DevISSues Vol. 24 No. 2 - The development of development studies

development of development studies

Colophon

DevISSues is published twice a year by the International Institute of Social Studies, PO Box 29776, 2502 LT The Hague, the Netherlands Tel +31 (0)70 4260 443 or +31 (0)70 4260 419 www.iss.nl devISSues@iss.nl

Editor Jane Pocock

Editorial Board Lee Pegler, Sunil Tankha, Sandra Nijhof

Design Ontwerpwerk, The Hague

Cover image Ontwerpwerk

Production OBT, Leiden

Circulation 5,000

The text material from DevISSues may be reproduced or adapted without permission, provided it is not distributed for profit and is attributed to the original author or authors, DevISSues and the International Institute of Social Studies.

ISSN 1566-4821. DevISSues is printed on FSC® certified paper.

From the Editorial Board

The development of development studies

I remember hearing ‘Birthdays are for reflection’. If that’s the case, this 70th Anniversary edition of DevISSues is spot on for timing. The three short essays (but also the staff-student dialogue) all challenge views on what is (should be) Development Studies.

Researchers from the IDS (Taylor & Leach) concur with most others on the need for development studies to be based on critical engagement with justice, empowerment and accountability and the need for collaboration, but give more focus on the need for internationalism (vs a fear of nationalism).

Agbonifo, on the other hand, is quite incisive about bias in the (intentional/ western progress) development studies tradition which we still largely accept. Indigenous knowledge is ok only if it accepts ‘our’ view of progress and much of the sustainable development narrative misses key issues (e.g., exclusion; emphasis on local and on culture/environment as valuable for and in themselves). In their view, development and justice do not have to mean growth and (often) only come about by contestation.

Agbonifo argues for both local resilience understanding/support and the dismantling of structures of domination and exploitation, something that Winters supports within their perspective on past migration-development thinking but also in terms of how we should think about it – our positionality. Past dominant ideas on the migration debate have moved from colonial labour use, to concerns about brain-drain, to the equally blind view that gains for all involved are or can be attained, to frequent nationalist fears of ‘the marouding hords (sic)’.

Let’s engage in a critical (pessimistic) view of migration, one where we do not blame migrants or focus on economic benefits, but where we expose and evaluate explicit strands of dominant modes of migration thinking (Winters). To many of these authors (including the staff-student chat on resilience and heatwaves) this requires continual, critical thinking and great sensitivity to social processes/governance and local dynamics.

To an ISS which, over these 70 years, has moved from a monarchy-supported training centre to a fully-fledged, critical space for development studies focused on social justice aspects of global processes, this is still both a mantra and a challenge. Yet as one of our celebration seminars underlined, we are all (in some way) complicit in these power structures/historical processes. ‘Our’ science incorporates injustices of colonialism for which we must both remain aware and keep in mind the question – who owns this science?

Happy Birthday ISS!!!

Dr Lee Pegler, Chair, DevISSues

Last week we celebrated our 70th birthday. Congratulations to all of us!

Established in 1952, ISS moved from providing capacity building for civil servants to offering a master programme in development studies; from training the trainers into a research-intensive university institute conducting high quality, socially relevant research with a strong PhD programme. Yet our key aspects remained the same: our core values of Social Justice and Equity, our critical social science approach and our strong ideology to make the world a better place.

The theme of our 70th anniversary is Reconnecting: with each other at ISS, with our alumni around the world, with our partners in the global South and with the city of The Hague. The pictures on the windows around our building of us holding hands nicely symbolize this theme. All those hands reaching out to each other feel like a warm embrace. The same hands are on the ISS flags on the Hofvijver near the Binnenhof and with them we send a great ISS message to all inhabitants and politicians in The Hague.

The Dies celebration on 13 October was one big feast of reconnecting with each other. The high tea for retired staff, the alumni lunch and visit from a group of alumni who graduated 50 years ago, and hence studied at Palace Noordeinde, greatly contributed to our festivities.

It was particularly nice to celebrate our Dies with current staff at Panorama Mesdag. For many colleagues who joined ISS during the pandemic this was their first opportunity to participate in such a celebration. It’s wonderful that we can now build our relationship with these colleagues in person!

We celebrated the Dies itself by reconnecting to the past. We travelled through time, from Palace Noordeinde to Hotel Wittebrug and Kortenaerkade, and took a peek into our future. It was about looking backwards in order to be able to move forwards. With the world in turmoil on many fronts, the shifting powers from global North to the global South, the importance of decolonizing knowledge and aid all make ISS’ knowledge and expertise even more relevant.

Our strong academic team has recently been augmented by three professorial promotions: Rosalba Icaza (the first woman full professor of colour at ISS), Lorenzo Pellegrini and Andrew Fisher. And two new professors joined ISS this autumn: Professor Arul Chib arrived from Singapore to become professor of Technology and Global Development; Professor Shuaib Lwasa, originally from Uganda but resident in the Netherlands for some time, joined ISS as professor of Urban Resilience and Global Development. The professional staff that have joined us recently will ensure that ISS can continue to offer top-notch services to aspiring development professionals well into the future.

Inge Hutter, Rector ISS

Noordeinde Palace – the first ‘home’ of ISS. In its early days, ISS taught civil servants from ‘developing countries’ so that they could return to their home countries to develop them. ©ISS

From the past to the present: Navigating the future of development studies

The ‘intentional’ incarnation of development was less an altruistic than a self-serving endeavour. The Cold War, processes of decolonization and domestic unrest in the US provided the context for the emergence of intentional development. More than anything else, fear that newly independent societies would pitch tent with the Communist Soviet block and the possibility, as a result, that the latter could gain global dominance largely informed President Harry Truman’s ‘Big Brother’ inaugural address in 1947.

He described formerly colonized societies as poor and in dire need of exactly those resources Western countries had in abundance and were willing to offer gratis. Truman advanced a discourse of intentional development of ‘poor’ countries by the ‘rich’ countries to help the former become like the latter. He effectively hid the causal link between the technological advancement of the ‘rich’ and over three centuries of ‘primitive accumulation’ and despoiliation inflicted on the so-called poor countries.

Truman’s erasure of ‘immanent’ development reduced development to one thing; what others do for you in order that you might become like them!

