Development: Freedom or Economics?

When we define development, we must define what we aspire development to mean along with the reality of what development currently is. As the title of our class notes, development in its current form is tied to politics. In it’s purist form, development is freedom as Amartya Sen and my classmates have noted. Development encompasses accesses to basic rights such as food, shelter, education, and healthcare with a lens for equality in the distribution of these resources. This is why most of us in this class work in the field, to increase access to basic human rights, standards of living, to fight poverty and inequality.

However, is this the global understanding of the word development, is this the understanding of development in politics? Is there even a clear view on what development stands for within the “development sector”? When we discuss development, many people automatically think of not only “international development” but also economic development. It seems the terms' most common use is in reference to international economic development. Would we call Meals on Wheels (a US non-profit bringing meals directly to those in need) a development agency? We’d like to say yes, but in reality, that’s not the language used to describe domestic non-profits.

The lack of consensus around the definition of the word development reflects the complexity of the field itself. I keep wondering: Why do we need to define it? Is it to bring a common goal or mission to development actors? With all the talk about one-size-does-not-fit-all, will there ever be a common mission that can define all “development” actors? Or maybe it’s simply to be reflective?

Thoughts?

Comments

[lparewski]

Catherine, you make an interesting connection between Meals on Wheels and development agencies. I agree that many would not consider US non profits development agencies. Similarly, I'm curious to know how many think of the US as a developing country.

Additionally, I've gone back and forth on the question of how essential a definition for development actually is. I've ended up with: a definition, even if its vague, would be good to have. With so many people working in the field, a definition could be something we can unite and focus our work around.

[Bruce]

Catherine,

I completely agree that development is a difficult term to attach a definition to. It seems that there is no shortage of definitions that attempt to describe what development is. Development practitioners and theorists tend to lump numerous activities into the term "development" as they would define it. While this has certainly made our work as students of development more confusing, I find that because there are so many definitions and that these "lumped activities" are so often described as development to serve agendas, a normative definition is important to abide by. Consider the idea of "going green" for a moment. While originally it meant something, it is very little more than a marketing tool today. It has been hijacked in a sense and the term "green" is nearly meaningless because of it. If development is to remain meaningful and viable, it needs definitions and debates about them. It must be thoroughly argued, discussed and disputed in order to prevent “development” from being taken freely by those whom would justify actions in favor of their agendas as development. To this end I also believe that it is important to determine what is NOT development.

[Christina P]

I agree with the view that development is difficult to define and has many facets and interpretations. Your comment about distinguishing between what we want development to be versus what it is struck me. Sometimes the cases we read in class about development programs seemed like taking one step forward and two steps back, so to speak. Isn’t this often the case when issues of human rights are dependent upon political institutions?

There is a connection, I think, between economic development and development as freedom and not necessarily a disconnect. Increased freedom often follows improved economic outcomes because these outcomes expand one’s opportunities for development.