College of Education

School of Continuing and Distance Education2014/2015 – 2016/2017

SOCI 424:

THE CONTEXT OF DEVELOPMENT

AND UNDERDEVELOPMENT

Lecturer: Dr. James Dzisah

Email: jdzisah@ug.edu.gh

SESSION 2:

THE CONTEXT OF DEVELOPMENT AND UNDERDEVELOPMENT II: THEORY AND REALITY

SESSION OVERVIEW

This is the second, and final, part of the introduction to the Context of Development andUnderdevelopment. We conclude by examining the idea and practice of development as acolonial project by interrogating how market-based development is not natural, but rathera political construct that promotes development for some and underdevelopment forothers.

Goals and Objectives:At the end of the session, the student will be able to:1. Explain the impact of our current consumer-based practices on development2. Identify the obstacles and possibilities that either derails or aids development that is

sustainable3. Explain how commodity chains help illuminate the social and environmental linkages

of global production4. Interrogate why market-based development is not natural, but rather a political

construct.5. Explain development as a project (1940s – 1970s) that was internationally

orchestrated6. Explain the superimposition of open markets across national boundaries as an

intentional project (1970s-2000s) of development expansion.

SESSION OUTLINE1. Decolonization and Markets2. Polanyi’s “Double Movement”3. Project As Framework4. The Global Marketplace5. Commodity Chains6. Long Supply Chains7. Increasing Global Inequality8. Development Project9. Globalization Project10. Sustainability Project11. Activity12. References

DECOLONIZATION AND MARKETS

• Post-colonial world order emerged from:

– Combined force of decolonization politics

– New model of publicly regulated capitalist markets in First andThird World

• Led to the creation of the nation-state

• Development as a national standard institutionalized inUN System of National Accounts

– Monetized economic activity recorded as Gross NationalProduct (GNP)

POLANYI’S “DOUBLE MOVEMENT”

• Polanyi: Neither labour, land nor money were producedfor sale and were really “fictitious commodities”

• Social movements would arise to protect society fromunregulated markets (a “double movement”), to re-embed markets within social controls

• Proof: Establishment of the 20th century welfare state, amodel for the development state

PROJECT AS FRAMEWORK

• Meaning/practice of development changes withchanging political-economic conditions

– Development project (1940s-1980): public regulation ofmarkets; social contract

– Globalization project (1980s-2000): “good market, bad state”mantra in public discourse

– Sustainability project (2000s-), tension between these poles;“climate regime”

• Polanyian “double movements” dynamically linksprojects, accounts for their succession

THE GLOBAL MARKET PLACE

• Much of what we consume has global origins

– Sneakers produced in China or Indonesia

– Japanese eat poultry fattened in Thailand with American corn,using chopsticks made with wood from Indonesian or Chileanforests.

– Computers, cell phones and nuclear reactors require coltanfrom Congo

• Global consumerism is neither accessible to (or possiblefor) a majority of humans, nor a universal aspiration

COMMODITY CHAINS

• Sequence of production stages, located in a number ofcountries at sites that provide inputs of labour andmaterials contributing to the fabrication of a finalproduct

– Enable firms to switch production sites for flexiblemanagement of their operations (and costs)

– Requires access through subcontractors to labor forces,increasingly feminized, who often have little security (orrights), in unregulated global workplace

Slide 9

LONG SUPPLY CHAINS

• Much commercial agriculture is extraverted, rather thanintroverted

• Has led to the creation of:– “Ghost acres” – additional land offshore used to supply the diet of a

nation; also includes “food miles”

– Example: development paradox in Guatemala

• Great distance between consumers, and producers andenvironments:– Makes it impossible for consumers to recognize the impact of their

consumption or

– Producers to voice concerns about working conditions or health of theirhabitats

INCREASING GLOBAL INEQUALITY

• North America: 6% of world adult population and 34%of household wealth

– Europe and Asia-Pacific countries also have disproportionatewealth

• Share of wealth of Africans, Chinese, Indians, otherlower-income Asian countries lesser than theirpopulation share

• Standardizing development measures reinforces beliefof a high correlation between GNP and socialwellbeing

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

• 1940s – 1970s

• An internationally orchestrated program of nationally-sited economic growth across the Cold War divide

– Involved financial, technological, and military assistance bythe superpowers.

• United Nations ideal as governments implemented ahuman rights-based social contract with their citizens

GLOBALIZATION PROJECT

• 1970s- 2000s

• Redefined development as a private undertaking

– Superimposed open markets across national boundaries

– Liberalized trade and investment rules

– Privatized public goods and services

• Corporate rights prioritized over social contract

GLOBALIZATION PROJECT Cont.

• Neo-liberal doctrine (“market freedoms”) met withgrowing contention

– Social revolt in Latin America

– Middle-East rebellions (Arab Springs)

– Growing weight of China (and India) in world politicaleconomy

• Polanyi’s double movement is alive/well

SUSTAINABILITY PROJECT

• Incipient, but heavily influenced by the climateemergency

– China leads the green technology race

– Global environmental (justice) movements push towardsdevelopment as “managing the future” sustainably

• Whether the global market will remain dominant is stillto be determined

SESSION SUMMARY

• As global interdependencies deepen, global inequalities expand.• The interconnections among the lifestyles of people in the global

north and south suggest that such relationships are mediated bypolitical and economic policies.

• The post-colonial world order emerged from the combined forceof decolonization politics and the new model of publicly regulatedcapitalist markets.

• The development project (1940s – 1970s) was an internationallyorchestrated program of national economic growth, with foreignfinancial, technological and military assistance. Governmentsfocused on implementing human rights-based social contractswith their citizens.

• The globalization project (1970s- 2000s), superimposed openmarkets across national boundaries, liberalized trade andinvestment rules, and privatized public goods and services.

SESSION SUMMARY Cont.

• Corporate rights gained priority over the social contract and redefineddevelopment as a private undertaking.

• The neo-liberal doctrine of market freedoms has been met with growingcontention symbolized by the anti-neoliberal social revolt in Latin America,Middle-East rebellions, and growing weight of China (and India) in the worldpolitical economy. Thus, Polanyi’s double movement is alive and well.

• An incipient sustainability project, heavily influenced by the climateemergency, is forming. While China leads the green technology race, a myriadof environmental (justice) movements across the world push states, businessleaders and citizens towards a new formulation of development as “managingthe future” sustainably.

• In this context of growing contention and with the emergency of climatechange, the question to be asked is whether the global market will remain asdominant as in the past.

ACTIVITY

• How can development be understood by its socialand ecological paradoxes? How do measurements ofdevelopment perpetuate these paradoxes?

• What is the double movement and how is itexpressed in the transitions between thedevelopment, globalization, and sustainabilityprojects?

REFERENCES• McMichael, Philip (2012). Development and Social Change: Global

Perspective (Fifth Edition). Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Chapter 1.

• Cohen, Michael and Robert Shenton. 1995. “The Invention of Development.” Pp. 27-43 in Jonathan Crush (ed), Power of Development. London and New York: Routledge.

• Esteva, Gustavo. 1991. “Development.” Pp. 1-23 in Wolfgang Sachs (ed), The Development Dictionary. London: Zed Books.

• Ferguson, James. 1994. “Epilogue.” Pp. 279-288 inThe Anti-Politics Machine: Development, Depoliticization, and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

• Seers, Dudley. 1972. “What are we trying to Measure?” Journal of Development Studies 8(3):21-36. Studies 10(1):19-34.