To date, the idea of development as efforts geared at ameliorating the dark-side of progress suffers erasure in both development theory and practice. The de-emphasis is not unintentional. The globalization of development – a view of development as a global phenomenon geared at becoming like the West – would be impracticable if alternative visions of what constitutes

development and how it was to be attained were in circulation. Development studies promoted the idea of universal development. The idea that ‘small is beautiful’, that ‘culture sits in place’ and that ‘development is local’ have little or no place in mainstream development theory and practice. Even though accepted as possibilities, the idea of globalized ‘intentional’ development relegates place-based development to the background.

Fudged within colonial contexts, development studies denied cognitive respect to non-Western societies and disregarded other knowledges, labelling them unscientific. Development in the metropole meant predation and expropriation of resources in distant lands for the good of the homeland. It was only necessary to dehumanize the ‘other’ and deny them history to legitimize the metropolitan definition of development. But that was only one side of the coin. Development also meant the ‘civilization’ of those whose bodies and resources were violated and expropriated for European benefit. Such a view of development fails to reckon that formerly colonized societies existed in varying historical processes of change, shaped by environment, history and social organization and spiritual cognition. While development studies increasingly recognizes indigenous knowledge as a legitimate way of seeing, this is only to the extent that it lines up with mainstream development studies. Similarly, indigenous knowledge is embraced only as it overlaps with scientific knowledge – it is not empirical enough to stand on its own as a legitimate and credible mode of seeing and being.

Disquiets within the field have failed to cut the umbilical cord linking development studies to hegemonic power bases. Development may well be a discourse of control as argued by Arturo Escobar. Even more insidious, development studies promotes the capture and construction of formerly colonized societies as sites for socioeconomic experimentation. Development through modernization, import-substitution

industrialization and neoliberalism rested on the view that poverty was an inherent pathology that could only be salvaged by the adoption of ‘modern’ practices and infusion of ‘missing’ Western ideas or capital. Yet the logic of identifying and adding the never-ending missing elements to attain the desired el dorado remains a staple of development studies. In consequence, the global South remains an experimental site for testing Western European ideas of development. And nobody takes the blame for the serial failure but the victim!

Development studies continues to promote a one-sided conservative view of conflict as antithetical to development Yet European history abundantly shows that development was never the peaceful evolutionary progress it is often made out to be. In several instances, violent conflicts and the fear of revolution led to fundamental reforms and consequent development in Europe. Major institutions, including the EU, UNDP and World Bank, often claim that without peace there can be no development. Within countries, authoritarian governments preach the need for peace in order to have development when they actually instigated the condition of conflict. Yet development is inherently a conflictual process (Agbonifo 2019). It is insidious that development studies supports peace and stability in highly unequal societies characterized by internal colonialism, denial of human rights and ethnic domination. The bias for peace helps preserve unequal social structures and repressive regimes.

The idea of the ‘future’ is evident in development studies, but it is the

Professor John Agbonifo is Director of the Global Affairs and Sustainable Development Institute at Osun State University, Nigeria

Our Common Future. The ‘Brundtland Report’ on environment and development.

Brundtland Report’s definition of sustainable development that brings it into sharp relief. It defines sustainable development as meeting the needs of the present without jeopardizing the capacity of future generations to meet their own needs. Development studies approaches the ‘future’ as neutral, commonly accepted and uncontested (Tibbs, 2000). Embedded in the present, the future is a site where different actors project conflicting aspirations, beliefs, values, fears and emotions (ibid.). It is unclear how development studies relates to a contested ‘future’.

What should be the focus?

In the global South, development has various uses. Atrocities have been committed against the less powerful and vulnerable in the name of development. Fragile cosmetic infrastructural projects are sold to citizens as development. In the name of development, ethnic minorities are expropriated of their natural resources which are deployed for the benefit of majority groups.

‘Development studies continues to promote a one-sided conservative view of conflict as antithetical to development.’

Appeal is made to development when such development degrades the environment and imposes intolerable human costs on the poor. In all of these cases what constitutes development is defined by the ruling elites. It is made without regard to the values, needs, worldviews and aspirations of ordinary citizens or communities. Development studies needs to begin to actively debunk what it is not, even if there is little consensus over what it really means.

Development studies takes the human condition almost as given. In many places, the ‘civil’ in civil society is almost extinct. Cruelty to others and callousness define citizens’ and social institutions’ interactions with those most in need. Police violence on blacks in the US, xenophobia against fellow blacks in South Africa, riotous banditry and kidnapping in Nigeria and watching fleeing African migrants perish in the Mediterranean rather than rescue them are some examples of individual and institutional callousness and cruelty

across human societies. The callousness of citizens and social institutions draws attention to the need to recreate humane societies as the focus of development studies.

capacity of a community to withstand adversity based on its culture, environment, livelihood strategies and overall ways of being and doing. This requires little economic growth!

What needs to change

There is no end to the number of factors that work against development. In an era of changing climate and deepening inequalities, development studies should focus on identifying factors that undermine local communities’ resilience, and how to enhance local resilience against risks and other adversities. Building resilience implies enhancing the

The world needs an emancipatory development studies – an approach that prioritises local vision and ‘immanent’ development over ‘intentional’ development (Cowen and Shenton 1996). The idea of the ‘helpless poor’ in dire need of intentional development has been promoted for too long in development studies. There is now a need to explore what local communities can, and actually do for overall community progress. Why some communities seem incapable of self-help projects and how local and translocal factors undermine the capacity of communities for self-help should be of interest to development studies. Unveiling and working to identify and eliminate local and translocal dis-empowering forces may well be a strategic approach to promoting development from below.

Where oppression and domination prevail, distrust and corruption are inevitable. Indeed, corruption is a strategic tool of expropriation and capital accumulation. Development studies needs to give more attention to corruption: money laundering, safe havens for stolen wealth, unaccounted for wealth and the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few at the expense of the impoverished majority should be prioritized. Forces of corruption unleash destitution and promote a development strategy of exploitation.

Legacies of oppression and domination continue to haunt political stability and socioeconomic development in much of the global South. Progress in these societies will not come from concerted economic development efforts but from dismantling structures of domination and exploitation. Development studies may well begin to prioritize the political approach to progress.

