Introduction: translocal development, development corridors and development chains
In: International development planning review: IDPR, Band 33, Heft 4, S. 377-389
ISSN: 1474-6743
937314 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: International development planning review: IDPR, Band 33, Heft 4, S. 377-389
ISSN: 1474-6743
In: International development planning review: IDPR, Band 33, Heft 4, S. 377-388
ISSN: 1478-3401
In: World health forum: an intern. journal of health development, Band 15, Heft 2
ISSN: 0251-2432
In: Canada's international policy statement: a role of pride and influence in the world
In: World development: the multi-disciplinary international journal devoted to the study and promotion of world development, Band 15, Specia, Heft (Autumn), S. 69
ISSN: 0305-750X
In: Development and change, Band 29, Heft 2, S. 343-373
ISSN: 1467-7660
Alternative development has been concerned with alternative practices of development—participatory and people‐centred—and with redefining the goals of development. Mainstream development has gradually been moving away from the preoccupation with economic growth toward a people‐centred definition of development, for instance in human development. This raises the question in what way alternative development remains distinguishable from mainstream development—as a roving criticism, a development style, a profile of alternative positions regarding development agency, methodology, epistemology? Increasingly the claim is that alternative development represents an alternative paradigm. This is a problematic idea for four reasons: because whether paradigms apply to social science is questionable; because in development the concern is with policy frameworks rather than explanatory frameworks; because there are different views on whether a paradigm break with conventional development is desirable; and finally because the actual divergence in approaches to development is in some respects narrowing. There is a meaningful alternative development profile or package but there is no alternative development paradigm—nor should there be. Mainstream development is not what it used to be and it may be argued that the key question is rather whether growth and production are considered within or outside the people‐centred development approach and whether this can rhyme with the structural adjustment programmes followed by the international financial institutions. Post‐development may be interpreted as a neo‐traditionalist reaction against modernity. More enabling as a perspective is reflexive development, in which a critique of science is viewed as part of development politics.
In: African studies, Band 65, Heft 1, S. 45-62
ISSN: 1469-2872
In: Alternatives: global, local, political, Band 25, Heft 3, S. 335-352
ISSN: 0304-3754
In: Artha Vijnana: Journal of The Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, Band 30, Heft 2, S. 109
In: Development in practice, Band 16, Heft 2
ISSN: 0961-4524