week 7 wt - development Flashcards
(14 cards)
What is the difference between “development anthropology” and “anthropology of development”?
Development anthropology refers to the applied, practical involvement of anthropologists in development projects, often working for agencies or NGOs to implement or evaluate interventions. Anthropology of development is a critical, academic field that studies the development industry itself, analyzing its discourses, practices, and impacts, often highlighting unintended consequences and power dynamics. This distinction is crucial for understanding the different roles anthropologists play in relation to development.
(Source: Lecture notes, Week 7; Edelman & Haugerud, “The Anthropology of Development and Globalization”)
How did the concept of “development” emerge in the post-WWII era?
After WWII, “development” became a central global project, with the US and Western powers promoting economic growth and modernization in the “Third World” as a way to prevent the spread of communism. This era saw the rise of large-scale aid, technical assistance, and the framing of poverty as a technical problem to be solved by experts. The Cold War context significantly shaped the early development agenda.
(Source: Lecture notes, Week 7; Escobar, “Encountering Development”)
What are the main critiques of the development industry from post-development theorists?
Post-development theorists argue that development is not a neutral or benevolent process but a Western-centric project that imposes external values, undermines local knowledge, and creates new forms of dependency and inequality. They see “development” as a discourse that constructs the “Third World” as backward and in need of intervention, often ignoring local realities and agency. Key figures like Escobar challenge the very foundations of the development enterprise.
(Source: Escobar, “Encountering Development”; Escobar, “Development, Violence and the New Imperial Order”)
According to Ferguson, what is the “anti-politics machine”?
Ferguson argues that development projects, such as those in Lesotho, often depoliticize poverty by framing it as a technical problem, ignoring historical and political causes. The “anti-politics machine” refers to how development interventions expand bureaucratic power and state control while failing to address underlying issues of inequality and power. This concept highlights how development can mask underlying political dynamics.
(Source: Ferguson, “The Anti-Politics Machine”)
What does Ferguson mean by the “bovine mystique” in Lesotho?
Ferguson describes how development experts misunderstood Basotho farmers’ attachment to cattle, seeing it as irrational and an obstacle to economic progress. In reality, cattle had complex social, cultural, and economic meanings, serving as status symbols, social security, and sources of power, not just as economic assets. This illustrates the importance of understanding local perspectives and cultural values.
(Source: Ferguson, “The Bovine Mystique”)
How does Mosse critique participatory rural appraisal (PRA) and similar approaches?
Mosse argues that participatory approaches, while claiming to empower local people, often reproduce existing power relations and serve the interests of development agencies. Participation can become a ritual that legitimizes projects rather than genuinely transferring power or knowledge to local communities. Mosse’s work questions the effectiveness and authenticity of participatory methods.
(Source: Mosse, “Authority, Gender and Knowledge”)
What is the significance of “discourse” in the anthropology of development?
Anthropologists analyze how language, narratives, and representations shape development practice. “Development discourse” constructs certain problems, solutions, and identities, influencing what kinds of interventions are possible and whose voices are heard or silenced. Analyzing discourse reveals the power dynamics embedded in development processes.
(Source: Edelman & Haugerud, “The Anthropology of Development and Globalization”; Lecture notes, Week 7)
How has the focus of development shifted from economic growth to “human development”?
Over time, critiques of purely economic models led to broader understandings of development, emphasizing health, education, gender equality, and well-being. The “human development” approach, popularized by the UNDP, measures progress through indicators like the Human Development Index (HDI), not just GDP. This shift reflects a growing recognition of the multi-dimensional nature of development.
(Source: Lecture notes, Week 7; Edelman & Haugerud, “The Anthropology of Development and Globalization”)
What is the “post-development” critique, and what alternatives do its proponents suggest?
Post-development scholars argue that the very idea of “development” is problematic and call for abandoning it in favor of approaches that prioritize local autonomy, pluralism, and grassroots movements. They advocate for recognizing diverse ways of living and organizing society, rather than imposing a single model of progress. Post-development thinking challenges the universalizing assumptions of mainstream development.
(Source: Escobar, “Development, Violence and the New Imperial Order”; Escobar, “Encountering Development”)
How do NGOs and civil society organizations fit into the anthropology of development?
NGOs have become major actors in development, often filling gaps left by the state. Anthropologists study how NGOs operate, their relationships with donors and communities, and the ways they can both challenge and reinforce power structures. The rise of “civil society” is seen as both an opportunity for local agency and a new form of governance. The role of NGOs is a complex and contested aspect of development.
(Source: Gardner & Lewis, “Anthropology, Development and the Crisis of Modernity”; Edelman & Haugerud, “The Anthropology of Development and Globalization”)
How does gender feature in anthropological critiques of development?
Feminist anthropologists highlight how development projects often ignore or misrepresent women’s roles, needs, and knowledge. Gendered analyses reveal how interventions can reinforce existing inequalities or open up new opportunities, depending on how they are designed and implemented. Gender is a critical lens for understanding the differential impacts of development.
(Source: Mosse, “Authority, Gender and Knowledge”; Lecture notes, Week 7)
What are some of the main methodological challenges in the anthropology of development?
Anthropologists must navigate their own positionality, the expectations of funders, and the complexities of working with multiple stakeholders. There is a tension between critique and engagement: how to be both critical of development and constructively involved in improving outcomes. Reflexivity and ethical considerations are central to anthropological research in development contexts.
(Source: Lecture notes, Week 7; Gardner & Lewis, “Anthropology, Development and the Crisis of Modernity”)
How does the anthropology of development address the role of culture?
Anthropologists emphasize that “culture” is not static or homogenous. Development projects often essentialize or instrumentalize culture, treating it as an obstacle or a tool. Critical approaches highlight the dynamic, contested, and political nature of cultural practices in development contexts. Understanding culture requires moving beyond simplistic or stereotypical representations.
(Source: Edelman & Haugerud, “The Anthropology of Development and Globalization”)
How has globalization and neoliberalism influenced development and its critique?
Globalization has increased the flow of ideas, people, and capital, reshaping development agendas. Neoliberal policies have promoted market-based solutions, privatization, and reduced state involvement, leading to new forms of inequality and new challenges for anthropological analysis. These global forces have profoundly shaped the context and content of development interventions.
(Source: Edelman & Haugerud, “The Anthropology of Development and Globalization”)