Women in Ghana selling fruit from their market stall. ©Sandra Nijhof

‘…the idea of globalized ‘intentional’ development relegates place-based development to the background.’

Where are they now?

Study programme PhD in Development Studies

Year of graduation 2009

Country of origin India Current occupation Associate Professor & Associate Dean, International Programmes and Collaborations Division Birla Institute of Technology and Science, India.

What made your time at ISS special? ISS community members stood out for their kindness and helping nature throughout my stay. Apart from the rich cultural exchange, the warmth of ISS faculty and staff made my PhD journey truly special and memorable. ISS gave me a life filled with possibilities and great memories of happiness and fulfillment.

What is your most memorable moment at ISS? It has to be my PhD defence. ISS friends provided the love and affection of a family.

What does ISS mean to you now? ISS means life-long friendships, state-of-the-art academic training and endless possibilities to contribute to development in its true sense. The cumulative value created by ISS for the world is immense and invaluable.

Hartstikke bedankt to ISS!

Cesar Guedes

Study programme

International Relations

Year of graduation 1990

Country of origin Peru

Current occupation I retired in 2021 after 30 years with the United Nations. My last appointment was as UNODC Country Director for Afghanistan but I also served in Guyana, Peru, China, North Korea, Germany, Austria, Panama, Bolivia, Pakistan, Mozambique, Kazakhstan and Afghanistan. I now live in Vietnam, do some freelance consultancies and plan to write a book.

What made your time at ISS special? I have wonderful memories of my colleagues and teachers, some of whom I am still in touch with. In 2015 we celebrated 25 years of graduating and a few of us met at ISS The Hague. What does ISS mean to you now? ISS helped me catapult my knowledge and career to another level and fulfil my dream to work for the United Nations.

Mariza Dacoron

Study programme Women, Gender and Development

Year of graduation 2003

Country of origin Philippines

Current occupation I work as a registered nurse in the Oncology/Rehabilitation unit in Leiden. I previously worked for INGO in Sri Lanka and UNDP in Bangladesh after ISS but took a career shift. What made your time at ISS special? Meeting brilliant people from all over the world. ISS is like a mini United Nations.

What is your most memorable moment at ISS? At ISS there was always a celebration of cultures, personal stories and knowledge. I gained great friends and some of them I still meet regularly and reminisce about our beautiful and happy memories at ISS. What does ISS mean to you now? ISS has changed my life; I became part of a global network.

Study programme & year of graduation National and International Development Diploma (1971)

Master in Social Sciences (1972)

Country of origin Costa Rica

Current occupation Commissioner General of Costa Rica

What made your time at ISS special? The unique possibility to engage with people from all parts of the world and to study in an environment with a multidisciplinary approach to development. What is your most memorable moment at ISS? When I got admitted to the Master in Social Sciences Programme. It was a hard competitive bid.

What does ISS mean to you now? It was an initiation into the study of and passion for social development, which have been with me since that time.

William Reuben

Sailaja Nandigama

A healthy dose of pessimism as a way forward in migrationdevelopment thinking?

Scholarly and policy interest in migration as a development issue is at least as old as ISS itself. A long history of research, dialogue and intervention shows that dominant thinking about the migrationdevelopment nexus has wavered between more positive and negative evaluations, yet the main tenet has remained the same: migration should be managed for the sake of development. In this brief reflection, I will describe some of the narratives that haunt the migration-development nexus and that prevent us from questioning exactly which migration and what development (Raghuram, 2009) we are imagining.

Dr Nanneke Winters is Assistant Professor at ISS

The idea of controlling people’s mobility for a particular development objective is of course much older than what is currently understood as the migrationdevelopment nexus. A case in point is the forced movement of people and their labour use in colonial regimes. However, the current instrumental reading of migration-development became prominent in the 2000s, after decades of relative silence or negative

evaluations. Whereas in the 1950s and 1960s there was initial optimism regarding the role that migrant ‘guest workers’ could play in their home countries as bearers of money, skills and ‘productive’ attitudes (not to mention the coveted labour they provided in destination settings), in the 1970s and 1980s scholars increasingly saw migration as a problem that fostered dependencies and inequalities. The so-called brain drain became a hotly debated topic. More optimistic globalization thinking in the 1990s and a doubling down on neoliberal principles paved the way for the settling of the migration-development nexus in the 2000s as the instrumental approach to migrants, returnees and diaspora that we know today. A combination of factors, including the ‘discovery’ of remittances and migrants as agents of bottom-up development, but also increased security concerns about unprecedented cross-

A vendor caters to people on the move at the border between Panama and Costa Rica. ©Nanneke Winters

border movements and connections, facilitated this approach.

So, what does this instrumental approach look like? Primarily, it builds on a triplewin scenario in which migrants, origin countries and destination countries all benefit from migration. For migrants, their migration should result in income and knowledge that can be productively invested ‘at home’, a place they should ideally return to. For origin countries with an often-young population, out-migration should relieve the threat of unemployed masses and generate remittances supporting their economies and social systems. Last but certainly not least, for destination countries with an oftenageing population, migration ideally produces a much-needed labour force. As these destination countries are generally among the most powerful states, they largely determine the migration-development agenda. They hold the economic and political power to engage in the ‘global race for talent’, attracting so-called highly-skilled migrants; to externalize their borders so that it becomes increasingly difficult for ‘unwanted’ migrants to enter; and to withhold development aid from countries which do not perform such an imposed bordering function. This being said, countries that play a key role as neighbouring, transit or origin states have bargaining power and resources to gain (financial, technical and training-related) in the face of large human movement, as recently evidenced by agreements with countries as diverse as Honduras, Indonesia, Libya, Turkey and Sudan.

