‘[T]his dream (of development) ... progressively turned into a nightmare.

For
instead of the kingdom of abundance promised by theorists and politicians in
the 1950s, the discourse and strategy of development produced its opposite:
massive underdevelopment and impoverishment, untold exploitation and
oppression’ (Arturo Escobar 1995). Critically evaluate this statement.

The following essay seeks to critically evaluate Arturo Escobar's statement on how
he has viewed and conceptualised the concept of development and whether it can
be seen as a viable option for Third World developing states, particularly in Africa, or
whether it should be abolished entirely. As a result, in order to comprehend the
significance of the preceding statement, I will structure this essay as follows. First, I'll
go over development and the key assumptions about how a development state
should function and operate. Second, the essay will attempt to assess the viability of
development in these states by examining development successes and failures.
Finally, the essay will evaluate this development dream through the Post
Development school of thought to determine whether Escobar's statement is
accurate and whether this dream should be abandoned or transformed in a way that
sees development as an effective tool of post-colonial transformation, as seen in the
case of Asian tigers and their successful development project. Finally, I'll put all of
my information together in a way that allows me to come to a conclusion about
whether I agree with Escobar's statement or not. In order to present a more thorough
analysis of the issues, the essay will refer to key scholars in development and post-
development studies.

What is development?

Due to the general way it is frequently carried out, the study of development has
always been perceived as very complex and often being cited as yielding very little
success. This often traced back to its application and development as discourse. As
many influential thinkers have proposed alternatives to development. Development is
frequently interpreted as the improvement and enhancement of the economic,
political and social status of third-world countries in order for them to reach a certain
level of modernity. This is frequently facilitated by Western countries, organizations,
and institutions that provide investment and knowledge to struggling states.
Development, according to Cowen and Shenton, is an "ameliorative doctrine and set
of state practices to construct social and political order in capitalism" (Cowen and
Shenton 1996). They argue that as a result of these practitioners, many development
projects did not consider appropriate methods for each individual state, resulting in
development lacking the key function of growth, rather than being an effective tool it
was used to serve individual interests. This is inextricably linked to the notion of
development as a Western phenomenon, with successful development being
measured by the European standard of modernity. As a result, this put increasing
pressure on African states to not only utilise Western Models of development as
effective blueprints for change but it takes away from the Post-colonial discourse that
sought to do away with Western structures as this was linked to a nuanced form of
Neo colonialism. Development was seen to be an exercise where developing states
created their own metric of measurement of development creating their own unique
discourse in understanding how states may be better improved. This has also been
argued by Alan Thomas who characterises development as vision often described of
a desirable society one that was often Eurocentric or Western in nature (Thomas
1996). Development can be viewed through two lenses: ideological and structural,
which helps one understand how the development process will unfold in various
states.

Development as an Ideology

This focuses on development discourse and how it has evolved. A key argument that
has emerged is that will states accumulate resources and industrialize their
economies in order to facilitate a fast-growing economic system. In theory, this
presents a utopian idea of wealth generation for states and their citizens, but it has
not been translated practically. Scholars such as Fanon have lamented the inability
of African states and their leaders to navigate the creation of a social structure that
can be used to benefit the state through development projects that are frequently
supported by international investors. He contends that leaders frequently struggled
to keep promises made to their citizens during liberation struggles against
colonialism while appeasing Western donors by adhering to the terms of their
investments.

Development as Structural
Development through the lenses of structural discourse investigates how states are
structured and their capacity to implement policies that promote development. By
assessing the measures that have been implemented. Thandikwa Mkandawire notes
in her article "Thinking about Development States in Africa" that the institutional,
technical, administrative, and political aspects are critical to the success of the
development project (Mkandawire 2012). The following factors examine whether the
state is capable of realizing the concept of modern development, which underpins
political, social, and economic success and growth. Development through the lenses
of structural discourse investigates how states are structured and their capacity to
implement policies that promote development. By assessing the measures that have
been implemented. Thandikwa Mkandawire notes in her article "Thinking about
Development States in Africa" that the institutional, technical, administrative, and
political aspects are critical to the success of the development project (Mkandawire
2012). The following factors assess the state's ability to realize the concept of
modern development, which underpins political, social, and economic success and
growth. The problems surrounding development, on the other hand, create a very
impractical conception of how development can be measured and applied, and to
better understand this, I will refer to Lorenzo Fioramonti’s argument of development
and how the use of Gross Domestic Product as a unit of measurement of success
often falls short (Fioramonti 2012). This is due to the fact that GDP is frequently
grossly inaccurate and undercuts other factors that may be used. GDP is frequently
chastised for failing to capture the value of growth. This is because, while GDP may
appear to be significantly high, it may not translate into a general rise in living
standards and successful economic growth. Aram Ziai also argues that the units of
measurement and indices ranking “neglects social inequality and the tremendous
differences between living standards in the favelas and the residential estates” (Ziai
2013)

As a result of the growing literature on development's inability to bring prosperity but

rather oppression and even more underdevelopment, the following section will
examine Escobar's claim that development will eventually become a redundant
discourse.

