IDSB06 ExamReview Answers.doc

14 Pages
Unlock Document

International Development Studies
B.von Lieres

Final Review IDSB06 By: Satparshi Sarma Week 9 Development and Environmental Ethics: • Key environmental concerns; 1. depletion of earth’s resources 2. sinks – earth’s system to absorb waste and cleanse the environment 3. transformation of landscapes and eco-systems • Environmental ethics: fairly new debate • Historically the focus in global environmental affairs has been on protecting our environment and ecology • P. 206 focus on human-nature interface • Ethical justification for caring about nature in its own right: there is something very wrong about cutting down a tree. Wapner and Mathew, Article: The Humanity of Global Environmental Ethics • revolved around the way humans treat the natural world • how humans exploit the natural world • however, environmental ethics that focuses only on protecting the non- human environment, ignores the burdens imposed on the poor • Nature is also a vital medium through which humans interact • As important as how humans treat the natural world is how humans mistreat each other using nature and the environment to do so – p. 204 • Environmental ethics are part of the broader challenge of global ethics • Emphasize the inter-human dimensions of environmental harm • Want to link environmental ethics to human rights frameworks • In the past global environmental ethics has taken the interface between humans and nature as core subject of analysis • the way people treat nature • E.g. how consumption patterns erode the earth’s eco-system • Ecological effects of structural adjustment programs • But we also need to focus on how people abuse and exploit each us through the medium of nature • Look at the distinction between the environmentally advantaged and disadvantaged • We need to look at the ability of the rich and powerful to displace environmental problems • Transferring, re-locating or transporting environmental challenges to those who have little choice but to suffer them (p. 208) • Displacement across space and time: • Pulling timber, fish, minerals from other regions without fair compensation • Spoiling other people’s land in an effort to protect their own • Marginalised people being moved to make room for reserves and parks • Wish to preserve biological diversity without addressing the needs of the local population • Waste disposal in other countries • Unwilling to pay for financial and ecological cost of disposing their own waste • Millions of tons of poisonous substances form developing to developed countries • Sometimes there are financial advantages receiving waste for developing countries • Displacement across time too • Practices the harmful effects of which will be felt in the future • Land can be stolen form future generations • Power relations between exploiters and exploited • The globalized rich are overwhelmingly more responsible for environmental harm than the localized poor What is a just ethical framework? • “Sustainable development”: 1987, Brundtland Commission • Development that meets the need of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs • Rich countries cannot simply pull resources from poor regions without ensuring that the poor’s basic needs are met • Development that brings economic capacity to those regions in need of basic goods and services Sustainable Development • But: economic livelihoods for the poor that do not strip the land of resources • calls on the wealthy to pursue less materialistic forms of development • Focus on local involvement • Shared equitable ecological space and sustainable development Ethical Framework • Need to make displacement visible • Pro-poor conservation • P. 218 • Pro-poor conservation may be defined as an approach that optimizes conservation and livelihood benefits with an explicit emphasis on poverty reduction and social justice • Linkages between extracting and transporting resources and human security, well-being and freedom Isla, Article: An Ecofeminist Perspective on Biopiracy in Latin America • Background: neo-liberalism and the transfer of local and communal wealth into external markets • Subsistence economies of indigenous people • Local knowledge and traditional medicines are key to indigenous communities’ identities and way of life • Increasing commodification of biodiversity of indigenous communities • Bio-piracy:Appropriation of local knowledge of the attributes of native plants and animals • Biopiracy: the appropriation of traditional knowledge and biogenetic resources of indigenous people • Import of local resources to Europe • ‘sustainable development” paradigm promotes biopiracy • simply restructuring third world capacities to accommodate trans-national capital expansion • Natural capital – traditional biodiversity becomes a global commodity that can be transferred in the context of sustainable development • Biopiracy touches on the core of indigenous people’s survival • Inserts subsistence livelihoods into market economies • Threat to livelihoods or rural women and peasants • Their traditional methods should be recognised as science • Traditional expertise in biodiversity • Biopiracy suppresses human rights of indigenous women and communities Week 10 Women, Gender and Development • 1.2 biIllion people in the world live in extreme poverty • 70 % are women who are disadvantaged in terms of their access to property, housing, credit, education, health services, etc. • Close to 85 million school-aged girls are deprived of basic right to education • Women count for 64 percent of adults who cannot read or write with understanding • Of over 800 million people suffering from malnutrition the majority are girls under the age of five and pregnant women • Wide-spread violence against poor women • Category of Third World women is not homogenous • Extent and persistence of discrimination against women vary according to a complex system of power relations – gender, social, class, race or ethnicity, age, religion, sexual orientation Approaches to Gender and Development • 1980s: Gender and development approach: Unequal gender relations hinder development and female participation in it • 1986 Third UN Conference on Women in Nairobi, Kenya • Seeks to transform the structures of power with the long-term goals of an equal partnership between the genders in which all become participants in decision-making and beneficiaries in development • Looked at the effects of neo-liberalism on the marginalisation and impoverishment of women • Looked at the macroeconomic foundation of the oppression of women • Linked relations of production with relations of reproduction • Viewed women as a specific target group of development Recent Development: Mainstreaming gender equality • Mid – 1990s • 4th UN World Conference on Women (Beijing) “Equality between men and women was the only way to build a society that is sustainable , fair and