11

DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES OR ALTERNATIVES TO DEVELOPMENT:1 THE CREATIVE WHIRLWINDS OF THE ALTERNATIVES

INTRODUCTION
The objective of this essay is to make an inquiry as to what alternative development really is. To do this, the focus of this essay will be centered on deconstructing the concept to its roots, in order to clarify its true meaning. (See Figure 1) The first part of the essay will be dedicated to the task of conceptualizing alternative development. This will be done by critically answering questions such as what is development and what do we mean by alternative? (Alternative to what?; Alternative to whom?; Why and how is alternative development made?) In doing so, it will give readers a clearer idea of the rationale of the concept of alternative development. Plausibly, the question alternative to what will require the analysis of at least some of the present trends in development thinking, such as: (a) mainstream conventional development, (b) people-centered development and (c) post development. Is alternative development the simple dialectical opposition to conventional development? Is post-development an alternative development trend? In this section of the essay, three elements will be of interest in each trend analyzed: the particular features that identify it; its relationship with alternative development, and a case example which illustrates it. Finally, in the third part of the essay, a comparison matrix of these development trends will be discussed. This matrix will give a birds eye view of each trends main objectives, principles, actors and practice (synoptic case studies). This corpus of theory and empirical evidence will serve as a critical source to discuss the future of alternative development.

CONCEPTUALIZATION OF ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT

When we look into a mirror we think the image that confronts us is accurate. But move a millimetre and the image changes. We are actually looking at a never-ending

1 The title is based on the criticisms Nederveen Pieterse (2001:108) does to representatives of the Post-development current way of thinking,

127

CARLOS ZEPEDA

range of reflections. But sometimes a writer has to smash the mirror for it is on the other side of that mirror that the truth stares at us. Harold Pinter, Nobel Prizewinner in Literature 2005.2 What is alternative development? What are its objectives and key features? Reflecting on Pinters allegoric insight, could we say that alternative development is just an inverted mirror of conventional, mainstream development? If so, is alternative development a never-ending range of reflections on the concept of development? What are its objectives, methods and why does it claim to be alternative? Alternative to what, to whom? In order to investigate the real meaning of alternative development, it might be necessary to smash the mirror and look beyond the concept. We should be asking ourselves more radical questions: instead of theorising about what alternative development is or is not, and whether actual development is failing to bring welfare, agency and human rights to people, ask why we need and how should we make alternative development. Alternative development could be defined in simple terms as an ideology that argues for the rectification of existing imbalances in social, economic, and political power. (Friedmann, 1992:9). Distorted or not, alternative development may be argued to be more than just a critical-creative-mirror of responses to conventional development shifting in position as mainstream development shifts (Nederveen-Pieterse, 2001:74). From Friedmans point of view, it is clear that alternative development goes beyond the status quo of conventional development discourse. Alternative development is inevitably centered in the politics of claiming because it seeks to be the intellectual voice of the disempowered by trying to put forward in the development agenda their moral claims as a response to the hegemonic powers that oppress them. Thus, alternative development could be seen as the champion of the poor in that it advocates for their social and political empowerment. How does alternative development do that? Friedmann argues that in order to obtain local empowering beyond the typical grass roots empowerment, the key role of the state is vital because communities are not gemeinshaftlich.3 On the other hand, alternative development may be seen as a different, creative way of constructing development. Different to what? Different to mainstream or conventional development. from Nederveen-Pieterses (2001: 73-74) perspective, alternative development constructs its identity upon its relationship with its dialectical nemesis, conventional development, and can be seen as (a) a

The text has been emphasized in bold by the author of this essay. See Friedmann, (1992:7) This term refers to the idea that communities are not always harmonious spaces of solidarity and unified goals. Communities are not always morally right because social tensions do exist in territorial communities and also in political communities. Power struggles may be seen because of religious, ethnic, social class, caste, linguistic and gender differences.
3

128

DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES OR ALTERNATIVES TO DEVELOPMENT

loose profile trend in development theory and practice, (b) a paradigm, or (c) a post-paradigmatic way of thinking about alternative development.

CONVENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: THE PREDATOR OF ALTERNATIVES?

