1

THEORIES OF DEVELOPMENT
Santiago Galindo - s3441591

Has the time come to discard the term development? If so, what do we replace it
with? In what ways is the concept flawed?

Introduction
Development is a mirror of the times (Pieterse, 2010, p. 11)
Despite the vagueness of the term development and the wide variety of uses in different
historical contexts, for the purpose of the following discussion, it will be understood as the
predominant worldview of the current socio-cultural system imposed by the western
culture to the rest of the world that establishes the means and resources needed to achieve
a better life. However, the ambition of a world full of developed countries in a planet with
finite resources is unrealistic and self-destructive. This essay will argue that the
inconsistencies of development are rooted in the separation between western culture and
nature. Firstly, the current vision of development will be addressed and its interrelation with
inequality, followed by an analysis of the origins and evolution of the current dominant
worldview and its divide from the cosmos. Finally, an alternative to progress will be
discussed that imply decelerate the roller-coaster of development, get off the carriage, put
our feet back on earth, start cleaning the mess left behind and recreate a lifestyle
compatible with the community of life of Mother Earth.
Development, inequality and absolute justice
According to conventional theories (Pieterse, 2010), the term development as we use it
today evolved from the European classical economic practices of the nineteenth-century
and under the mask of opportunity, the term development has been used to evoke
progress, evolution, economic growth, modernization and human flourishing during
different times and circumstances. However, its meaning as it is referred today was initially
proposed during the post-war era in the discourse of the U.S. President Truman in 1949 who
offered a model to the so labelled underdeveloped countries of the south to be able to
catch up with the new global power of the north. This support led to political independence
of colonies in Latin America, Africa and Asia from abolished empires of Gran Britain, Japan
and France. What Truman succeeded in doing was freeing the economic sphere from the
negative connotations it had accumulated for two centuries, delinking development from
colonialism. No more of the old imperialism, said Truman (Pieterse, 2010, p. 14) to give
way to a neo-colonialism era where the colonization of minds and nature remains until
today (Watts, 2009). The development era came to an end after the fall of the Berlin Wall in
1989 that was a symbol of the clash between democracy and communism during the Cold
War, since then, the concept of development has taken the form of neoliberalism and
globalization until reaching the proposal of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) in
2000 by the United Nations (UN) (Pieterse, 2010).

2

In the pursuit of a more equitable and sustainable society, world governments, leading
development institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund
(IMF), civil society and other partners have expressed their commitment to achieve the
following MDG by 2015: eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; achieve universal primary
education; promote gender equality and empower women; reduce child mortality; improve
maternal health, combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases; ensure environmental
sustainability and develop a global partnership for development (United Nations, 2014).
Progress of its implementation was presented by the UN Report entitled The Inequality
Predicament which shows that we cannot advance the development agenda without
addressing the challenges of inequality (United Nations, 2005, p. iii) and concluded that
failure to pursue a comprehensive, integrated approach to development would perpetuate
such a predicament, causing all to pay the price (United Nations, 2013, p. 21). Eight years
after, the new UN Report called Inequality Matters shows that disparities in distribution of
income, access to education, health and quality services among other dimensions of
development have improved little for marginalized and disadvantaged social groups such as
poor, indigenous and rural populations while wealthy people are becoming wealthier. Such
report emphasizes that policy has a primary role to address this dilemma and will require
to unleash the human and productive potential of each countrys population and to bring
development towards a socially-sustainable path (United Nations, 2013, p. 21).
At the gates of 2015 and even though some of the MDG targets have been met and others
have been successfully reduced, levels of inequality continue rising mainly due to the
complexity of the relationship between growth and inequality. Under this circumstances, a
new ambitious post-2015 development agenda is in progress where a central message is
that social and economic policymaking have a critical role to address disparities between
haves and have-nots. In one of the last UN reports it is emphasized that growing
inequalities can be arrested by integrated policies that are universal in principle while
paying particular attention to the needs of disadvantaged and marginalized populations
(United Nations, 2013, p. 7). Nonetheless, Sachs (2010, p. 7) claims that it is vital to
recognise two types of equity, relative justice and absolute justice. The first one looks at
the distribution of various assets such as income, school years or Internet connections
across groups of people or nations. It is comparative in nature, focuses on the relative
positions of asset-holders, and points towards some form of equality. The second form of
justice, recognises the availability of fundamental capabilities and freedoms without which
an unblemished life would be impossible. It is non-comparative in nature, focuses on basic
living conditions, and points to the norm of human dignity. Generally speaking, conflicts
about inequality are animated by the first idea, while conflicts about human rights are
animated by the second. In addition, Sachs shows that the predicament of this century as
seen by world leaders inspired by development theories and relative justice mindset is that
governments are forced to impulse either equity without ecology, or ecology without
equity and concludes that it is hard to see how this dilemma can be resolved unless the
belief in development is dismantled Sachs (2010, p. 7).