developed” • Universality and indivisibility of women’s rights • Women were no longer approached as a target group isolated from other development issues in favour of a comprehensive approach to gender that cuts across issues and areas • In practice this approach to promote changes in gender relations and to mainstream gender into development as a whole Millennium Development Goals (MDG) • Of the 8 key goals only 2 emphasize the needs of women and children in the areas of health and education • A third refers to the equality of the sexes • Modest gender dimension • Disconnected from macro economic structures • Do not integrate social relations of gender into anti-poverty projects • Fight against poverty which affects men and women differently if addressed using dominant economic indicators such as income, and not gender- focused indicators Klenk Article: Who is the Developed Woman?: Woman as a Category of Development Discourse, Kumaon, India • Looks at representation of women in development • Focus on local women’s identities and representations of themselves • How do women see themselves in development? • Socially embedded critical perspectives of their own • Need to challenge “women-as-victims” approach • Need to avoid viewing women as perennial victims • Media cliches of the “underdeveloped” woman: portrayed as courageous in her misfortune and resigned to her fate unless helped or rescued by benefactors from the global North • Shift focus on their habits of resistance • Their struggles for human rights, sharing resources, mutual aid • Wide range of different responses and agendas formulated by different women • Need to look at the diverse perspectives of poor women and themselves in the development process • Women draw on different discourses themselves • Women contribute to development discourses and practices • Case study: Lakshmi Ashram - rural Gandhian environmental programme • Women members of the community were asked “what is a developed woman?” • No answer, but when asked what she can do, many diverse answers • Women in development • Previous approaches to women and development have been critiques for treating women as isolated category with unified meanings in diverse contexts • Status as victim - victim of capitalist schemes, victim of patriarchy, victim of poverty • P. 65 Essentialised as “Third World Women” • Overlooks the critical perspectives that poor women bring to bear on their world as well as their own skills and strategies • Evidence of development as a process of change in women’s lives • Displaced backwardness onto other women in the region • All contested the representation of rural women as helpless vicitims • Women spoke about social work, empowerment, entrepreneurship and sustainability • How do people who are deemed to be targets of development actively negotiate their experiences and subjectivities in backward locations? • Focus on microcredit – provision of small loans to women to establish small enterprises • Has the potential to improve the material conditions of low-income women • Availability of credit can increase a woman’s’ work burden – men often control the income generated by the credit women receive • Can enforce social hierarchies • Contesting subjectivities • Constructed development as a contested process • Development cannot only be reduced to a change in material circumstances, but also a point of departure of new subjectivities • Need to ground critical development studies agendas in the diverse perspectives of participants in development on their own experiences p. 76 • Struggles over meanings of development in specific contexts are sites of contestation among power differentiated actors, not sites of closure Sarah White Article: Thinking race, thinking development • Race and development • Development is not simply a practice, but a discursive regime of power and knowledge. • Development ; materiality and a transformative practice • Can be an oppressive regime of power and knowledge in which people are treated as objects of development – as passive recipients of development. • E.g. What is to be done for “them”? • Objects of development are stripped from their history • Development may be regarded as a process of racial formation – e.g. colonialism: citizens and subjects of colonialism – e.g Mahmud Mamdani’s book “Citizens and Subjects” • How is race embedded within development? Race is actively constituted in and through development interventions p. 417 • Critical issues in development remain power and poverty, but we also need to acknowledge the social inequalities of race Week 11 Human Rights and Development Grugel and Piper Article: Do Rights Promote Development? • Are rights useful for tackling the multiple forms of exclusion (social, political, economic, gender-based) and marginalization experienced by poor people? P. 80 • Do rights arguments work as a tool for change? • Should rights-based approaches take precedence over other kinds of arguments for justice such as need, obligation or core state responsibilities? • 1948 – the UN Declaration of Human Rights • After 1989 – re-surgence of a global discourse around human rights and respect for individual rights • Growth of democratisation movements, new democracies in the global South, transnational movements demanding new rights in the global South • Initially rights were de-linked from development as development focused on the macro, the bigger picture and more economic questions • Focus on the market, access to services • End of 1990s: focus on getting the institutions for development right • 1999: Sen: “development as freedom” shifted development’s focus onto rights • 2000 onwards: human rights are seen as constitutive of development – more multi-dimensional view of poverty which includes rights • Human rights seen as contributing directly to poverty reduction, aid effectiveness and good governance • Range of new international campaigns use the language of rights • UN rights conventions such as the 1990 Convention on the Rights of migrants and their families – setting standards for how states should treat marginalised groups • 2001 – 2002: development agencies began to frame their demands about development AND rights • UNDP : view that rights are an integral feature of development Arguments and Debates • DFID: rights-based development means encouraging individuals and communities to claim rights and to become drivers of change • Means empowering people to claim their rights to opportunities and services made available through pro-poor development Grugel and Piper Article: Do Rights Promote Development? • Rights discourses are very important: emphasize agency and the ordinary person in development • They also focus on bottom-up change • Moves us to level of human experiences and the many forms of abuse and injustice that much of the strictly
More Less

Related notes for IDSB06H3

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.