LIMITS OF POST-DEVELOPMENT IN THE CRITIQUE OF DEVELOPMENT

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4215/rm2022.e21001

Abstract

The theoretical current known as post-development emerged in the 1980s. Its proponents were authors with different analytical focuses and diversified themes, firmly committed to a radical critique of the idea of development. In this regard, this article aims to analyze post-development's theoretical and propositional basis, evaluating its arguments' consistency and the coherence between the basis of this argument and its propositional direction. Initially, the main issues raised by post-development are examined, paying particular attention to the two main strands of criticism of the concept of development. Next, there is a counterargument to the criticisms discussed above to demonstrate their inconsistencies and possible contributions to the reflexive and operational development field. Based on this debate, it is concluded that post-development makes valid and necessary criticisms, if these are intended to improve development projects that aim to address the objective reality of a large part of the Brazilian and global population. However, stripped of this crucial practical focus and an awareness of the gravity of different populations' social situations, post-development contributes little to overcome the history of failures of different development proposals.


Keywords: Development, Post-Development, Alternative Development, Theoretical-Propositional Critique.

Author Biographies

Maiara Tavares Sodré, State University of the Center-West, Irati (PR), Brazil

PhD in Geography from the São Paulo State University "Júlio de Mesquita Filho", Presidente Prudente Campus - UNESP/PP (2021), with a FAPESP scholarship. Member of research groups/CNPq Regional and Agricultural Dynamics (UNESP/PP); Agrarian and Environmental Studies (UFPel); and Territory, development and agriculture (USP). Member of the Agrarian Studies Network (REA Brasil), made up of research groups from UFPel, UNESP/Rio Claro, UNIFAL, UNIMONTES and UFS. She is currently a professor at the Federal Institute of Santa Catarina (IFC), Campus São Bento do Sul.

Rosangela Aparecida de Medeiros Hespanhol, State University São Paulo Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Presidente Prudente (SP), Brazil.

PhD in Geography (2000) by UNESP in Rio Claro. She carried out a postdoctoral internship on sustainable rural development at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales under the supervision of Professor Ignacy Sachs (2004/2005). She was a professor at the Department of Education of the State of São Paulo (1986-1988) and at the University Center of Três Lagoas at UFMS (1988-1993). She is currently a professor of the Undergraduate and Postgraduate Courses in Geography at UNESP, Pres. Prudent. CNPq Productivity Scholarship. He is a referee for the following agencies: National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Research Support Foundation of the State of São Paulo (Fapesp), Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (Capes), State Research Support Foundation of Maranhão (FAPEMA). Reviewer for journals: Confins - Franco-Brazilian Magazine, Campo-Território Magazine, GeoUerj, Kultur Magazine (Spain), Formation Magazine, Caderno Prudentino de Geografia. She has experience in the area of Geography (Human, Regional and Agrarian), working mainly with the following themes: Public Policies; Spatial organization; Food safety; Social Reproduction Strategies; Collective Organizations; Productive Diversification; Local/Regional Development.