Why hasn’t been able to carry the Promises that were envisioned in 1950?
John Rapley refers to a school of thought known as Post Development, in which he
contends that development is rooted in individual, state, and institutional interests,
with the ultimate goal being the attainment of development is deeply embedded in
Western conceptions of modernity that allow for the monopoly of power in these
developing states. (Rapley 2004).

Problems associated with Development

This may be linked directly to the ideologies of African leaders, who frequently
presented an incoherent and oppressive regime that sought to benefit only a select
few while leaving the majority of the state unaffected by investment. "The ideology of
development was explored as a means of producing political hegemony," writes Ake
(Ake 2005). By establishing political hegemony, Ake contends that development was
not a solution to Post Colonial developmental efforts of resource and service
allocation, but rather served as an effective mechanism for government and
institutions to usurp power and control, with only a small cohort of individuals
benefiting from the development project.

The second issue is the increased reliance of developing countries on foreign aid,
loans, and investment to maintain often fragile and volatile economic and political
states. According to dependency theory, "the state of underdevelopment is precisely
the result of the incorporation of Third World economies into the capitalist world
system dominated by the West and North America" (Randall and Theobald 1998). As
a result, Western states were frequently able to maintain strict control over how third-
world countries used investment while also making critical contributions to how
states' resources should be allocated. In the case of Lesotho's development
agencies, it should be noted that, while the attempt to alleviate poverty failed, the
country produced a kingdom that is extremely rich in resources; however, due to the
inefficiencies of these agencies in implementing key policies that would create viable
markets and stimulate the economy, Lesotho remains heavily reliant on international
assistance to bolster their economy (Ferguson and Harrison 1994). As a
consequence, any investment that came in was not used to improve and create
better public services, but rather to temporarily relieve respective governments'
social and economic pressures. As a result, there is a power imbalance between the
West and the developing world. As institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF
could not only name the terms of aid but also limit governments' autonomy.

Violence has often been a key characteristic of resource exploitation as well control
of power. For scholars such as Ashis Nandy bemoans how development was often
associated with the notion that violence is necessary in order for development to
take place therefore legitimating the use of violence in states as an important source
sacrifice that needs to be under carried, “the idea of development has as its
underside memories of violence and exploitation that went with the early phases of
development in the West and the idea includes the message that the
underdeveloped world should make similar blood sacrifices to develop” (Nandy
1995) This portrays violence as an inherent feature of development, which is
inaccurate because it allows for violence to be perpetrated and justified as part of the
developmental project in developing countries.

Rents are usefully defined by the late Douglass North as “returns that exceed the
opportunity cost of resources that might otherwise be deployed in a competitive
market. Natural resources can yield significant rents or returns from investment in
their extraction “(North 1993). "Rent-seeking can be broadly interpreted as activities
which seek to create, maintain, or change the rights and institutions on which
particular rents are based," according to the definition (Khan 1996). As a result, if
activities are changed, development may be harmed, further exacerbating the
problem of underdevelopment. Patronage networks and corrupt government regimes
have become common in developing countries, limiting what can be done to create
development opportunities.

What have Key theorists said?

The school of post development is the most vocal critic of development. It maintains
that "development as a discourse is articulated around an artificial construct that
must be conceptualized in different ways if the power of development is to be
challenged" (Escobar 1995). This assertion by Escobar reinforces his belief that
development is a failed project whose original goal was not to help developing
countries transition into a new globalised era, but rather to maintain and assert
power over the global South. The most important aspect of post development theory
is its rejection of all forms of development. In analysing Escobar's argument, it is
critical to recognize the impossibility of development by first acknowledging that it is
a construct, which will allow for deconstruction by challenging existing structures that
have been put in place to create lines of difference between the West and the South.

Success of Development

Development can be defined as "a rejection of the fundamental premises of colonial

rule, as well as a firm assertion of people of all races to participate in global politics
and lay claim to a global standard of living" (Ziai 2013). The point Ziai is seeking to
make is that development should be viewed as a project of state growth that puts an
emphasis on replacing colonial structures with societal values and traditions. This
supports the idea that a state's development schema does not have to be based on
a Eurocentric or Western Model, but rather on the aspirations of the local people and
the creation of a society based on cultural norms. When this fundamental idea
becomes more widely adopted the process of development will have much more
successful rates and this will in turn emphasise the need to move away from
Eurocentric models of state development.

What is the Future of development?

When attempting to answer the question about the future of development, it is critical
to evaluate both the successes and failures of the current discourse of development,
as a one-sided approach will limit the level of analysis, as both developmental and
post-developmental theorists have noted. N Scholars such as Nederveen Pieterse
have completely dismissed the concept of development, pointing out how inherently
Westernized it is and how several failed states that have undergone development
projects have demonstrated that the concept of development has lost its lustre in
recent years. Pieterse notes that “Western concepts of Nation state, civil society and
representative government are universal increasingly proved invalid”.(Pieterse
2010 )This is consistent with the notion that policymakers and development agencies
have overlooked contextual factors and culture when developing potential
development programs, resulting in many projects failing and a greater realization
that the concept of development was not a viable application in transforming and
industrializing their economies (Ravallion 2012).

