# data[].attributes.body
One of the key takeaways from Pailey’s article the message conveyed that even as scholars, practitioners and policy makers our experiences and encounters with development are fashioned by race. To me this is an important takeaway as designing policy or development programs without an empathetic understanding of the target demographic would lead development being top-down as mentioned in Escobar’s article and possibly have destructive rather than a humanitarian effort. Race is one such perceptual filter identified here that hinders or schematizes perception. One way to combat the racial filter could be to build teams of practitioners ensuring perspective taking by bringing together professionals from multiple racial, local and expert domains and take a human centric bottom-up approach to development.
-Priyanka K.

# data[].attributes.body
Comte's point of view caught my attention specially when he mentions the idea of progress behaving with nature's laws of change. It was unexpected that he mentions women to be superior from men thanks to their "social sympathy" essential for development, from his point of view .  María Mónica Gutiérrez

I agree, I was surprised by this too! I found the emphasis on sympathy in regards to the 'social' very interesting, with Comte's view being that there is no tension between self-interest and sympathy. Development and progress seemed to have been about finding a balance between individuals pursuing their own self-interest, and working for a common social interest, with Smith emphasising moral judgement, and why individuals are motivated to act.
Izzi B

Response by Moustafa:

But doesn't he normalize gender roles for "natural qualities," which I think is also affected by his Catholic views that also surface in his view of "third stage" of societal development?

Response to Maria:

I agree on the points made before, Comet’s perspective on the social position of women also surprised me. This is particularly because Comte produced his work in the early 19thcentury, prior to the what could have been considered as the era of somewhat liberating literature on the ongoing gender role debate.

The points you have highlighted also made me think, whether it is accurate to suggest development is the nature’ s law of change, or would it be important to emphasise that it is not simply nature, but the capitalist nature’s law of change in order to sustain the system.  Therefore, Comte’s statement that “women’s “social sympathy” is essential for development” might be understood better from a Marxist feminist perspective within the capitalist natural context. For example, Zaretsky suggests, the nurturing nature of women could encourage the process of development, as women provide free unpaid housework, which according to the theorist involves teaching capitalist values to the next generation of labour force, while also providing psychological support to their husbands, so they can return to work fresh without wanting to rebel against the system. However, the extent of the applicability of this theory is debatable depending on many factors, such as the era and given society of focus.

- Veronika

# data[].attributes.body
I enjoyed this overview, particularly JS Mill's idea of the stationary state. It seemed to subvert the traditional teleological mindset of the Victorian era and sounded, to me at least, a lot like modern, ecologically minded economics. I wonder how this aim 'blissful' steady-state, could also be used to define and contrast 'poorer nations against economically advantaged ones' as Escobar writes?
Elliot P

Response by Sheu Jeen:
Mill's stationary state and 'Art of Living' also really spoke to me. Your question about comparing poorer nations vs wealthier ones brought to my mind 2 prime examples of smaller, less economically advantaged countries which could be said are practising this concept; Bhutan (70% forest cover and Gross National Happiness index), and Costa Rica (50% forest cover and aims to be carbon neutral by 2021). It would be interesting to understand from an anthropological perspective the success of these countries vs those who have more resources to do so but have not managed to.

Response

I really like those examples. It would be interesting to research where those two countries are ranked by the IMF and WB, when positioned and defined by their development standards. Also if they managed to avoid the 'grand scale' structural adjustments which were discussed in the lecture.

Elliot P

# data[].attributes.body
Cowen & Shenton provide an interesting historical account of how 'development' has been understood – both theoretically and in practice - from the 17th century though to the mid- twentieth century. Using India as an example they show how ‘development’ has involved cyclical processes in which later cycles have involved attempts to correct mistakes made in earlier cycles –such as the emergence of rural development in India as a corrective to the power and property rights given to  landlord classes in the colonial era. Their account highlights that a central theme has been a concern with maintaining social stability and order though periods of change and transformation. This historical perspective implicitly raises questions about the ideas, interests and concerns that underpin development policy and practice today (A question that Escobar possibly considers that he has answered!).
Jennifer H