Although many of the dynamics described above are fused with political and cultural considerations (such as potential electoral gain based on ‘tough on migration’ stances), they are also firmly economic in nature. Dominant migrationdevelopment thinking is rooted in an economic language and practice that emphasizes trade, unlimited growth, transnational business investment and a pool of global labour. Moreover, the migration-development nexus has become a profitable industry in itself. Research funding, remittances fees,

summits, consultants, campaigns, headlines, gadgets: the migrationdevelopment nexus is big business (Andersson, 2014) – a racialized business that often obscures the human cost of an instrumental approach to migrationdevelopment. This cost not only involves the sacrifices in well-being of migrants who spend years away from their loved ones, working in often insecure, unsafe conditions while contributing to destination settings. It also involves the criminalization and illegalization of large groups of people on the move; the reinforcement of global inequality as structural detrimental conditions remains unaddressed; and a lack of sustained attention for those displaced by conflict and development projects – unless they reach the borders of the global North.

What, then, does all this have to do with the development project as a constellation

of ideas and interventions that we study at ISS? When scholars, practitioners and policy makers talk about ‘addressing the root causes of migration’, they frequently do so with the ultimate aim of reducing migration, at least the migration that is seen as ‘out of control’ and problematic. This aim reflects the global North’s desire to ‘keep people in their place’ (Bakewell, 2008), or more precisely, to keep certain people in certain places, as well as persistent wishful thinking that more development ‘there’ leads to less migration ‘here’. Yet critical academic and grassroots knowledge holds that increased income, health and education, hallmarks of development, do not necessarily lead to less migration. Rather, as migrating requires resources, such development can spur people’s mobility (Kothari, 2003). At the same time, research has shown that people have traditionally used cross-border connections to work, trade, study, marry, care and explore, practices only accelerated (but unevenly so) by communication and transportation technology. These practices blur the distinctions between ‘there’ and ‘here’ and upset an imagined or imposed sedentary view of populations looking for opportunities elsewhere.

‘critical knowledge holds that increased income, health and education do not necessarily lead to less migration.’

A house under construction, build with money and skills earned through migration, Nicaragua.

©Nanneke Winters

Recent contributions from the fields of migration and development studies thus question optimistic, instrumental migration-development thinking that assumes migration can be managed and harnessed without taking traditional modes of mobility and structural inequalities into account. These include scholars who take a livelihood (Kothari, 2003), human security (Truong et al 2014) and aspirations-capability approach to migration (de Haas, 2021). These all substantiate how human mobility is multi-dimensional, contextspecific and an intrinsic part of social transformation. Though influential in their own fields, these contributions have not yet had significant bearing on mainstream migration-development thinking. This can be seen, for example, in the Sustainable Development Goals. Critical explorations have pointed out that the SDGs address migration and development in ways that disregard the translocal nature of development (Nijenhuis & Leung, 2017) and the fundamentally displacing character of unsustainable linear growth narratives (Suliman, 2017). This can be considered a missed opportunity. To address these omissions, in development studies we would do well to draw inspiration from recent interventions in migration studies that question the North/South divide and northern-centric views and interests (Grosfoguel et al., 2015), that ‘recenter the South’ (Fiddian-Qasmiyeh 2020) and that underline enduring colonial legacies

(Samaddar, 2020). Coupled with older debates that question the notion of development itself, these interventions show why it is so difficult to imagine a different kind of migration and a different kind of development.

New books

Given deeply felt insecurities in both the global South and North, and unabating levels of displacement, it seems likely migration-development will remain high on the agenda for the foreseeable future. But perhaps it is time to infuse this agenda with a healthy dose of migrationdevelopment pessimism. Not the kind that blames migrants for undertaking dangerous journeys, violating migration laws, ‘draining’ their countries of their ‘brains’ and consuming ‘conspicuously’. But a new kind of pessimism, or perhaps realism, that is committed to consistently exposing the interventionist and exploitative strands of dominant migration-development thinking.

An Uneasy Hegemony: Politics of state-building and struggles for justice in Sri Lanka

Shyamika Jayasundara-Smits argues that state-building in Sri Lanka is centred on a politics that rejects individual and group equality, opposes the social integration of marginalized groups and appeals to narrow, fearful and xenophobic tendencies among the majority population and minorities alike.

Andersson, R. (2014) Illegality, Inc. Clandestine Migration and the Business of Bordering Europe. Oakland: University of California Press.

Bakewell, O. (2008) ‘Keeping Them in Their Place’: the ambivalent relationship between development and migration in Africa. Third World Quarterly 29 (7): 1341–1358.

Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, E. (2020) Introduction. Recentering the South in Studies of Migration. Migration and Society: Advances in Research 3: 1–18.

Grosfoguel, R., L. Oso & A. Christou (2015) ‘Racism’, intersectionality and migration studies: framing some theoretical reflections. Identities, 22(6): 635-652.

de Haas, H. (2021) A theory of migration: the aspirations-capabilities framework. Comparative Migration Studies 9(8). DOI:10.1186/s40878-020-00210-4

Kothari, U. (2003) STAYING PUT AND STAYING POOR? Journal of International Development 15: 645–657.

Nijenhuis, G. & M. Leung (2017) Rethinking Migration in the 2030 Agenda: Towards a De-Territorialized Conceptualization of Development, Forum for Development Studies, 44(1): 51-68.

Raghuram, P. (2009) Which Migration, What Development? Unsettling the Edifice of Migration and Development. Population, Space and Place 15: 103–117.

Sammadar, R. (2020) The Postcolonial Age of Migration. London: Routledge. Suliman, S. (2017) Migration and Development after 2015. Globalizations 14(3): 415–431.

Truong, T-D., D. Gasper, J. Handmaker & S. I. Bergh (2014) Migration, Gender and Social Justice. Perspectives on Human Insecurity. New York: Springer.

Trade and Investment in East Africa: Prospects, Challenges and Pathways to Sustainability

Edited by Binyam Afewerk

Demena and Peter van Bergeijk, this book provides a thorough understanding of the key policy debates on international trade and investment for development with a focus on the East African Community.

‘the migrationdevelopment nexus has become a profitable industry in itself.’