Nederveen-Pieterse (2001: 73) also states, that the core problem in trying to identify alternative development as a unit is that what defines it, namely its concerns on introducing alternative practices4 and redefining the goals of development5; has been continuously incorporated as add-on features and co-opted by conventional development. In other words, conventional development has been a mimetic alternatives predator and thus also the greatest challenge for constructing a concise definition of alternative development, because it necessarily implies a convergence between alternative and conventional development discourse and practice. Evidence on this issue is provided by the fact that participation is now a mainstream development discourse. Yet there is a disclaimer: mainstream development does not truly practice real participation, but rather, participulation (Carmen, 1996: 42), because mainstream development uses it only as a means to manipulate consent rather than empowering the people. This is the real world of development and its alternatives: if a practice does not question and address power relations, most surely it will not be a real alternative for development but rather for the maintenance of the status quo: The most fundamental issues of development are, at their core, issues of power. (Korten, 1990:214)

ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT AS LOOSE PROFILE?

Alternative development as an ideology is in continuous dialectic opposition to mainstream, growth-maximizing strategies, and the individualistic-positivistic rationale of modernization; inevitably it features a loose profile which gives it a certain heterogeneous nature. Hitherto, it is also this dialectic process which confers alternative development its own distinct rationale and also a certain degree of homogeneity: a moral justification centered in claiming for the expansion and defense of (a) human rights, (b) citizen rights and (c) the florishing of the people. (Friedman, 1992: 9-11) But if conventional development is mainstreaming alternative development and incorporating its concerns and goals into actual development practice and discourse (for example, the World Bank now incorporates participatory initiatives in every development intervention it undertakes) then why do we need alternative development? Furthermore, is alternative development a real alternative that goes beyond the failures of development? Has alternative develop-

4 5

Ie. community participation ie. shifting development goals from GDP growth to human development)
129

CARLOS ZEPEDA

ment been able to offer an alternative scope to the end-of-the-road crisis of conventional development?

ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT AND ITS MORAL JUSTIFICATION

Nederveen-Pieterse (2001) argues that while alternative development has had major merit and success (it has developed several perspectives on the agency, methods and objectives of development) this is counterbalanced by the fact that alternative development has failed to (a) build a clear perspective on micromacro relations, (b) construct a truly macro-approach of development, and (c) develop a coherent theoretical position. What makes it more difficult is that alternative development necessarily has to go beyond the failures of conventional development, and differentiate itself from conventional development if it wants to be alternative and survive. Development as a concept is confronted with the fact that the development strategies that have been followed to date have been incapable of overcoming poverty, social exclusion and defending the human rights of the people. (Korten, 1992; Parfitt, 2002:1-11) Inevitably then, alternative development will have to build upon new morally suitable grounds, and that is why it is also consolidating a good trend, as scholars are now concerned with the ethics of development (Des Gasper, 2004:1-14), and why development should be different from how it is now conceived. As Chambers (1983) states, at the end all our efforts should be centered on the people and how to bring about good change, for them.

TRENDS IN DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVES

So what is alternative? According to Nederveen-Pieterse, (2001:75), alternative generally refers to three spheres: those of agents, methods and objectives (or values) of development. This is the thread in the next part of this essay: the actual development trends in development perspectives. Conventional or mainstream development Conventional development could be defined as a growth-centered development (Korten, 1992: 61). This view basically purports that poverty and underdevelopment result from inadequate capital investment to overcome low levels of productivity and employment. In this trend in development, individualism and the supposed utility maximizing behavior of individuals occupy the centre stage of its rationale, theory and practice, which has led scholars to call it the economic approach (Becker, 1992). The favored strategy in this kind of approach has been to focus on capital investment in order to stimulate economic growth. So, if the recipe for growth is to invest, from where does the capital come? It may come from domestic savings, foreign assistance, or foreign investment (Korten, 1992) So the expected output is, in other words, a typical case of a lets wait and see promise
130

DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES OR ALTERNATIVES TO DEVELOPMENT

that the resulting growth in economic output will extend and trickle down benefits to the poor. In other words, growth-centered development is always trying to focus on the expansion of the economic pie with a promise of automatic benefits for all thanks to the invisible hands of the market. What is excluded from this analysis is, inevitably, the issue of political resistance. This is best avoided by preventing redistribution efforts or claims in the development policy agenda. Their best defense is the slogan that if one looks after growth, equity will take care of itself. (Korten, 1992) It is in this approach where development transforms itself into creative destruction, (Schumpeter, 1947) because this economic laissez faire leaves the market unbridled and the state becomes co-opted by powerful interest groups. The holders of power (entrepreneurs) are not accountable to the state, and rather use power to preserve their privileged individual freedom, property rights and the entrepreneurial private interest which seeks to maximize its profit in a laissez faire market-centered society. This is commonly referred to as the neoliberal framework of thought. (Hinkelammert, 2002:133) Currently, the characteristics that identify conventional or mainstream development are associated with those of modernism and its main arguments, namely that the basis of solidarity becomes weaker and more abstract, allowing for the growth of individuality and freedom () the dominance of rational calculation () the progressive disenchantment of the social world. (Oxford Dictionary of Sociology, 2005). Synoptic case studies included in conventional development are found in the type of development favored in all the countries affected by the Washington Consensus in the form of Structural Adjustment Programmes, particularly in Latin America, where the IMF and the World Bank have been the key actors in pushing this trend into the development agenda. It is a known fact that conventional development in the body of mainstream neoliberal policies has been a total failure in bringing development. For example, just by checking the online news of 2006, one can see these examples in the headlines: Ines Bustillo, director of the Washington office of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) has recently stated that in 2005 Latin America had a third year of straight economic growth (4.3%) but still 40.6% of the whole population in the region (213 million people) lives in poverty and 16% of them in extreme poverty. Conventional development has not been helping the poor in countries like Peru, a neo-liberals dream where it has been estimated that GDP growth has been 6%, private investment has risen in 10%, debt status has ameliorated in the international markets, and has an expected inflation rate of 1.1% throughout the year. The other side of the story is one of injustice, exclusion and concentration of power: more than half of Peruvians are in poverty (51.6%), Peru occupies the 79th place (of 177) in human development according to the UNDP, and 10% of Peruvian society has the accumulated wealth of almost 40% of Perus income (BBC Mundo, 10 January 2006). The same story repeats itself through131

CARLOS ZEPEDA

out the majority of Latin American countries and other regions that have followed this neoliberal recipe in their development policies. Lastly, more recent accounts on development as growth-centered have been favored, namely, models of development though growth with equity, but still they have not made explicit efforts to explain why growth does not end poverty, and leaves the structural causes behind. People-centred development In people-centered development, the contrast with conventional development is remarkable. People-centered development seeks to put the table the other way around and instead of putting growth as the priority, the urge is to place economics at the service of people, a direct reversal of existing practice. (Korten, 1992: 65) In other words, policies directed to the peoples welfare and agencies are the most important ones. The crucial idea is to:
reverse the tendency toward concentrating power in impersonal and unaccountable institutions, returning it to people and communities and ensuring its equitable distribution. (Korten, 1992)

But what will it take to do such a big task? Basically people-centered development implies that there must be an empowerment process of the people and that empowering should be done by constructing the appropriate member accountable institutions and strengthening local resource control and ownership. Furthermore, to follow a people-centered development approach is not to say that economic growth is abolished alltogether but rather that it has to be the right-kind of growth. It puts economics to the service of people, so its call is not for a limitless unbridled growth, but growth that takes into account that the Earth is finite and that it requires a sustainable management of its resources in order to improve human well being (Ibid: 66). The requirements of a people-centered approach are basically to put forward three aspects: (a) justice: where the idea would be to have a fundamental restructuring of the economic and social system in order to empower the disempowered and thus, provide them with the means to expand their agency and welfare; (b) sustainability: where the disparities of unsustainable growth must be dealt with, and (c) inclusiveness: where the issue of real participation through empowerment of the people is the main issue at stake. The elements that compose the people-centered approach are easy to understand and remember: the protagonists are the people and the beneficiaries of the policies are also the people. Hence, means and ends are people-centered and so are all the policies. For instance, it is argued that local organizing needs to link with structural reforms from the local to the national and global levels by breaking down and providing alternatives to dualistic economic structures, integrating the modern and traditional sectors, and melding, redistributing, and reallocating the use of their assets (Ibid). People become emancipated. The
132

DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES OR ALTERNATIVES TO DEVELOPMENT

same is true if we examine what people-centered development seeks at the global level:
Breaking the unchallenged and unaccountable power of transnational capital and bringing transnational corporations under a system of controls and incentives that make them useful, accountable contributors to the creation of a just, sustainable and inclusive human society. (Ibid: 66)

Synoptic case studies exist but do not yet match the ideal of a peoplecentered approach, something acknowledged by Korten: That no models of a people-centered sustainable society exist seriously limits the credibility of our proposals Yet for him, this approach is idealistic only if one views survival as an idealistic goal in our contemporary world. In reality, one could draw links with alternative grass roots movements solidarity economics alternatives with this kind of approach. To be exact, a group of organized communities in San Vicente, El Salvador called Grupo Bajo Lempa have developed a people-centered development approach which puts its focus on the empowerment and welfare of the people in the participant communities. Moreover, they have developed more than 13 economic initiatives that are environmentally friendly, that do not seek growth maximization but are oriented towards an equitable redistribution of resources, etc. (see www.gbajolempa.net) Post-development What is needed is not development alternatives, but alternatives to development. () Not more Development but a different regime of truth and perception (Nederveen-Pieterse 2000) from Escobar, 1992b:412-414) For post-development, the issue at hand is that development has failed structurally as a concept and as a practice. The problem is not resuscitating development or seeking more alternatives of development within it. As NederveenPieterse (2000: 99-100) says, it is:
not that development strategies or projects could or should have been better planned or implemented. It is that development, as it imposed itself on its target populations, was basically the wrong answer to their true needs and aspirations. It was an ideology that was born and refined in the North, mainly to meet the needs of the dominant powers of a more appropriate tool to their economic and geopolitical expansion.

For the Post-development trend, the key to give real solutions to the negative effects of development and structural social and economical injustice, by searching for new, radical ways of thinking. That is, abolishing the quest for searching alternatives in development, and looking instead for alternatives to development. For Rahnema (1997:391), solidarity is the key fuel for thinking of new ways to bring more positive realities to people. Likewise, the end of development for

133

CARLOS ZEPEDA

Rahnema should not be an end to the search for new possibilities of change, for a relational world of friendship, or for genuine processes of regeneration able to give birth to new forms of solidarity. On the contrary, a new kind of trust can be built and the call is for a genuine work of self knowledge and selfpolishing in order to create a new aesthetic order. This ideology is critical and reactive to the following elements. It: (a) knows that poverty is not to be taken for granted, (b) knows that, in the end, Development = Westernization, (c) builds upon a radical critique of Modernism, (d) sees development as a manipulation of discourse, and (e) draws upon antimanagerialists insights and dichotomous thinking in the politics of postdevelopment (Nederveen-Pieterse, 2000: 99-110) Synoptic case studies in post development can be found in Gandhiism and Budhist economics. The idea of a reaction to Western know-how and ways of doing things is certainly present in this way of conceiving development. The radical notion of trying to find the ultimate truth through new ways of solidarity is certainly a key feature in the politics expressed in Gandhiism and Buddhist, and post-development even has Confucionist roots. (See Rahnema, 2000: 377)

CONCLUSIONS
Death Where was the dead body found? Who found the dead body? Was the dead body dead when found? How was the dead body found? Who was the dead body? Who was the father or daughter or brother Or uncle or sister or mother or son Of the dead and abandoned body? Was the body dead when abandoned? Was the body abandoned? By whom had it been abandoned? Was the dead body naked or dressed for a journey? What made you declare the dead body dead? Did you declare the dead body dead? How well did you know the dead body? How did you know the dead body was dead? Did you wash the dead body Did you close both its eyes Did you bury the body Did you leave it abandoned Did you kiss the dead body Harold Pinter (2005)

134

DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES OR ALTERNATIVES TO DEVELOPMENT

Development may not be declared dead as long as there are development alternatives and dialectical, creative ideologies and critical ways of conceiving reality. Development alternatives or alternatives to development, either of these ways at looking at the problem of the struggle of life vs. death, may lead to the search for new utopias (Franz Hinkelammert, 2001). Alternatives are not one but many, and all that they have in common is that their search for good change (Chambers, 1983) should lead to the expansion, the flourishing of human life. (Radin, 1987; Sen, 1999; Alkire, 2001)

