Development is often defined as an objective, linear journey from ‘underdeveloped’ to ‘developed’. However, critics have argued that in reality, this path is far from being that clear. In a recent paper titled Rethinking development: Language, power and the cost of progress, Chisom Udeze (Diversify, Oslo, Norway) and Frode Eick (Lovisenberg Diaconal University College, Oslo, Norway), challenge dominant developmental narratives and call for a reframing of how progress is understood. Rather than it being defined by the prevailing development narratives which ‘uphold high- consumption models’, development should instead be grounded in sustainability.

The paper argues that the terms ‘developing’, ‘third world’ and ‘developed’ are rooted in colonial legacies and power dynamics which celebrate high consumption and resource extraction. These labels, they argue, implicitly centre certain experiences while marginalising others. As they state, the use of such terminology ‘ signals whose experience is centred, whose progress is validated, and whose suffering is minimised’. Despite these terms being adapted to fit official settings - such as, Low Income Countries and Middle Income Countries - they still naturalise the same hierarchies.

In traditional global growth, consumption has been used as a key indicator to view the ‘economic health’ of a country, seen as forms of prosperity and progress. However, this framework distorts global narratives by overlooking essential elements of human growth such as ‘community cohesion, care economies, environmental sustainability and political freedom’. It also hides the unequal and profound consumption patterns between countries and the global political and economic structures which sustain them (as seen through organisations such as the World Trade Organisation and the International Monetary Fund.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) remains one of the most influential metrics in defining development. By prioritising economic output, efficiency and consumption, GDP often ignores wellbeing, climate sustainability and care. The labour of marginalised communities, including women and Indigenous people, largely disappears from this system. In addition, the environmental costs of growth are undervalued and deferred to future generations.

Udeze and Eick propose Household Final Consumption Expenditure (HFCE) per capita as a potential alternative. Herein, actual consumption patterns can be taken into consideration, with lived experiences and knowledge also being accounted for. Nevertheless, the authors do acknowledge its limitations: HFCE does not adequately capture intra-country inequalities and continues to undercount non-market and informal economies. For this reason, they argue that HFCE should be used alongside ecological indicators and measures of inequality to more comprehensively assess development.

Overall, Rethinking development: Language, power and the cost of progress calls for a shift away from growth centred metrics and towards a model of development which prioritises sustainability, equity, and care. In doing so, it challenges not only how development is measured, but also whose knowledge, experiences and futures are valued in defining progress and consumption patterns.

Please see the link to the full article here.

I hope you liked Developmental Insights’s first deepdive and new format. Publishing weekly will enable me to discuss different issues in greater depth and I will be considering your comments and queries. If anyone has anything that they would like me to look into during these deep-dives, please comment below or send it to developmentalsinsights@gmail.com.

Best,

Harkiran