This chapter of Hann and Hart looks
at the term ‘development’, explores formal/informal economies within a state, and
gives a general history of the 20th Century’s global economic moves
to develop countries (particularly in Africa, Asia, and Latin America). The authors argue that while ‘development’ has
several meanings across different disciplines, lately, the definition has been “the
commitment of the rich countries to help poor countries become richer” (Hann
and Hart, 102). A large section of the
chapter focuses on the anthropology of development in Africa with its primary
focus on West Africa. Right now I’m in a
History of Africa from 1850 class and we’re learning about the economic colonial
practices of Europeans between 1850-1950(ish) and I couldn’t help but continue
to draw parallels as a common reason European Imperial powers gave for colonizing
Africa was to civilize, educate, improve their lives/economies, etc. These incredibly harmful actions by “developed”
countries onto “undeveloped” countries is something that seems to be a
presumptuous and ever-present narrative in history.
I agreed
with most of the chapter but I have questions on the attitudes circulating
about “development” now. The chapter
mostly went up to the 1990s with once sort of anecdotal piece about carbon
emissions in 2009. I’d like to know the
trends now and the actions of the IMF and the World Bank towards those
countries.
(also I'm sorry if this has a really weird format-- blogger is doing something weird and I don't know how to make it change)
The format looks fine, Rachel. Per your question, the chapters we will be reading from Ananya Roy discuss more contemporary roles of international development agencies such as the IMF and the WB. In particular, she focuses on the expansion of microfinance as a new form of development initiative. She is skeptical of these initiatives for reasons that we'll discuss later on.
ReplyDelete