I took a class last fall from Professor Dennis Galvan called INTL 204: Perspectives on International Development, and I believe that it was the most eye-opening course I’ve taken in college. Classes like that are why I go to college.
Luckily for us, Professor Galvan posted the syllabus, readings, and lecture notes for the class online and so I have been able to compile a mini lesson and a large set of readings based on what I learned in his class and what he’s posted online.
One warning: this is not all theory of change per se, but I would say that it is all very relevant to the future of ODA.
- Communitarian Theory: This theory describes a political system in which small, intimate communities are the most important part of society rather as opposed to individuals (liberalism/democracy) or the entire state (fascism), to name a few familiar examples.
- Modernization Theory: Modernization theory was the first major theory of development. It was born out of Truman’s Four Points which first set development as a goal for the current governments. It involved massive infrastructure projects in other countries. The Marshall Plan, where the U.S. financed the massive rebuilding of factories, roads, farms etc. in Western Europe can be considered in some ways a fantastic success of this theory, and its core model. However, such projects proved far less successful in other regions of the world.
- Marxian Theory: Marxian Theory is developmental theory in the tradition of Marx’s thought. I tried my best to pick articles that represent this theory, but it is very diverse. What it basically addresses is the Marxian idea that increasing the productive capacity of a region does little for the good of the society unless wealth is evenly distributed. It also contains the idea that uneven distributions of wealth are self-perpetuating and will lead to injustice. One of the ways this theory was practiced was the basic-needs plan, which declared that all people in the world deserved certain basic items. For awhile, the result was something akin to global socialism, where countries attempted to provide basic needs for all (like the way, in Sweden, the government taxes the rich in order to provide for the basic needs of its poor). This program was quickly abandoned as too-expensive and too inefficient.
- Kapur, “Poor but Prosperous (Kerala, India),” 1998, pp. 40-45. [PDF] This article describes a region that, though less productive, is happier because of wealth equality.
- Ken Silverstein, “Millions for Viagra, Pennies for The Poor,” The Nation, August 13, 1999 This article shows the injustice that develops when wealth is unevenly distributed, and the way advances in technology accrue to the needs of the rich rather than those of the poor.
- Streeten, “Basic Needs: Some Unsettled Questions,” 1984, pp. 973-978. [PDF]
- Neo-Liberal Theory: Neo-Liberal Theory is one we are more familiar with. It states that the way for nations to become developed is to lower barriers to trade, decrease taxes and regulation, and privatize all industries and then let the free market go to work. It is very similar to what we consider globalization today.
- Post-Modernist Theory: Post-Modernist Theory is basically a catch-all phrase for those who question the core beliefs of development. Some of it questions the notion of development as progress (ie. they would question that a group of people would be better off with outside intervention) or even the very idea of progress (that it’s possible to improve) or at least western ideas of progress (that there is one linear path to progress, and that it involves increasing industrialization, liberalism, and democracy). Others question the means previously used to achieve progress (ie. the modernist idea that development is something one nation should do to another;for instance, that the U.S. should try to aid development in Uganda). The general consensus of post-modernist theory on progress is that it means wildly different things to different groups, and that the needs of people should be addressed on as small a scale as possible to allow for the different desires and ideas of progress of different groups. On the issue of means, they believe that development should be a collaboration between small groups (NGOs) and communities (villages, neighborhoods etc.), as this is more efficient and more responsive to the specific challenges and needs of people. The current development theory of the time seems to be mostly of the Post-Modernist school; certainly ODA and the community work ODA is trying to achieve would tend to fall under the blanket of Post-Modernist Development.
- Other:
- Fung & Wright, Deepening Democracy, 2003, ch 1. [PDF] This reading especially contains ideas on how alternative democratic institutions can be created, and how our current system in the U.S. is far removed from an ideal democracy in which the people have a strong say in their political system.
- Rotella, “In Brazil, a Threat to Fusion of Religions,” August 8, 1998, p. A18. This article describes ways in which local cultures don’t have to be destroyed by new institutions, but can fuse with them to create new cultures that better suit the needs of the people.
- Shively, Power and Choice, 1995, pp. 155-168. [PDF] This article describes the nature of authority and legitimacy.
There are a very large number of ideas here, and there’s no way to do them all justice in the time we have before the retreat, so I’ve selected five readings that are somewhat related and pertain to the post-structuralist theory. I also plan to go over Galvan’s lecture slides on that subject and teach them as best as I can.
Here are the five readings, with notes where appropriate:
- Scott, Seeing Like a State, 1998, pp. 11-52. [PDF] This reading talks about how a state will, by necessity, view the territory and the people which it rules in an oversimplified manner in order to make sense of the huge variety of cultures, institutions, relationships etc. that exist, and in doing so will often make decisions that don’t reflect the true needs of its people. Furthermore, many states will seek to simplify these cultures, institutions, and relationships in order to make its people easier to rule, often going to great lengths and causing much suffering to the people.
- Fukuyama, “Social Capital,” April 5, 1997. This article says that there are more types of capital (ie, things which increase productivity) than our typical western ideas of capital, which are generally limited to things like factories, and tractors, or sometimes skills and experience.
- Rotella, “In Brazil, a Threat to Fusion of Religions,” August 8, 1998, p. A18. This article describes ways in which local cultures don’t have to be destroyed by new institutions, but can fuse with them to create new cultures that better suit the needs of the people.
- Etzioni, “Religious Civil Society is Antidote to Anarchy in Iraq & Afghanistan” 4/1/04. This article talks about how we shouldn’t take it for granted that increasing people’s freedom (by freedom, in this case, I mean removing obstacles to what people can do) will increase their standard of living. The example it gives is that, in Iraq and Afghanistan, increasing, rather than decreasing, the influence of Islam in people’s lives would be a good way to make people happier, even though Islamic rules might limit the freedom of the people (especially women).
- Fung & Wright, Deepening Democracy, 2003, ch 1. [PDF] This reading especially contains ideas on how alternative democratic institutions can be created, and how our current system in the U.S. is far removed from an ideal democracy in which the people have a strong say in their political system.
These readings are all meant to contain ideas about how ODA can improve the standard of living in places by respecting local culture, and how, hopefully, we can empower the people to create democratic institutions that reflect the will of the local people.
As a quick note (I’ll write a lengthier reflection later, I hope), I think everyone should listen to “Is Aid to Africa Doing More Harm Than Good?” if you have a chance. For me, the take away was beginning to see the diverse range of opinions towards over 30 years of developmental aid being sent to the continent. Some say that the overall efforts are positive because of the incremental successes being had, while one voice in particular spoke of all the corruption foreign financial aid has helped support. Listening to the discussion, I believe, gives you better appreciation of all the details that should be considered.