the limitng efects of uneven power relatons.
3
Axeloy
Prefaie
- The pursuit of development has become a global concern, no one is unafected.
- All cultures, moralites, languages, rituals and symbolic practces relate to what is already there.
Therefore is the world of development subject to considerable tensions as diferences emerge in the
interest and attudes of its diverse peoples.
- In this book the authors explore anthropology’s varied engagement with and understandings of
insttutons and social groups.
- Anthropological perspectves ofer ways of understanding the value judgements, social realites and
social practces that make up the world of aid and development.
- The book seeks to make anthropology simpler and development more complex. The aim is to
engage critcally with development and suggest perspectves and practces that may discourage
development practtoners from taking lazy shortcuts.
Chapter 1 – Introduitonn hope and decpair
Key points chapter 1:
Outlining of diferent theoretcal bases by which policy-makers, scholars and practtoners
have sought to understand development
Hoe ways of thinking about development infuence practce
Points of similarity between globalised narratves and how these common assumptons may
limit understanding of the complex reality of change
Outlining the basis of recent anthropological approaches to the study and practce of
development
- Viewed from the comfort of social and geographical distance, economically ‘poor countries’ are
conjured up as places of unrelentng misery by the US and European media. This book will engage
with a range of representatons and realites through close-up examinatons of everyday experience,
rather than giving polarised pessimistc depictons and exaggerated promises permited by distance.
- This book considers ‘the spaces in between’, the gap that exists between the past and the future,
between policy and practce, developed and developing or between success and failure. In the space
between these binary oppositons lies the real world of aid and development.
- But what actually is development? The concept is hard to defne.
- The term development was originally used to refer to processes of social and economic change
- Some see development as a natural process, others as a planned intenton. Also, it is hard to
separate natonal development from internatonal aid.
Development as easy
- The peoples and natons of the underdeveloped needed to improve and grow. The soluton was
obvious: development could be efected by the export of money, technology and expertse from the
developed to the developing world. (Truman’s vision)
1
,- This vision is a simple one in the sense of identfying the goal of a world freed from poverty, disease
and oppression. But, in more than half a century since Truman’s plans, the results materialised only
for some. Substantal diferences have emerged to account for this failure and suggest what the goals
of development should be and how they might be achieved.
- The problems and solutons to development have been simplistcally defned, as if development
were easy, and even misconceived. Goals set by the UN are impossible to achieve and to naïve.
- Development is shown as easy – with impossible visions, ambitous targets and positve reports –
whereas it is fraught with difculty, diference and confict.
Development as modernity
- Afer WWII states in Asia and Africa became independent. During this tme, development thinking
was dominated by the noton of a straight forward route leading to the goal of modernity.
- To modernisaton theorists and proponents, development can be achieved by mimicking the
historical experience of the industrial states of Europe and North America.
- An important theory is Rostow’s theory in which he describes his ‘Stages of Economic Growth’
- The belief is that the defcits of underdevelopment could be made good by a simple replicaton of
historical conditons of the already developed. Large-scale and capital-intensive infrastructure was
the means by which development was to be achieved.
- Such explicit modernisaton theory has long since fallen out of intellectual fashion in some circle.
However it persists in the mainstream in subtler forms.
Development as control
- Challenging evolutonary assumptons of modernisaton theory, the noton of forced dependency
pointed to an alternatve understanding of relatonships of development and underdevelopment
- Recogniton of unequal trade relatons between the global North and South grew into a more
general critque of the noton of a straightorward linear progression towards development.
- The countries of the global South were actvely underdeveloped through involvement in an unequal
and exploitatve global economic system.
- Dependency theory was rooted in the convicton that development as conventonally practsed was
no more than an exercise in power. Through development, powerful internatonal actor were able to
impose their interests. -> a contnuaton of colonialism by other means
- Also, various other strands of development theory have put the spotlight on control (feminists,
environmentalists)
- Against the backdrop of the Cold War, aid and development were used to reinforce politcal
interests; not only the economic but also the security concerns of the donor countries have shaped
internatonal development. Development and security concerns have merged.
Development as empowerment
- Many critcs atributed the failures of development to the top-down nature of development
processes. The arrogant assumptons underlying modernisaton theory, reliance on natonal statstcs
and blueprint standardised policy prescriptons doomed development to bringing benefts only to a
few.
2
, - Partcipaton has become so much part of the orthodoxy that all donor agencies require any
initatve to have at least an element of PRA or its equivalents.
- The PRA approach is popular within the Bank, and especially its assumpton that empowerment
involves individual rather than collectve transformaton. It can be interpreted as improving
processes through consultaton to get beter results, rather than forcing the Bank to give atenton to
class, power or gender inequality.
- The critque of partcipaton is that it is inherently fawed; in fact, the more partcipatory a method
claims to be, the more it will mask local inequalites. Sharing through partcipaton does not
necessarily mean sharing in power. Incorporaton, rather than exclusion, is ofen the best means of
control.
- Top-down commitment to others’ empowerment is highly contradictory because if people are given
the space to empower themselves they tend to work outside expected parameters.
- Development agencies are not promotng partcipaton in an open-ended way, but heralding
partcipaton within highly constrained limits to ensure that their own goals are met.
- Empowerment can only genuinely challenge power structures if it is explicitly politcal, but then stll
it can create an ‘inclusion delusion’, obscuring the power limits it leads to.
Development as discourse
- Words work to shape thought and acton, and practces determine the way we think about them.
- Discourse is a claim to truth, it normalises and makes natural. The analysis of the discourse in the
world of development gave rise to a powerful ‘post-development’ critque.
- Post-development theory emerged out of the critcism of development project, the insttutonal
arrangements that produced them and the theories that justfed them. Critques pointed to the ways
in which partcular practces and ideas were naturalised and, therefore, depolitcised.
- The power of discourse lies in its ability to order and defne, words and concepts shape ideas, policy
and practce and reshape the objects they describe.
- Through the constructon of hierarchical frameworks for acton, development becomes equated
with westernizaton. This denies diferences between countries and makes globalizaton a process of
homogenizaton.
- Failed projects get replicated because although they may fail for the people, they succeed for the
state. Success of development is feared.
- As a result there are many movements fghtng for a beter, greener, fairer future.
Moving beyond discourse
- Key assumptons of discourse theorists:
Mainstream and discourse theories maintain a sharp dichotomy between the global North
(agent) and South (object)
Both see development as a monolithic enterprise that is easily defned and internally unifed.
Local agency is limited
- Post-development discourse is unconvincing because it atributes the idea of development with a
narrow, singular meaning and consistency that are not matched either in theory or in policy.
- Anthropologists have adopted diferent, critcal perspectves that recognize the varied possibilites
of development, while acknowledging the limitng efects of uneven power relatons.
3