The more things change, the less they should stay the same

The case for recasting development

Photo above: A recently demolished ‘kampung’ in North Jakarta. The former residents say they were given one week's notice before their houses were reduced to rubble. ©Chris Bentley

Human beings have over time played shifting parts in creating ever more intricate mechanisms to manipulate, analyse, interpret and change our world, environmentally, socially, economically, culturally and politically. The outcomes of decades of investments, interventions and inventions have brought benefit to many, but have also brought huge detriment to our shared planetary environment and to the lives of so many who inhabit it. Most recently, the Covid-19 pandemic has sharply highlighted existing (and sometimes deepening) inequalities, inequities and injustices, reinforcing what had already been a growing realisation of the inevitability and centrality of uncertainty and complexity to all forms of development (Leach et al, 2020). It has thrown into sharper relief a range of problems with ‘mainstream’ development concepts, institutional practices and power relations, narrow notions of progress and growth, and linear planning models.

As the SDGs and other global frameworks have set out visions of achieving a more equitable and sustainable world where people everywhere can live their lives free from poverty and injustice, the time seems right for a ‘recasting’ of development and development studies that is underpinned by the centrality of universality (development as progressive change for all), plurality, justice, equity and resilience. Rather than small adjustments and tweaks to concepts and practices, at the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) we are calling for a radical reimagining of what is possible: rethinking economies; re-envisaging humanitynature connections (and so notions of ‘human development’); engaging critically with digitalization on massive scales; reconfiguring citizen-state relations amidst new kinds of power; adapting to shifting geo-political orders and elaborating new principles for cognitive justice and the prioritization of citizen knowledge (Taylor and McCarthy, 2021). The events of the last year have

Dr Peter Taylor is Director of Research at the Institute of Development Studies

Professor Melissa Leach is Director of the Institute of Development Studies

challenged us to double down on the commitments and priorities laid out in our current strategy, given the scale and the urgencies of the challenges the world is facing.

For whom is a recasting of development studies important?

In our view, development, recast, can become a key catalyst for engagement with citizens around justice, empowerment and accountability; with governments around soft power diplomacy, bringing needs and openings for ‘grand strategy’ and ‘mutual learning’ that integrate foreign policy, social policy and development approaches grounded in the aspirations, needs and realities of citizens and communities; with academic research, policy and practice communities around knowledge co-creation, learning, civic engagement and the range of moves now glossed as ‘decolonizing’ (Taylor and Tremblay, 2022); and with a variety of organizations and institutions for whom a recasting of development will present both opportunities and challenges. For development studies, the field that shapes and engages with development, we believe strongly that there is a need for complementary

combinations of world-leading research, education and engagement involving collaborations between natural and social sciences and humanities; policymakers, businesses, funders, practitioners, advocates, activists, citizens and intermediaries who help forge connections between these groups; all underpinned by a commitment to co-creation of knowledge, championing evidence, equitable partnerships and mutual learning between countries.

What questions are guiding us?

We are already exploring several overarching questions, although we realise these will continue to evolve through engagement with different voices and perspectives:

• How should development be recast if trends, pathways and trajectories, and the global frameworks that influence these, are to lead to positive change and transformation?

• How can development engage differently with diverse voices, knowledges and perspectives in light of the SDGs and beyond, in a wider context of uncertainty, complexity and universal challenges?

• What types of learning are needed to

support new approaches to universal, equitable and inclusive models of development, and how can we strengthen the connections between diverse forms of knowledge, evidence, policy and practice in different contexts?

• How can development studies itself become more equitable, collective and collaborative in order to address historical structural inequities and power asymmetries that constrain its ability to support transformative change?

What issues could be considered?

We have identified several issues for development studies, as part of an emerging ‘recasting’ agenda for reflection and inquiry:

1. Nationalistic tendencies and the closing of democratic space in both authoritarian and democratic states.

Populism is becoming ever more widespread in rich and poor countries, authoritarian and democratic ones. There are tendencies for shutting down political freedoms – controlling legal systems, the press etc, or direct (sometimes violent) restrictions on (non-violent) protests. Some nations are withdrawing from multilateralism; crucial decisions are being made on a nation by nation basis, frequently short-term, often with future generations not represented in current decision-making amidst a closing of civic space coupled with a trampling of digital rights. Development studies can help document developments; analyse causes and counter these authoritarian, polarizing tendencies, and identify and inform potential policy and action directions. It can explore the drivers of change that promote more effective, accountable and inclusive governance institutions and mechanisms that can help re-establish trust with citizens, including the possibilities offered by digital technologies.

2. Epistemologies and the politics of knowledge.

Development studies can promote inter-, trans- and multi-disciplinary approaches to tackle complex challenges and

uncertainties. It can help make more transparent the political economies of knowledge and evidence, and reveal more clearly the interests and ideologies underlying different models and conclusions.

3. Contemporary capitalisms. Recent analyses of capitalism and prevailing financial systems are revealing how their workings underlie so much of development, including rising inequality, indebtedness, failures to tackle environmental issues and health injustices (including obstacles to cheap production and sale of vaccines in low- and middleincome countries). Development studies can offer deeper analysis of current and emerging financial models that may work against sustainable futures.

4. Historical perspectives. Past decades offer a wealth of experience to draw upon and to learn from. Today’s realities are products of history; to ignore it is almost certain to lead to failed analysis and policies. Development studies could reflect more on economic and political revolution and evolution; the high hopes accompanying independence and the much more complex reality which nonetheless was extraordinarily successful by many measures and in many places. It can help us learn from history on ways to build a new universal agenda, including resisting authoritarianism and aggressive forms of nationalism.

5. Tensions between contextualized perspectives and understandings of global development.

It is challenging to balance activities, engagement and conversation narratives in specific contexts alongside global values. Development studies can interrogate the new development norms emerging through these conversations and how these are informed by different perspectives. It can include debates about decolonization, engagement with indigeneity and indigenous knowledges, and fostering of a diversity of voices and perspectives whilst also challenging mainstream power.

6. Equity and the needs of those hardest to reach.

We struggle with questions on how to work with and build on approaches to intersectionality, where different forms of (in)equity (by gender, class, disability, race, place etc) are not just additional but mutually constituting and reinforcing. Development studies can explore issues such as the evolution of labour and accumulation and the role of technology; fragility of the labour market; taxation; implications of climate change and environmental challenges for equity.

7. The fundamentals of aid. Aid as acts of human-human and political solidarity remains hugely important, especially when dealing with humanitarian challenge, but there is also a need for international funding mechanisms for collective international action on longer-term issues and to fund the global governance institutions and services we rely on such as the WHO. Development studies can explore questions about wealthier countries’ future engagement in development cooperation and what can be learned by

fostering mutual learning with countries that have taken very different approaches, such as China.