3

Inconsistencies of development, economic thinking and origins of inequality
Since the 90s, the sustainable development agenda has been largely influenced by the
famous economist Jeffry Sachs who in one of his best sellers, The End of Poverty (2005)
argues that extreme poverty could be eradicated by 2025 through carefully planned
development aid. Sachs also uses the metaphor of the ladder of economic development
to express the situation of countries that cannot even reach the bottom rung because
they are incapacitated by a poverty trap which is intensified generation after generation.
Therefore, these least developed countries are in need of an international first aid kit to
assist them to reach the first stair so they can have a chance to climb the ladder by their
own means and therefore be part of the corporate global economy from which will be
benefit.
Even though this blueprint for a better world has some positive outcomes for people at the
bottom of the ladder, its efforts are primarily concentrated in mitigating the effects instead
of combating the cause which is called reactive thinking and can be compared with "lifting
drowning babies out of a river when what is most needed is to go upstream to stop the
babies from being thrown in the water" (Cobb and Diaz, 2009, p. 326). The other problem is
the dangers associated with the belief that developing countries can and should reach the
yearned status of developed ones. A recent example occurred over the tribune of the
Olympic Games in Beijing 2008 and the World Expo in 2010, where China announced its
success in becoming a new global power by ranking as one of the top three winners in the
list of countries by Gross Domestic Product (GDP) along with United States and the
European Union (Sachs, 2010). Nevertheless, what this measure of success does not tell is
that the manufactory of the world has triumphed thanks to the annihilation of ecosystems
and exploitation of human lives to produce cheap goods for a consumerist global society.
Moreover, the world is still recovering from the last financial crisis of 2008 and when one of
these gigantic economic bubbles inflated by pathological dreams of development explodes,
its effect will lead to a global economic depression that will take civilization to a new dark
age (Gorrie, 2013). Under this circumstances, development can be seen as an attempt to
extinguish a fire with gasoline, which ultimately will only intensify the social-ecological crisis
until reaching a point of global collapse.
In order to disassemble this dangerous belief system, core ideas of development need to be
evaluated such as the ones contained in the book The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-
Communist Manifesto published by the economist and political theorist Walt Whitman
Rostow (1960, pp. 411) who argues that economic development take place in five stages:
the traditional society; the preconditions for take-off; the take-off; the drive to maturity,
and the age of high mass consumption. This theory represent one of the milestones of
social evolutionism through modernization. Previous negative assumptions of traditional
societies as backwards, shameful, primitive, dark-skin, poor, savage and undesirable were
reinforced in comparison with evolved, modern, sophisticated, advanced white man which
created a call of duty in societies of the global north to civilize such primitive ways of living
and a shameful self-vision of the people in an already devastated post-colonial global south.
Here the emphasis is placed on the transformation of traditional cultures into western