References

BAUMAN, Z. Modernidade e ambivalência. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar, 1999. 334p.
COSTA, S. Desprovincializando a sociologia: a contribuição pós-colonial. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, São Paulo, v. 21, n. 60, p. 117-134, fev. 2006.
DE VRIES, P. Don't compromise your desire for development! A lacanian/deleuzian rethinking of the anti-politics machine. Third World Quarterly, v. 28, n. 1, p. 25-43, 2007.
DELGADO, N. G.; BONNAL, P.; LEITE, S. P. Desenvolvimento territorial: articulação de políticas públicas e atores sociais. Relatório parcial. Rio de Janeiro: IICA – OPPA/CPDA/UFRRJ, 2007.
ESCOBAR, A. La invención del Tercer Mundo: construcción y deconstrucción del desarrollo. Caracas, Venezuela: Fundación Editorial el perro y la rana, 2007. 419p.
ESCOBAR, A. Planning. In: SACHS, W. (ed.). The Development Dictionary: a guide to knowledge as power. 2nd. ed. London: Zed Books, 2010. p. 145-160.
ESCOBAR, A. Una minga para el postdesarrollo. America Latina em Movimento, Quito, ano XXXIII, época II, p. 26-30, jun. 2009.
ESTEVA, G. Development. In: SACHS, W. (ed.). The Development Dictionary: a guide to knowledge as power. 2nd. ed. London: Zed Books, 2010. p. 1-23.
ESTEVA, G. Más allá del desarrollo: la buena vida. America Latina em Movimento, Quito, ano XXXIII, época II, p. 1-5, jun. 2009.
FRASER, N. Rethinking recognition. New Left Review, London, v. 3, p. 107-120, May/June 2000.
FURTADO, C. O mito do desenvolvimento econômico. 3. ed. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 2000. 92p.
HOBART, M. Introduction: the growth of ignorance? In: HOBART, M. (ed.). An anthropological critique of development: the growth of ignorance? London: Routledge, 1993. p. 1-30.
MARKUSEN, A. Fuzzy concepts, scanty evidence, policy distance: the case for rigour and policy relevance in critical regional studies. Regional Studies, Brighton, v. 33, n. 9, p. 869-884, 1999.
MASSEY, D. Filosofia e política da espacialidade: algumas considerações. GEOgraphia, Niterói, ano 6, n. 12, p. 7-23, 2004.
MASSEY, D. La conceptualización del espacio y la cuestión de la política en un mundo globalizado. In: SILVA, J. B. da; LIMA, L. C.; ELIAS, D. (org.). Panorama da geografia brasileira I. São Paulo: Annablume, 2006. p. 11-19.
MASSEY, D. Pelo espaço: uma nova política da espacialidade. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 2008. 312p.
MONTENEGRO GÓMEZ, J. Desenvolvimento em (des)construção: narrativas escalares sobre desenvolvimento territorial rural. 2006. Tese (Doutorado em Geografia) — Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Presidente Prudente, 2006.
MONTENEGRO GÓMEZ, J. Desenvolvimento em (des) construção: provocações e questões sobre desenvolvimento e geografia. In: FERNANDES, B. M.; MARQUES, M. I. M.; SUZUKI, J. C. (org.). Geografia Agrária: teoria e poder. São Paulo: Expressão Popular, 2007. p. 39-54.
MONTENEGRO GÓMEZ, J. Los límites del consenso – la propuesta de desarrollo territorial rural en América Latina. In: FERNANDES, B. M. (org.). Campesinato e agronegócio na América Latina: a questão agrária atual. São Paulo: Expressão Popular, 2008. p. 249-274.
MORAES, A. C. R. Na trilha do purgatório: política e modernidade na geografia brasileira contemporânea. In: SILVA, J. B. da; LIMA, L. C.; DANTAS, E. W. C. (org.). Panorama da Geografia Brasileira II. São Paulo: Annablume, 2006. p. 39-46.
MORIN, Edgar. A via para o futuro da humanidade. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 2013. 392p.
PACIONE, M. Applied geography: in pursuit of useful knowledge. Applied Geography, v. 19, p. 1-12,1999.
PEET, R. Imaginários do desenvolvimento. In: FERNANDES, B. M.; MARQUES, M. I. M.; SUZUKI, J. C. (org.). Geografia agrária: teoria e poder. São Paulo: Expressão Popular, 2007. p. 19-37.
PEET, R; HARTWICK, E. Theories of development: contentions, arguments, alternatives. 2nd. ed. New York: The Guil Ford Press, 2009. 324p.
PIETERSE, J. N. Development Theory: deconstructions/reconstructions. 2nd. ed. London: SAGE, 2010.
PIETERSE, J. N. My paradigm or yours? Alternative Development, Post-Development, Reflexive Development. Development and Change, Oxford, v. 29, p. 343-373, 1998.
