As an outgrowth of Western thought and imperialism, development work historically has been structured to integrate states into the global economy (Wallerstein, Galtung). Overall development has been considered "successful" when colonial/post-colonial states interact and thrive within the global economy. However, integration into a world economy inevitably leads to some cases of underdevelopment because the system’s structure is based on being economically viable and competitive: some states will “win” (have more desirable products, cheaper prices, etc.) and other states necessarily will “lose” (have fewer and less-useful products, higher prices, etc.) (Wallerstein, Galtung). Development’s goal of integration into a fixed economic structure such that some must fail when others succeed undeniably leads to underdevelopment.
Notably, this structure of economic-focused development ignores, or even worse, impoverishes, other crucial areas of states. For example, Escobar discusses the inattention to culture in development. Escobar argues that there should be a return of local culture and context-specificity in critical analysis of development. Further, he argues that anthropologists should consider effects on culture when looking at how development occurred. Similarly, Thiong’o shows how the post-colonial infusion of English disintegrated African language and culture. In fact, as evident in theatrical, lyrical and written artistic works, the imperialism influence over the choice of language itself also extended to change the concepts expressed through language. In sum, development has focused on economic gains and integration in the global market, not on cultural contexts or social progression.
I think development must be concerned economics, and, further, that economic development must be a main concern. However, even while focusing on economics, the structure of development also should be and can be changed to include culture. Elaborating on ideas from the readings, I posit two ways to integrate culture into the structure of development. First, culture must be integrated in how developers work with people in developing nations. This may be done by having developers speak the language of the region being developed (Thiong’o, Galtung) and creating “horizontalization” by involving domestic associations that are organized around cultural communities (Galtung). A third way is to have a “go-between” country (Galtung). While this will not promote the culture of the developing nation, it will minimize the degree of imperialism of the dominant culture.
Second, culture must be integrated in the actual work that the developers produce. The idea is to begin with cultural values and to add creativity in order to develop products that will be competitive in the world-economy. Taking advantage of local culture and geographies (Wallerstein), can lead to innovation. Creating new culturally influenced products for sale on the global market is particularly important for nations whose marketable resources are finite, not part of global demand, or unavailable due to poor infrastructure or high distribution costs (Galtung).
While it is easy to theorize of culture combined with creativity resulting in new economically competitive products, how exactly can development workers induce this sort of innovation? Further, underdevelopment would subsist, despite economic development, if resources do not reach through the nation. Thus, what political development needs to occur in order to ensure that the economic profits are distributed for the benefit of the whole nation-state? Finally, how can we separate the use of professional international work languages from eroding the use of local, native languages?
No comments:
Post a Comment