|
Post-Autistic Economics Network
|
Student Essays on Post-Autistic Economics posted April 2003 The Case
for “Development from Below” Introduction: The Evolution of the Development Discourse
A concept of ‘development’ defined solely in economic terms has evolved, perhaps not surprisingly given its roots in classical economics (Todaro, 2000:8,14). Development is associated with attaining high or ideally full employment and, most importantly, continued growth in income levels as measured by a nation’s gross national product (GNP). Critics argue that this perspective continues to dominate “First World”[1] thinking, even though per capita GNP has long been acknowledged as merely “a crude index of economic development” (Lipsky et. al. 1973:848). How, then, has ‘growth’ come to be viewed as practically synonymous with ‘development’? Sachs argues that the answer can be traced to a particular moment in history: Epochs rise slowly, but the
development era opened at a certain date and hour. On 20 January 1949, it was
President Harry Truman who, in his inauguration speech before Congress, drawing
the attention of his audience to conditions in poorer countries, for the
first time defined them as ‘underdeveloped areas’… The Northern countries, in particular the U.S., were running
ahead, while he saw the rest of the world – with its absurdly low per capita
income – lagging far behind. An image that the economic societies of the
North had increasingly acquired about themselves was thus projected upon the
rest of the world: the degree of civilization in a country is to be indicated
by the level of its production… (1993:4). What factors explain the emergence of alternative theories of development, a perspective that rejects the classical economic interpretation? One recurring theme is the recognition of the need to elaborate theories to better understand the conditions under which development does or does not occur. Policy prescriptions based on conventional economics have failed to adequately remedy the enormous disparities that continue to separate the developing from the developed world. For example: ·
It is estimated that in 1998, more than one-quarter
of the people in the world’s poorest regions had an income of less than $U.S.
1.00 per day (World Bank, 2001). ·
Although the infant mortality rate[2]
in both developed (OECD)[3]
and developing countries decreased between 1970 and 1999, the difference
between the two rates doubled over the same period: compared to developed
countries, infant mortality in developing countries was 5 times higher in
1970, and 10 times higher in 1999 (World Bank, 2001). ·
While life expectancy for people in developing
countries rose from 55 years in 1970 to 64 years in 1999, it still lagged far
behind the average life expectancy of 78 years (1999) in the OECD countries
(World Bank, 2001).
·
By 1997, forests were disappearing or being
degraded at a rate of 14 million hectares a year[4];
·
In some parts of the world, water usage is so high
relative to supply that “surface water supplies are literally shrinking and
ground water reserves are being depleted faster than they can be replenished
by precipitation”[5]; ·
An estimated ninety percent of the developing
world’s wastewater continues to be discharged untreated into local rivers and
streams (Barlow, 1999:8). “Development from
Below”: The Emergence of an Alternative Paradigm
Ekins, a principal
proponent of the alternative paradigm, which he terms the New Economics, is careful to point out
that “the aim of the New Economics, as of conventional economics, is to
facilitate economic development. The difference derives from its
interpretation of the word ‘development’…” (1986:43). Five basic principles
of “development from below” were first outlined in a 1975 report of the Dag
Hammarskjöld Foundation entitled What
Now: Another Development. Specifically, development is conceived as: ·
Need-oriented,
responding to both material and non-material human needs; ·
Endogenous, that is,
derived from locally determined priorities; ·
Self-reliant, with an
emphasis on maximizing community strengths and resources; ·
Ecologically sound,
with attention to sustainable and equitable resource use; ·
Based on structural
transformations in social, economic and spatial relationships in order to
foster the participative decision-making required to achieve the above four
principles (in Ekins, 1992:99-100). Development from
below is also the philosophy and action of learning from below (Ekins, 1986): development from below seeks
to consult first with “those who are last” in determining the development
agenda. Re-Examining the
Goals: The Growth vs. Development Debate
Development from
below, on the other hand, is concerned more with the equitable distribution of income; it seeks to
satisfy basic needs (Stöhr and Taylor, 1981), to increase human welfare
(Ekins, 1986:8), and to foster diversity and complementarity by addressing
the needs of the producers, the consumers and the local community (McRobie,
1986:xii). It is concerned with making people “more productive, creative and
self-reliant” and strengthening “the support systems of family and community”
(McRobie, 1986:xi; also Graham, 1986:19)). More recent conceptualizations
include goals such as the liberation or empowerment of people to make their
own choices (Bradfield, 2000:27). Development from
below rejects entirely the assumption that “growth is good and more is
better” (Ekins, 1986: 8-9), on the grounds that growth confuses the means of development with its ends. Although economic growth may be
one way of improving human welfare, when defined in conventional economic
terms (as measured by gross national product), it falls far short of
providing an adequate measurement of more encompassing visions of
development. For one thing, GNP takes
no account of how consumption or wealth is distributed. Countries that have
recently undergone aggressive economic restructuring serve to illustrate this
point. For example, the GNP of Bolivia, considered “one of the most
successful economic adjustment programs of the postwar era” (Larraín &
Sachs, 1998:145; CIDA, 2001), grew by an impressive rate of 4% per annum
between 1990 and 1999 (CIDA, Ibid). Nevertheless, there is evidence that GNP
growth did not benefit the majority of Bolivians. Their country remains one
of the poorest in the hemisphere, and continues to rank lowest or
next-to-lowest of the South American countries on a broad range of social
indicators. Fully half (50%) of the national income (GNP) accrues to the
wealthiest 20% of the population, while the poorest 20% earn only 5.6%. Furthermore, the differences in income and
social conditions between Bolivia’s urban and rural populations are dramatic.
While female illiteracy is 15% overall, it reaches 50% in rural areas. The
poor constitute 52% of the urban population, and a full 82% of the population
in rural areas. Clearly, GNP growth falls far short of being an adequate
measure of the overall ‘development’ of human well-being and potential. Critical to
understanding the alternatives offered through development from below is the
importance placed on articulating the concept of human need. Max-Neef
(1986:49) argues that human needs must be understood as a system of
interrelated needs “of having” and “of being”, including “permanence (or
subsistence), protection, affection, understanding, participation, leisure,
creation, identity (or meaning) and freedom” (Idem). Thus, housing, food and
income, while typically thought of as basic needs, are viewed instead as satisfiers of the fundamental need of
subsistence. While fundamental needs remain constant in time and space, “what
changes, both over time and through cultures, is the form or the means by
which these needs are satisfied” (Idem). Thus, participatory decision-making
‘from below’ about how a society will satisfy its needs is the essence of the
alternative paradigm. Conclusions
·
Putting first what those who are last want and
need; ·
Understanding their situation, resources and
problems; ·
Combining these to determine program and research
priorities (Ibid: 319). In Sach’s (1987:24)
words, development planning must be “committed, contextual, contractual and
participative” if it is to fulfill its aim of achieving qualitative
development in place of imbalanced and unsustainable growth. References Barlow, M. 1999. Blue Gold: The Global
Water Crisis and the Commodification of the World’s |
[1] Todaro (2000:744), following the classification systems of the United Nations, the World Bank, and others, defines the First World as the “now economically advanced capitalist countries of Western Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan” that were the first “to experience sustained long-term economic growth.”
[2] Number of infant deaths per 1,000 live births.
[3] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
[4] Based on scientific evidence presented at the June 1997 UN General Assembly Special Session, cited in Khor (1997:8).
[5] Information from World Resources, a publication of the United Nations Environment Program, the World Bank and the World Resources Institute, cited in Barlow (1999:6).