POLLARD, J.; HENRY, N.; BRYSON, J.; DANIELS, P. Shades of grey? Geographers and policy. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, London, v. 24, i. 2, p. 131-136, 2000.
RADOMSKY, G. W. Desenvolvimento, pós-estruturalismo e pós-desenvolvimento: a crítica da modernidade e a emergência de "modernidades" alternativas. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, São Paulo, v. 26, n. 75, p. 149-162, fev. 2011.
RAHNEMA, M. Poverty. In: SACHS, W. (ed.). The Development Dictionary: a guide to knowledge as power. 2nd. ed. London: Zed Books, 2010. p. 174-194.
RIBEIRO, G. L. Poder, redes e ideologia no campo do desenvolvimento. Novos Estudos CEBRAP, São Paulo, v. 27, n. 1, p. 109-125, mar. 2008.
RIST, G. The history of development: from western origins to global faith. 3. ed. London: Zed Books, 2008. 288p.
SACHS, I. Desenvolvimento: includente, sustentável, sustentado. Rio de Janeiro: Garamond, 2008. 151p.
SACHS, W. Introduction. In: SACHS, W. (ed.). The Development Dictionary: a guide to knowledge as power. 2nd. ed. London: Zed Books, 2010a. p. xv-xx.
SACHS, W. One world. In: SACHS, W. (ed.). The Development Dictionary: a guide to knowledge as power. 2nd. ed. London: Zed Books, 2010b. p. 111-126.
SACHS, W. Preface to the New Edition. In: SACHS, W. (ed.). The Development Dictionary: a guide to knowledge as power. 2nd. ed. London: Zed Books, 2010c. p. vi-xiv.
SACHS, W. The archaeology of the develompent idea: six essays. Interculture, Montreal, v. XXIII, n. 4, p. 1-37, Fall 1990.
SAID, E. W. Orientalismo: o Oriente como invenção do Ocidente. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1990. 370p.
SAQUET, M. A. O conhecimento popular na praxis territorial: uma possibilidade para trabalhar com as pessoas. Geotema, Roma, Supplemento 2019, p. 5-16, 2019.
SEVILLA GUZMÁN, E.; WOODGATE, G. Agroecology: foundations in agrarian social thought and sociological theory. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, London, v. 37, n. 1, p. 32-44, 2013.
SHIVA, V. Monoculturas da mente: perspectivas da biodiversidade e da biotecnologia. São Paulo: Gaia, 2003. 240p.
SHIVA, V. Resources. In: SACHS, W. (ed.). The Development Dictionary: a guide to knowledge as power. 2nd. ed. London: Zed Books, 2010. p. 243-259.
SOKAL, A.; BRICMONT, J. Imposturas intelectuais: o abuso da Ciência pelos filósofos pós-modernos. 4. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Record, 2010. 316p.
SOUZA, M. L de. A teorização sobre o desenvolvimento em uma época de fadiga teórica, ou: sobre a necessidade de uma "teoria aberta" do desenvolvimento sócio-espacial. Revista Território, Rio de Janeiro, v. 1, n. 1, p. 5-22, 1996.
SOUZA, M. L. de. Os conceitos fundamentais da pesquisa sócio-espacial. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil. 2013. 319p.
VEIGA, J. E. da. Neodesenvolvimentismo: quinze anos de gestação. São Paulo em Perspectiva, São Paulo, v. 20, n. 3, p. 83-94, jul./set. 2006.
WATTS M.; PEET, R. Conclusion: towards a theory of liberation ecology. In: PEET, R.; WATTS, M. (ed.). Liberation ecologies: envinronment, development, social movements. London: Routledge, 1996. p. 260-269.
Published
15/01/2022
How to Cite
SODRÉ, Maiara Tavares; DE MEDEIROS HESPANHOL, Rosangela Aparecida. LIMITS OF POST-DEVELOPMENT IN THE CRITIQUE OF DEVELOPMENT. Mercator, Fortaleza, v. 21, jan. 2022. ISSN 1984-2201. Available at: <http://www.mercator.ufc.br/mercator/article/view/e21001>. Date accessed: 25 apr. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.4215/rm2022.e21001.
Citation Formats
Issue
Vol 21 (2022)
Section
ARTICLES
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain the copyright and grant MERCATOR the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows the sharing of the work with recognition of the authorship of the work and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are authorized to sign additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., publish in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their personal page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes as well as increase the impact and citation of the published work (see The Effect of Free Access).
  4. Authors are responsible for the content of the manuscript published in the journal.