Escobar's position is similar to Pieterse's in that he rejects development as a whole

because it is a discourse that presents a constructed narrative of third-world
countries that creates the impression that they need to be saved from themselves by
using Western conceptions of development create an idealistic state. As a result, the
needs of developing states can be subverted by imposing a narrative that creates a
state that is incapable of development and is instead forced to conform to Western
notions of modernity and development.

Therefore, Escobar maintains that he is not interested in “development alternatives

but rather alternatives to development” (Escobar 1995). This is extremely important
to note because it seeks to give us a clear analysis that was set out at the beginning
of the essay. It has been noted and seen that development has not produced the
utopian dream of Developing states of success and growth but rather it has made
third world countries poorer and more unstable than when they initially gained
independence in the 1950’s.

However, not all developmental theory scholars agree with Escobar's argument that
development is a failed ideology which can only be abandoned. Rather, they make
an argument that development policies and structures should have been adjusted so
that developers and developing countries can collaborate to ensure effective
development this argument has been noted in the case of Lesotho where supporters
of Development as an ideology place blame on the states poor form of governance
for the reason of Lesotho’s relatively slow development. It can be argued that if there
are good government policies that are put in place then development can succeed
as in the case of the Asian tigers as noted by world bank figures “The East Asian
tigers states and China are the most prominent examples of formerly poor countries
whose per capita income today surpasses that of some Northern States” (Ziai 2015).
This case of Asia shows the potential that development discourse may have it is
applied in the correct manner.
According to theorist Stuart Corbridge, development is critical, and that in order for it
to succeed, it must be carried out in a way that does not reject it in its entirety, but
rather looks for ways to make it more accessible by identifying its flaws and
considering alternative actions. Alternative development aims to look closely at the
flaws and find appropriate measures that could be effective. As Corbridge points out,
too much time has been spent debating the shortcomings of the Eurocentric
discourse that is involved in development analysis when time could be better spent
finding effective methods of poverty reduction. (Corbridge 1994)

Conclusion

In conclusion the essay sought out to critically look at Escobar’s statement and
effectively understand why has referred to development as a nightmare that could
not be contained there are key things that need to be considered. Firstly, a lot of the
literature on development has maintained that the idea of development was a
Eurocentric model, and this played a key role in its failure in many states. This is
because it is extremely difficult to take a European model of development and mirror
it in the global South notably in African states will often be unsuccessful as it fails to
take into consideration historical legacies and traditions. Secondly development
and the units of measurement over the past several years have proven to be
inaccurate and these indices like GDP and HDI may not produce the desired results
that will inform scholars and other interested parties about the successes and
failures of development projects. Thirdly development and its challenges can’t be
seen as one singular event but rather a culmination of government policies, access
to resources and the resource curse as well the rate at which development is
occurring measuring it against Eurocentric standards often creates a limited
interpretation thus overshadowing the success of developmental projects as a whole.
Therefore, in evaluating Escobar’s statement that notes “This dream of development
instead of the kingdom of abundance promised by theorists and politicians in
the 1950s, the discourse and strategy of development produced its opposite:
massive underdevelopment and impoverishment, untold exploitation and
oppression’ (Escobar 1995). I strongly support his argument that development has
been a failed as a project and has instead produced more underdevelopment and
unequal disparities between the developed and the developing states. However, it
would be unreasonable to abandon it in all its entirety rather a creation or revision of
the discourse surrounding development may prove to create more successful
projects in third world countries while ensuring that these states are receiving the
appropriate investment, knowledge to ensure a much smoother transformation.

Bibliography

Ake C .1996. “Democracy and Development in Africa” (Brookings Institution Press)

Corbridge, S 2007. ‘The (im)possibility of development studies’, Economy and

Society 36(2) p. 179-211.

Cowen M and Shenton R 1996 ‘Doctrines of Development’ (London, New York:

Routledge).

Escobar, A 1985. Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the

Third World (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press).

Ferguson, J 1994. ‘The anti-politics machine: “Development” and bureaucratic in

Lesotho

Fioramonti, L 2014. ‘The world's most powerful number: An assessment of

80 years of GDP ideology’, Anthropology Today 30(2): p. 12-15.

Khan M 2000. ‘Rents, Rent-seeking and Economic Development (Cambridge

University Press.

Mkandawire T 2001 ‘Thinking about developmental States in Africa’ Cambridge

Journal of Economics 25 (3) p.289- 313.

Pieterse, Jan Nederveen 2000 ‘After post-development’, Third World Quarterly

21(2) p.175-91.

Rapley J 2004. ‘Development Studies and the Post -Development Critique’ Progress
in development Studies 4(4) pg. 350-354.

Sen, Amartya (1999). ‘Development As Freedom’ (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

Thomas A 1996. ‘What makes good development management’ p. 9-17

Ziai, Arum (2016). ‘Post-development: Premature burials and haunting ghosts’,
Development and Change 46(4): 833-54.