4

culture with the injection of capitals, industries, institutions, education, hospitals and
political systems in order to make them dependent of a subsistence economy based on
supply of raw materials to the masters of the north to be able to pay the new debt and
perpetuate this debt by making them also consumers of value-added products and
technology that now they need to accomplish the mission of becoming a modern, wealthier,
powerful, freer, happier citizen who enjoys a better life. During this period, public education
system played a fundamental role that was the equivalent of religion during colonisation
times. All these geopolitics actions are a critical heritage of poverty in the present and
therefore corrective actions should be applied such as compensations and return of land to
original owners (Cobb and Diaz, 2009).
Another important book was The Wealth of Nations written by the moral philosopher Adam
Smith in 1776 which can symbolize the bible of classical economics (known also as political
economics) with its metaphor of the invisible hand and ideas about rational self-interest
nature of mans behaviour (not humans as women and men) or as modern economists have
labelled utility-maximising behaviour. According to these theories, mans economic
activities in a competitive free market are primarily driven by selfishness where supply and
demand are self-regulated by their respective costs and prices which tend to be fair for
producers and consumers and this ultimately would lead to economic prosperity for the
whole society. For instance, in one of Smith most cited quotes he states: But man has
almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren, and it is in vain for him to expect it
from their benevolence only. He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love
in his favour, and show them that it is for their own advantage to do for him what he
requires of them ... It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker,
that we can expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest Smith (1776,
p.25). Two centuries after, a new edition states that Smith believed that the most
persistent, the most universal, and therefore the most reliable of man's motives was the
pursuit of his own interests (Smith et al., 1976, p. xi).
Up to this point, development thinking has been deconstructed from its current vision
represented by the eight MDG supported by theories of sustainable development,
globalization, neoliberalism, neo-colonialism, economic growth and selfish rational
behaviour of man applied in a capitalist economy system. Links with inequality has been
highlighted as well as attempts to lift out of poverty traditional societies that desperately
need to be civilized by an hegemonic empire that is offering them a ladder that can have
access to through credit or by delivering attractive resources to their benevolent masters.
Such a ladder has five stages and an invisible hand will guide those who are self-interested
to make the right decisions. At the top of the ladder those who were able to consume,
destroy, kill, enslave, contaminate like there is no tomorrow will receive a medal of honour
labelled GDP (which Vandana Shiva calls Gross Domestic Problem).
This rational and economic thinking comes from the 14
th
century where scientific
perspectives derived from Cartesianism and competitive capitalism among European states
filled the gaps of meaning about humans existence left by the decline of Christianity during
the Reformation that led to the institutionalisation of an ideology of domination and

5

control over nature (Pattberg and Universiteit, 2007, p. 8). Moreover, the origins of
inequality, can be traced back to the origins of civilization 10,000 B.C. when humans were
hunter-gatherers which is the most sustainable way of living known to date and generally
equitable society that represents 99% of the existence of the human race on earth. Since
then, the major catalyst for a transition to modern society was the first agricultural
revolution that enabled the emergence and development of civilization (Dow G and Reed C,
2013). Thus marking the beginning of separation between culture and nature. Pattberg &
Universiteit (2007, p. 7) conclude that the enslavement of nature and the subsequent
enslavement of humans by other humans has led to a global state of affairs that is neither
morally nor practically sustainable and its consequences are still very alive today
represented by anthropocentric dreams of global domination.
Finally, under these arguments and after an attempt to deconstruct development thinking
through the review and critiques of some important theoretical influences and historic
events. The answer to the question about replacing the term development is no and yes.
No because the present connotation evokes something positive in the minds of the masses
and it would be wise to harness the momentum generated by the global crisis at social,
environmental and economic levels thanks to the MDG agenda. And yes in the sense that
this concept as a humanity driving force needs to recognize that we are interdependent and
eco-dependent. Therefore, the agenda of development should continue evolving towards an
eco-centric worldview that celebrates diversity, as there can be no fixed and final definition
of development; only suggestions of what it should imply in particular contexts (Hettne,
1995, p. 15).
Conclusion
Through the history of civilization, our worldview has been evolving under complex
circumstances and while humanity is currently facing a possible global collapse in the near
future, this crisis could represent our major opportunity to create a new synthesis that
combines the best techniques developed until now. In this effort, lessons from our past are
vital if we are to inherit a future that is worth living and perhaps the best resource that
civilization has created throw a tragic history of obsession with growth is that nowadays we
can bring global change in few years thanks to the interconnections created across the
world that is given birth to the biggest grassroots movement of history that has the
potential to bring to reality a so cherished utopia based on the wellbeing of all life which
would be a fair tribute to all the cultures and ecosystems extinguished during this always
evolving journey.
References
Cobb, C.W. and Diaz, P. (2009), Why global poverty?: A companion guide to the film The end of
poverty?, Robert Schalkenbach Foundation; Cinema Libre Studio, New York, Canoga Park, CA.
Dow G and Reed C (2013), The Origins of Inequality. Insiders, Outsiders, Elites, and Commoners,
Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 121 No. 3.
Gorrie, J.R. (2013), The China crisis: How China's economic collapse will lead to a global depression.