These reflections on a recasting of development studies are a work in progress but also demonstrate our commitment at IDS to continuing a journey of exploration and discovery. We acknowledge the contributions to our thinking on these matters by so many partners and collaborators who are also embarked on similar paths. We look forward to engaging with others in a wider context of dynamic change and transformation.

References

IDS Strategy 2020-2025

Leach, M., H. MacGregor, I. Scoones and A. Wilkinson (2020) Post-pandemic transformations: How and why Covid-19 requires us to rethink development. In World Development, Volume 138, February 2021, 105233

Taylor, P and M. McCarthy, (Eds) (2021) IDS Bulletin: Building a better world– the crisis and opportunity of Covid-19. Vol 52 No 1 March 2021

Taylor, P. and Tremblay, C. (2022) Decolonising Knowledge for Development in the Covid-19 Era, IDS Working Paper 566, Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, DOI: 10.19088/IDS.2022.018

‘a commitment to co-creation of knowledge, championing evidence, equitable partnerships and mutual learning’

COVID-19 emergency response activities, Madartek, Basabo, Dhaka by UN Women Asia and the Pacific (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

ISS news alumni awards EUR events PhD projects research staff students

ISS 70th anniversary ISS

In October, ISS celebrated its 70th anniversary. A week of academic and social events culminated on 13 October with the Dies Natalis. During this event we looked at the history of ISS, asking how our past informs our present and what a future ISS may look like. Music by ISS students, reminiscences by ISS alumni and a good old-fashioned ISS party in the evening made the event a great success. ISS is ready for the next 70 years!

ISS alumna Deputy Minister of Business Development in Colombia alumni

Inaugural lecture Professor Lorenzo Pellegrini staff

Alumna María Fernanda Valdés was sworn in as Deputy Minister of Business Development at the Ministry of Commerce, Industries and Tourism in Colombia. She graduated from ISS in 2009.

Lorenzo Pellegrini gave his inaugural lecture on 14 September. He presented a future beyond fossil capitalism, arguing that we need to focus on policies which limit the supply of fossil fuels as well as the demand.

Spinoza Prize for Professor Thea Hilhorst award

The highest award in Dutch academia, Thea Hilhorst was awarded the

for

of

work

In Memoriam

As an ISS community we send our heartfelt condolensces to the family and friends of those former students and staff who have passed away in recent months.

society

the ways in which people and institutions shape the organization of aid relations.

Professor Hilhorst is considered one of the founders of the relatively new research area of humanitarian studies. Her work is highly significant in the context of current global challenges such as international migration, climate change and pandemics.

The Journal of Peasant

Scopus CiteScore

Studies,

Arts

MA application now open study

Chad Brevis

ISS alumnus Chad Brevis passed away in August. He was part of the South African Skills Programme group of 2014-2015. Chad was Senior Lecturer of Human Science at the University of South Africa. After completing his programme at ISS he did a PhD in Film and Media Studies at the University of Cape Town.

Eduardo Alberto Sadous ISS alumnus Eduardo Alberto Sadous passed away recently at the age of 76. A former diplomat, he served as the Argentinean Ambassador to Venezuela between 2002 and 2005. At ISS Eduardo Sadous did a Diploma programme in International Law and Development in 1972.

S. Parasuraman

S. Parasuraman passed away on 2 September. Former director of the Tata Institute of Social Studies, he was a visiting professor and ISS fellow in the 1990s.

Debbie Asistyo-Sy

Debbie Asistyo-Sy unexpectedly passed away at the beginning of October. From the Philippines, Debbie was part of the 2013-2014 MA batch.

Education Fairs 2022 events

Inaugural lecture Professor Rosalba Icaza staff

Want to study at ISS? Why not visit one of our education fairs that will take place physically and online this year. You will have the opportunity to meet ISS representatives and ask any questions about our MA programme. All events are free and you are welcome to bring anyone with you. See details on our website.

PhD defences PhD

Britta Holzberg

11 October 2022

Decent work in textiles and garment production: Analysing the formation of glo-cal perspectives and practices in Egypt and Jordan

Zoe Brent (Cum laude)

5 October

The challenge of generational renewal in post-industrial farming contexts: Regimes of agrarian social reproduction in the Basque Country

On 23 June Rosalba Icaza gave her inaugural lecture in which she posed the question, ‘Can we respond to the possibility of an ethical life that is not structurally implicated with the suffering and the consumption of the life of earth and others?’

Two new professors join ISS staff

16 August 2022

Regional reorganisation, communal context and conflicts in Ghana

Emile Smidt

7 July 2022

Beyond militarized conservation: The policy labour regime and its effects in the Kruger National Park

Fergus Simpson

3 October 2022

The political ecology of conservation at a violent frontier constellation in South Kivu, Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo

Ebba Tellander

20 September 2022

The wind that blows before the rain: Resistance against oppression in northern Somalia in the 1980s

Professors Shuaib Lwasa (left) and Arul Chib joined ISS earlier this year. Shuaib joins as Professor of Urban Resilience and Global Development and Arul as Professor of Technology and Development. Welcome to both!

Louis Thiemann (Cum laude)

30 June 2022

The Third Class: Artisans of the world, unite?

Willem van Eekelen

1 June 2022

Socio-economic development in the rural Global South and the role of Official Development Assistance

Dennis Penu

A decade of monitoring children’s rights: The KidsRights Index at 10

On 19 October 2022 the tenth KidsRights Index was published.1 This Index is the product of a highly rewarding and longstanding collaboration between the Dutch NGO KidsRights (among other activities known for annually awarding the children’s peace prize), Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) and the International Institute of Social Studies (ISS). The work behind the scenes of the Index is performed by Professor Karin Arts, in recent years supported by PhD researcher Ekaterina Evdokimova (ISS); Professors Dinand Webbink and Philip Hans Franses (ESE); and Chairman of KidsRights, Marc Dullaert, supported by Jolanda Beerse.

