Suchergebnisse

Colombia, like other countries in the region, is undergoing a moment of self-definition. At its heart lies the issue of development. The increasing plurality of competing development models and political economies, however, complicates the discursive landscape and defies conventional approaches. To make sense of this complexity, grid group cultural theory and its typology of four irreducible, mutually exclusive, and jointly exhaustive ideal-typical worldviews is proposed. Four distinct development models are identified in Colombia's recent experience, illustrated by neoliberalism, developmentalism, post-development alternatives such as Buen Vivir and Vivir Sabroso, and a chimera.

Development suggests the notion of «good change» and its research and practice are about bringing it to fruition. Perhaps, because of this emphasis on application, relatively less attention has been given to philosophical issues, although shedding more light on the latter can contribute to the former. Positivism and, to a lesser extent, constructivism, with their advantages and disadvantages, have dominated the field. Against this conventional dichotomy, this article argues in favour of philosophical classic pragmatism as an alternative and does so employing philosophical ontology. From this perspective, pragmatism adheres to mind-world monism and phenomenalism. As such, it demands healthy awareness and criticism of preferences and biases, whether personal or contextual, in the self and in the subjects of interest. It entails a call for plurality, to harness practical reason to solve practical problems, turning indeterminate situations into determinate ones, thereby generating warranted assertions.

AbstractDevelopment models are disputed in the global South and North, as evidenced by recent protests advancing different desirable social ends and means. The diversity of development ideas suggests it is a wicked problem, requiring clumsy solutions. Employing grid group cultural theory, this article elucidates that plurality and indicates ways to harness it. Four irreducible, ideal‐typical notions of development are found: market‐led individual prosperity, state‐led system‐wide welfare, alternatives of community‐led equal welfare with ecological conservation and a mirage. Clumsy development models secure legitimacy and effectiveness by engaging all worldviews, including their distinct pathways to clumsiness or messy institutions.

Development is a value-laden concept and, as such, an essentially contested issue. To different extents, different ideas of development entail different assumptions about human agency. Although economics has been the most influential discipline, increasingly different accounts highlight distinct features of human beings and the contexts they inhabit, which lead to different implications. This article seeks to delineate the boundaries of the discussion and map out what are arguably the main alternatives within the field. Since such discussion deals with the question of what human action is, the argument is elaborated from the philosophy of science. Contra convention, the discussion uses a philosophical ontology, which is concerned with out connection to the world. Jackson's heuristic is adopted to generate four philosophies of science and four notions of agency, regarded as ideal typical. Neopositivism advances a rational agent, reflexivity suggests a patient, critical realism furthers an interagent, and analyticism proposes a transagent. This article invites scholars and practitioners interested in this increasingly interdisciplinary area to raise their awareness regarding the foundations on which their ideas about human agency build and note the implications they have for the production and consumption of knowledge.

AbstractRecent protests in Colombia, Ecuador, and Chile, as well as tense elections in Peru, Ecuador, and Chile, suggest strong polarization. At their heart lies a dispute for the development model. The plurality of factions and vindications underscore the plurality of development notions, rendering the situation a wicked problem. Grid group cultural theory makes sense of such complexity, identifying four irreducible cultures and their respective development models—illustrated by neoliberalism, the developmental state, multiple alternatives such as Sumak Kawsay, and a chimera. To address this problem effectively and legitimately, all models must be engaged to produce clumsy solutions. Further, each culture has its own pathway to harness this plurality. These are messy institutions whose shape, as well as that of clumsy development models, will depend on the relative power of each culture and the context in which they are located. It could be beneficial to incorporate these insights into research on and the practice of development governance in the Andean Region.

Abstract The growing unrest regarding the social, political, economic and environmental state of affairs in Latin America suggests a deep challenge of the development model. Ideas about development matter because they seek to bring about social states by solving what are regarded as social ills. However, its definition is being increasingly disputed. This article makes sense of that plurality. Applying grid group cultural theory to this debate produces four irreducible ideal-typical worldviews and notions of development: market-led, state-led, multiple community-led, and a mirage.