135

CARLOS ZEPEDA

APPENDIX
Comparison matrix of development

Alternative Development
Conventional Development People Centered Post Development Alternative Modernities

Rationale
Growth centered, individualism. Knowledge is not indigenous and does not create knowledge points to connect the new knowledge with the conventional knowledge, it creates a hierarchy of knowledge instead. Development is a professional pursuit, you need to have the right skills to participate, which many people are lacking It is institutionalized, not based on peoples lives People Centered, solidarity knowledge may be provided by the people (locals, indigenous, etc.) No hierarchy Not a professional pursuit Not institutionalized but rather based on peoples lives Against development, conventional development has failed, Solidarity needed not more development but a different regime of truth and perception Different idea of modernity, attitude of questioning the present but one which puts the human beings first, rationale of creative adaptation. (Modernity is not one)

Objective
Maximize laissez faire, that is, maximize profit within unregulated markets. Empowerment of the people through access to resource control. Self reliance, diversification Not development alternatives but alternatives to development. Anti capitalist, antiimperialist, antiproductivist, antimarket Think with a difference to Western discourse on modernity. Not rationalistic but different principles: i.e. Solidarity, friendship, etc.

136

DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES OR ALTERNATIVES TO DEVELOPMENT

Principles
Free market, individual freedom, respect property rights, Self-reliance, diversification, economies of community, sharing of information and technology Think reality differently, and find the archaeology of development in order to change the discourse. Essentially local, selforganizing capacity of the poor Grass roots movements, peasants, urban marginals, deprofessionalized intellectuals Swadhyaya in India, and Sarvodaya in Sri Lank (p.400) Privilege culture specific knowledge Specific national/cultural site

Actors
IMF, World Bank, market The community, people, Grass roots movements Local societies in general, people

Practice & Case Studies

USA capitalism Landless Movements in Brazil Example in Bali 6 star hotel remote no phone, no television Peru: Oxapampa (example) of modern place Saudi Arabia

137

CARLOS ZEPEDA Figure 1 Analytical Mind map: Development alternatives or alternatives to development

Source: own analytical work done mainly on the basis of Friedmann (1992), Korten (1992), Nederveen-Pieterse (2001).

138

DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES OR ALTERNATIVES TO DEVELOPMENT

REFERENCES
Alkire, Sabina. Valuing Freedoms: Sens capability approach and poverty reduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001. Amoore, Louise. The Global Resistance Reader. London: Routledge; 2005. Biekart, Kees. The Politics of Civil Society Building: European Private Aid Agencies and Democratic Transitions in Central America. Amsterdam: International Books and the Transnational Institute; 1999. Carmen, Raff. Autonomous Development: Humanizing the Landscape. London: Zed. 1996. Chambers, Robert. Ideas for development. London: Earthscan. 2005. ---. Rural Development: putting the last first. London: Longman. 1983. Ferrero y de Loma-Osorio, Gabriel. From Project Aid to development process: contributions towards a Process Oriented Management. Valencia, Spain: Universidad Politecnica de Valencia; 2003 (Dec). Friedmann, John. Empowerment: The Politics of Alternative Development. Maldon MA: Blackwell. 1992. Hernandez, Vladimir. A.Latina: crecimiento en desigualdad. BBC Mundo (BBC News in Spanish). 2006 Jan 10; news8.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/business/ newsid_4599000/4599410). Hinkelammert, Franz. Critica a la Razon Utopica. Bilbao, Spain: Editorial Desclee de Brouwer. 2002. Korten, David C. People-Centered Development, Alternatives for a World in Crisis. In K. Bauzon (ed.) Development and democratization in the Third World : myths, hopes, and realities. Washington: Crane Russak; 1992. pp. 53-77. McLean, Iain and McMillan, Alistair. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press. 2003. Nederveen-Pieterse, Jan. After post-development. Third World Quarterly. 2000; 21(2):175-191. ---. Development Theory: Deconstructions and Reconstructions. London: Sage. 2001. Parfitt, Trevor. The End of Development?: Modernity, Post-Modernity and Development. London: Pluto. 2002. Pinter, Harold. Art, Truth & Politics. Svenska Akademien. The Nobel Foundation. Notes: Nobel Prize of Literature Lecture 2005 Sen, Amartya Kumar. Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press ; 2001.

139