6

Hettne, B. (1995), Development theory and the three worlds: Towards an international political
economy of development, Longman development studies, 2nd ed., Longman Scientific &
Technical; Copublished in the United States by John Wiley, Essex, England, New York, NY.
Pattberg, P. and Universiteit, V. (2007), Conquest, Domination and Control. Europes Mastery of
Nature in Historic Perspective, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Vol. 14.
Pieterse, J. (2010), Development theory: Deconstructions/reconstructions, Theory, culture & society,
2nd ed, SAGE, Los Angeles, London.
Rostow, W.W. (1960), The stages of economic growth: A non-communist manifesto, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge [England], New York.
Sachs, J. (2005), The end of poverty: Economic possibilities for our time, Penguin Press, New York.
Sachs, W. (2010), The development dictionary: A guide to knowledge as power, 2nd ed, Zed Books,
London, New York, N.Y.
Smith, A., Cannan, E. and Stigler, G.J. (1976), An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of
nations, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
United Nations (2005), Report on the World Social Situation. The Inequality Predicament.
United Nations (2013), Inequality matters: Report of the world social situation 2013, New York.
United Nations (2014), The Millennium Development Goals Report Report.
Watts, M. (2009), Neocolonialism, in Watts, M. (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Human
Geography, Elsevier, pp. 360364.






























7






ASSIGNMENT COVER
SHEET

DISTANCE EDUCATION - POSTGRADUATE
SCHOOL OF GLOBAL STUDIES, SOCIAL
SCIENCE AND PLANNING
GPO BOX 2476V, MELBOURNE, VIC 3001
AUSTRALIA
PHONE:: 9925 2328

STUDENT
Family name Given Name Student Number
GALINDO SANTIAGO S3441591


STUDENT CONTACT TELEPHONE NUMBER: 0422017081

STUDENT CONTACT ADDRESS: 4 ADAMSON ST, VIC 3094

STUDENT EMAIL: S3441591@student.rmit.edu.au

Course/Unit Code Assignment No. Date Due
HUSO2074
1 5/9/2014
Program Name Course Name
Master of Sustainable Practice Theories of Development
Tutor (or Markers) Name
Peter Marden

School Date
Stamp




8

Declaration and Statement of Authorship:
1. I hold a copy of this assignment which can be produced if the original is lost/ damaged.
2. This assignment is my original work and no part of it has been copied from any other students work or from
any other source except where due acknowledgement is made.
3. No part of this assignment has been written for me by any other person except where such collaboration has
been authorised by the lecturer/teacher concerned.
4. I have not previously submitted this work for this or any other course/unit.
5. I give permission for this work to be reproduced, communicated, compared and archived for the purpose of
detecting plagiarism.
6. I give permission for a copy of my marked work to be retained by the School for review and comparison,
including review by external examiners.
7. I understand that Plagiarism is the presentation of the work, idea or creation of another person as though it is
your own. It is a form of cheating and is a very serious academic offence that may lead to expulsion from the
University. Plagiarised material can be drawn from, and presented in, written, graphic and visual form,
including electronic data, and oral presentations. Plagiarism occurs when the origin of the material used is not
appropriately cited.
8. Plagiarism includes the act of assisting or allowing another person to plagiarise or to copy my work.

Student Signature


Further information relating to the penalties for plagiarism, which range from a notation on your student file to
expulsion from the University, is contained in Regulation 6.1.1 Student Discipline
(http://mams.rmit.edu.au/j4lb68xx36oj1.pdf) and Academic Policy and Procedures: Plagiarism
(http://www.rmit.edu.au/browse;ID=sc98jdzwgdhh1#section2)

IMPORTANT:
This coversheet is for use only by students enrolled in distance courses.
Results can be check online at http://www.rmit.edu.au/myresults,
Please refer to your Course Guide on details of Assignment Submission.