Principles of the KidsRights Index

The Index is the tangible result of the desire of the three collaborating organizations to put science at the service of achieving societal impact in the realm of children’s rights. Thus, KidsRights, ESE and ISS jointly decided to design an instrument to measure, compare and publish the children’s rights records of as many countries as data allow for. Deliberate decisions were made to do this in a fully child rightsbased manner, to aim at maximum country coverage and comparability, to use the best available existing data, and to make the outcomes and the underlying data and methodology available through an open access website2 so that they can be easily consulted by anyone interested.

Five child rights-based domains

Given the nearly universal ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the

Child (CRC), we also purposefully decided to give a central place to that Convention. We checked which elements of the CRC quality data exist that allow for an equal level comparison between (nearly) all states in the word. This resulted in the compilation of five Domains that measure respectively children’s rights to life, health, education and protection, and the enabling environment or ‘infrastructure’ that a state must have in place for it to be able to pursue those rights in practice.

The latter consists of the combination of respect for the general principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (non-discrimination, the best interests of the child and child participation), legislation, mobilizing the state’s best available budget/resources, data and state-civil society collaboration. The country scores on Domain 5 are entirely based on the periodical country assessments issued by the Committee on the Rights of the Child, the UN treaty body that monitors compliance with the CRC.

Professor Karin Arts is professor in International Law and Development and Deputy Rector Education Affairs at ISS

Using existing data and exposing gaps therein

Rather than generating data ourselves, the KidsRights Index team makes use of data available from UNICEF, UNDP, UNESCO and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. These amount to the best globally available, highest quality and most comparable data on the elements measured by the Index. Obviously, in an ideal world, we would be able to cover many more dimensions of children’s lives in the KidsRights Index.

For instance, we know that in all countries in the world violence against children occurs and that children with disabilities lack the treatment they are entitled to. However, the current state of available data on these topics is not yet at the level required for their inclusion in the Index. By continuing to draw attention to the gaps in the globally available data on children and their rights, the KidsRights Index team seeks to contribute to an improvement of this situation.

The first version of the KidsRights Index was published in 2013 and covered 168 countries. The 2022 version reported on 185 countries. This means that currently ‘only’ twelve countries remain that cannot be covered in the Index. These are:

• the USA, the only state in the world that has not yet ratified the CRC and therefore does not have any data for Domain 5;

• the four small island states Cook Islands, Marshall Islands, Niue and Tuvalu;

• Somalia and South Sudan;

• the four mini-states Andorra, Liechtenstein, Holy See and Monaco;

• the Caribbean small island state of Dominica.

A global country ranking triggers attention

The KidsRights Index provides an annual ranking of all states covered. Their total score and ranking is calculated as the geometric mean of the scores on the five specific Domains. This makes it more difficult to compensate for low scores on specific Domains. This is justified by the argument that such a compensation is

not desirable, because all the children’s rights aspects covered are considered equally important. Therefore, an extremely low score in one area of children’s rights, for example on providing an enabling environment for children’s rights, cannot be compensated by a high score, for instance, on education. In the event that too many values are missing, a Domain score is not calculated to avoid distortion of the results.

Publishing a country ranking has turned out to be an extremely powerful way to generate publicity and arouse curiosity among a wide range of actors who can make a difference for children’s rights. These actors include governments, children’s rights and development NGOs, (Children’s) Ombudsmen, members of parliament, journalists, educators, social workers and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. The KidsRights Index team is grateful for all the exposure the Index has had in its first decade and how this has helped to trigger necessary discussions on how to do better on children’s rights, both in the global North and in the global South. Actually, the Index reflects a core principle of the CRC: that of contextual interpretation of child rights implementation records. In a nutshell, this entails that countries that are best equipped (e.g. because of their development level or availability of resources) are expected to also do best in realizing the Convention.3 This clarifies why some ‘developed’ states, such as the United Kingdom or New Zealand which, according to the Committee on the Rights of the Child seriously underperformed in relation to their implementation capacity, rank much lower than many people would expect (respectively 174 and 171 in 2022).

On the other hand, in 2022 Thailand ranks overall 13th, Cuba 19th and Kazakhstan 20th

Adding a (sub-)Domain on climate change?

Through the years we have refined our methodology which has strengthened the quality and reliability of the KidsRights Index. It is likely that the Index will always remain work in progress. For the immediate future, as announced in the 2022 KidsRights Index Report, we see the phenomenon of climate change as one of the most serious threats to children and their rights. According to UNICEF figures, at present already more than a third of the world’s children (820 million) are highly exposed to heatwaves, while more than one in six (400 million) children are exposed to cyclones. Close to 90% of all children across the globe are also subjected to air pollution. With climate change intensifying, this situation is likely to exacerbate in the years and decades to come. In the next phase of our work, we will therefore explore whether we can a add a new (sub-) Domain on climate change and children into the KidsRights Index.

For further details

If you are interested in further details, please check out the 2022 KidsRights Index Report and/or the KidsRights Index web resources.

1 https://files.kidsrights.org/wp-content/uploads/ 2022/10/18212510/KidsRights-Index-2022-Report.pdf.

2 https://www.kidsrights.org/research/kidsrights-index/.

3 2 https://www.kidsrights.org/research/kidsrights-index/.

‘an extremely powerful way to generate publicity and arouse curiosity among a wide range of actors who can make a difference for children’s rights.’

The effects of heatwaves in the EU

Dr Sylvia Bergh and Shellan Saling discuss their research into the effects of heatwaves on vulnerable populations.

Sylvia (Sy): With some colleagues from The Hague University of Applied Sciences and ISS, I got a grant from the municipality of The Hague in early 2021. We decided to work on the effects of heatwaves on vulnerable population groups in The Hague. In terms of the policy response, we wanted to investigate what the municipality and other governance levels can do. And then you came along as an MA student and we decided to work together for your Research Paper.

Shellan (Sh): Indeed. I thought your project sounded really interesting.

Sy: For your Research Paper, we focused on the European Union, on the Netherlands and France in particular. Maybe you can tell us about your findings and how the National Heat Health Action Plans differed.

