Development studies: A reader
In: Political geography: an interdisciplinary journal for all students of political studies with an interest in the geographical and spatial aspects, Band 16, Heft 7, S. 621-623
ISSN: 0962-6298
174525 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Political geography: an interdisciplinary journal for all students of political studies with an interest in the geographical and spatial aspects, Band 16, Heft 7, S. 621-623
ISSN: 0962-6298
In: Journal für Entwicklungspolitik 23.2007,2
In: Edition Südwind
In: Third world quarterly, Band 38, Heft 10, S. 2187-2207
ISSN: 0143-6597
World Affairs Online
ISSN: 0225-5189
In: Third world quarterly, Band 38, Heft 10, S. 2187-2207
ISSN: 1360-2241
In: Third world quarterly, Band 30, Heft 5, S. 829-830
ISSN: 1360-2241
In: Journal of international development: the journal of the Development Studies Association, Band 29, Heft 8, S. 1215-1226
ISSN: 1099-1328
AbstractDevelopment studies have been slow to explore and embrace the burgeoning field of emotions research, yet increasingly development interventions are adopting emotions‐based strategies, including the deliberate use of shaming. This article reviews the implications of a new three volume collection on poverty and shame for development studies, arguing that it offers a fruitful avenue for research that focuses on understanding the lived experiences, perceptions and feelings of the poor, as opposed to conventional uncompassionate qualitative analysis.
In: Development and change, Band 50, Heft 2, S. 426-444
ISSN: 1467-7660
ABSTRACTThis article challenges Horner and Hulme's call to move from 'international development' to 'global development' with a reaffirmation of the classical traditions of development studies. With some adaptation to fit the changing contemporary context, these traditions not only remain relevant but also recover vital insights that have been obscured in the various fashionable re‐imaginings of development. In particular, development thinking and agendas in the past were much more radical and ambitious in addressing the imperatives of redistribution and progressive forms of transformation in the context of stark asymmetries of wealth and power. Such ambition is still needed to address the nature and scale of challenges that continue to face the bulk of countries in the world, particularly given the persistence if not deepening of asymmetries. This reaffirmation is elaborated by addressing three major weaknesses in Horner and Hulme's arguments. First, they do not actually define development, but instead treat it as simply poverty and inequality dynamics, which are better understood as outcomes rather than causes. Second, despite their assertion that the study of (international) development was primarily concerned with between‐country inequalities, this is not true. Domestic inequality was in fact central to both development theory and policy since the origins of the field. Third, the authors ignore the rise of neoliberalism from the late 1970s onwards and the profound crisis that this caused to development outside of East Asia and perhaps India, which the jargon of 'global' implicitly obfuscates and even condones. Rather, the experiences of East Asia and in particular China arguably vindicate classical approaches in development studies.