Amartya Sen's capability approach redefined development in terms of people and their quality of life. Since development suggests the idea of positive change, it highlights what is worth changing, the desirable outcome and the desirable way to achieve it. This influential framework has succeeded in engaging different disciplines in constructive debate. There is a growing, and dispersed, literature adding and critiquing it. Hence, providing a current conceptual account of the approach, on its own terms, to assess its contribution to the project it undertakes, address its alleged shortcomings, and point to avenues to further the debate seems warranted. This is particularly timely given its 30 years of influence over public policy, as evidenced by the United Nations' Human Development Reports

Latin America is at a crossroads. Its efforts to integrate are undergoing significant changes. In this light, integration has been regarded as a wicked problem. Contra convention, such approach suggests that wicked problems, being social problems, may have an indefinite number of solutions. This article builds on that argument and, in order to make it workable, proposes gridgroup cultural theory as a framework to reduce its complexity while taking its inherent pluralityseriously. In brief, this theory focuses on how individual decision-making is influenced by the collective (group) or by institutions (grid). The combination of these two dimensions provides four rationalities, ways of life, or worldviews: hierarchy, individualism, egalitarianism, and fatalism. Latin American integration initiatives can be found within this limited diversity scheme to address this wicked problem and hint at appropriate solutions, clumsy ones. They require the inclusion of all rationalities in constructive dialogue seeking not to leave them worse off.

La integración latinoamericana ha sido considerada usualmente como un medio para un fin, una solución para algún problema. Sin embargo, la discrepancia entre lo que es y lo que ha aspirado a ser sugiere que es un problema en sí misma. Este papel aplica un enfoque conceptual de la literatura en planificación social con influencia creciente para argüir que no es uno cualquiera sino un problema "perverso". Contrario a los problemas 'dóciles', que son los problemas de las ciencias exactas, los perversos son sociales o de la sociedad y, por tanto, un tema de política pública. Los problemas perversos son inter alia difíciles de definir, únicos, inherentemente paradójicos, importantes, sujetos a muchas interpretaciones y, así, sin una solución correcta. La integración latinoamericana, se arguye aquí, tiene estas características y las implicaciones son relevantes para académicos y tomadores de decisión. Si la integración regional continúa siendo abordada como un problema dócil, los resultados probablemente seguirán discordando con las expectativas.

En sus 50 años de vida, la CAN ha enfrentado importantes desafíos, algunos de los cuales incluso han amenazado su existencia. Sin embargo, el hecho de que haya sobrevivido es un testimonio de su éxito. Frente a entornos políticos y económicos muy cambiantes, la continuidad de su trabajo se explica por su capacidad de adaptación a las circunstancias. En este medio centenar de años, el organismo ha atravesado más de una crisis existencial y las ha abordado con importantes autorreformas. Estas modificaciones han buscado renovar su relevancia. Con el fin de darle sentido a esta adaptación, este artículo utiliza la teoría cultural de cuadrícula y grupo (grid-group cultural theory) para identificar las principales racionalidades o visiones del mundo que han impulsado este proceso de integración regional. El análisis muestra que CAN se ha movido principalmente entre formas de vida jerárquicas e individualistas y señala algunas implicaciones para su futuro cercano. ; In its 50 years, CAN has faced important challenges, some have even threatened its existence. Nevertheless, the fact that it has survived is a testament to its success. On the face of greatly changing political and economic environments, the continuity of its work can be explained by its ability to adapt to the situation. In this half of century, the mechanism has undergone more than one existential crisis and it has tackled each with important self-reforms. These modifications have sought to renew its relevancy. In order to make sense of this adaptation, this article uses grid-group cultural theory to identify the main rationalities or worldviews that have driven this regional integration process. The analysis shows that CAN has mainly moved between hierarchical and individualistic ways of life, and points to some implications for its near future.