Sh: My focus was on comparing the French National Heat Plan to the Dutch

one and comparing these to the wider EU policy response. I think we were both surprised at the results. The EU is supposed to be a leader on climate change, and climate resilience and heatwaves are the leading cause of climate-change related deaths in the EU. Yet from what I found, the response is very limited and there’s not even a common EU definition for heatwaves.

Sy: We were also surprised that the Netherlands had quite a weak plan; little more than a communication plan. People can easily miss the communication and then they simply don’t get the

information they need. In France somebody is designated to deal with this and other governance levels take over if necessary. Precautions and measures are put in place and there is even a list of vulnerable people who need particular care. That’s a big contrast with the Netherlands.

Sh: France’s stricter policy response, its more stick than carrot approach, has to do with the trauma of the 2003 heatwaves during which France suffered the greatest number of deaths. That trauma explains why people in France are cautious and led to the creation a lot of laws; there are a lot of sticks in France’s plan. There are simply no sticks in the Netherlands’ heatwave plan.

What were the most shocking results of your research on The Hague?

Sy: The most vulnerable people are those that we tend to forget such as the elderly living alone. If you cross-reference

‘The loneliest people … live in the hottest places’

loneliness with the heat maps, you can see the overlap: the loneliest people also live in the hottest places and so they’re the most vulnerable. That alone was quite an eye-opener.

The other main finding was that these people themselves don’t realize that they’re vulnerable. How can you help somebody who doesn’t realize that they’re vulnerable? That’s a real public health communication challenge.

In Europe, we tend to associate warm weather with holidays, when in fact it’s a silent killer. Mediterranean countries have shutters that keep rooms dark and cool but houses in northern Europe, with their large windows, are not really built for climate change.

Sh: Not at all! There are incentives from the government to make homes greener but these aren’t mentioned in the plans.

Sy: We also found research that showed that subsidies in The Hague for green roofs, for example, go to the richer areas because the people living there know

how to get subsidies.

The other thing that I enjoyed about our project was looking at frugal innovations: looking at what people come up with themselves.

Sh: We also presented our research at a conference organized by the Netherlands Institute of Governance in Utrecht which was very well received. I was the only master’s student on the panel; the rest were all tenured professors but from the feedback it was clear that there was still a lack of knowledge. I found this quite shocking. I wonder why there is a lack of social science research at the EU level.

Sy: I think it has to do with the fragmentation of policy domains. You have climate change, adaptation and even the Green Deal which doesn’t say much at all about heatwaves. And then you have health which is a national sovereignty issue.

Sh: Yes, EU mandates prevent it from doing more on heatwaves and climate

change in general, because health falls under the national sovereignty of the EU states.

One thing that was particularly shocking is that one of the first policymakers to come up with the Heat Health Action Plan in France asked me whether I had contacts for the people who created the Plan in the Netherlands. That just shows that there’s not only fragmentation, there’s also a lack of a network among EU member states when it comes to responding to heatwaves.

Sy: Indeed. And the role of the impact of the research is also important. Our research has been included on ClimateADAPT which is the portal of the European Environment Agency. And we’re also taking advantage of the EUR impact journey. We’re part of a new trajectory involving the private sector and getting existing innovations on the market to the people who need them. We can now really see climate change happening; especially after this summer in Europe, nobody questions it anymore. I’m excited that we were able to work together on this research but there’s so much more to be done.

Sh: I feel like this is a great opportunity to contribute to research. There’s so much physical science research into climate change, but not much social science research. I think this is an exciting time, even though climate change is very scary. We must try to be optimistic and keep trudging along with how we can make an impact.

Sy: I think that those are great closing words.

‘EU mandates prevent it from doing more on heatwaves’

Development and Change

Development and Change is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal devoted to the critical analysis and discussion of current issues of development. It was established by the ISS in 1969, in response to the perceived need for a multidisciplinary journal dealing with all aspects of development studies.

Volume 53, Number 5, September 2022

Paul Segal

On Broker Exploitation

Cartel

Clayton Boeyink

in the Food

Madalali

of

Working Papers

The ISS Working Paper series provides a forum for work in progress which seeks to elicit comments and generate discussion. The series includes academic research by staff, PhD participants and visiting fellows, and award-winning research papers by graduate students.

Winds from the East: Ancient Asian views on international trade Đào, K. T. & van Bergeijk, P., Working Paper Series 705.

Manfred Max-Neef’s model of human needs understood as a practical toolkit for supporting societal transitions Gasper, D. Working Papers Series 704.

‘Start from the Garden’: Distribution, Livelihood

and Narratives of Agrarian Decline in Papua, Indonesia

Jacob Nerenberg

Measuring Women’s Empowerment:

in Benin, Malawi

Sarah Eissler,Jessica Heckert,Emily Myers,Greg Seymour,Sheela Sinharoy,Kathryn Yount

Zakia Salime

Thando Vilakazi,Stefano Ponte

On

Paul Segal

Antonio Andreoni

Energy sanctions and Russia’s democracy – autocracy: A dynamic VAR analysis van Bergeijk, P. & Faraji Dizaji, S., Working Paper Series 703.

From EAC-6 to EAC 7: potentials and pitfalls of the enlargement of the East African Community Demena, B. A. & van Bergeijk, P. Working Paper Series 702.

The notion of Iran as ‘high energy-intensity-country’: a critique Zarepour, Z., Working Paper Series 701.

English language premium in a marriage market: experimental evidence from Delhi Tomohisa Miyamoto, one of the ISS MA Research Paper Award winners for the academic year 2020-2021. Working Paper Series 700.

STUDENT LIFE

Just one of the many study trips ISS students participate in. This one to FAO headquarters. Photo by Zemzem Shigute Shuka

Collaboration and discussion are part and parcel of the ISS study experience.

Students showing off where they are from using the passports.

Helping out during a career fair in the Hague University of Applied Sciences. Photo by Darren Baradhan

Left: Students on a visit to the Cordaid headquarters in The Hague. They met policy advisors and discussed Cordaid’s role in influencing development policy at the local, national and international levels.

Celebrating ISS’ past, present and future

In a fantastic week of events celebrating ISS’ 70th anniversary, we looked at our past to inform our present and future. These are just some of the images taken during our celebratory week. Scan the qr code for a short re-cap video of the Dies Natalis on 13 October.