# data[].attributes.body
J. S. Mill and his 'stationary state' also stood out to me. His views about the corrupt effect that a system which supports 'an unlimited increase in wealth', and an earth drained and destroyed to support a 'large, but not a better or happier population' seem to speak directly to us, in the midst of a climate emergency, today. Much of my reading for Climate and Energy Policy consists of the same premise - we're now in a system of 'unlimited increase' which is lowering standards of welfare, and hindering 'development' by some of its definitions.
Bea

Response
I agree with you, Bea. There was much in this piece that felt particularly poignant to us today, and that quote is powerful. For me, the authors' explanation of the mainstream shift in intellectual understandings of progress from cyclical to linear, contextualised this growth obsession that we have grown so used to in contemporary understandings of development.  When the authors write that, 'This idea of progress connotated a linear unfolding of the universal potential for human improvement that need not be recurrent, finite or reversible', but 'potentially limitless', my heart sank. It does seem to me that this mindset is still in place- technology is seen to have a limitless scope for human improvement. Yet, the problems you have identified above, such as climate turmoil and lowering standards of welfare are proving that this limitless improvement is a myth.
Dora

Response
It is sorrowful to realize that one has already come up with the idea of sustainable development so early, and we are failing to put it into practice 160 years later.

# data[].attributes.body
This was an interesting take on race and development. There were some points which I did not fully agree with, but I liked how she opened up about how “whiteness wields structural power and privilege in development corridors” in some part because “Western whiteness remains a signifier of expertise, whether real or perceived.” Having witnessed this, it was interesting to see this highlighted in an article.
Sarah K

In response to Sarah's post:
"Western whiteness" is also considered "best" and "right", as Pailey says. This conception gives no value to opening up dialogue about race, a dialogue that needs to happen as it is essential for the de-centering of development. María Mónica Gutiérrez

In response to Sarah's post:
I have the same opinion as you concerning this article. Pailey's, compared to the other writers, was very open about the 'white gaze' that is still present in development. there should be a mutual exchange of knowledge from everyone that is involved.  Tessa

# data[].attributes.headline
Developing a Reciprocal Dialogue on Development

# data[].attributes.subject
Developing a Reciprocal Dialogue on Development

# data[].attributes.body
Pailey engages in a compelling critique of the warped conception of power and knowledge in the field of development, in which 'western whiteness remains a signifier of expertise, whether real or perceived' (p 731). In his conversation around decentering this white gaze of development, Pailey refers to Escobar's (1995) view that 'people in the global South [should] resist externally imposed development interventions' (p 739). Pailey briefly raises an interesting critique of Escobar which is that this commitment to resist has the power to essentialise the local and traditional, and in turn lead to a rejection of all external support, including that with good intention and a willingness to adapt.  I found this a particularly interesting point of discussion. I generally agree that open dialogue is important, not simply so that the global south can 'learn' from the global north, as the paternalistic historical discourse might have it, but also so that the sharing of knowledge can be reciprocal. I think that as the climate crisis worsens and the realities of industrialization are revealed, there are lessons that the global north must learn if it too is to develop and progress. To shut dialogue down prevents this mutual knowledge sharing that has the potential to be hugely beneficial globally.
Claudia

In response to Claudia:
I just realised my post is kind of on the same line as yours :) but yeah, I agree with you and believe that mutual exchange of knowledge and dialogue on an equal footing would  absolutely be beneficial for the future. However, I do feel that the wording 'externally imposed' suggests the more pernicious and coercive nature of development; perhaps the 'alternative ways of thinking, being and doing' already encompasses more democratic forms of global exchange
- Ayesha Badat

# data[].attributes.body
The point that stands out most for me is Escobar’s perspective where he describes development as a top-down, ethnocentric and technocratic approach that treats people and cultures as abstract concepts. This is a point I also observed while working in a CSR in Mumbai, India. Where in excessive focus on meeting top down quantitative goals and the presumption that  the experts, those at the top set and understood the aspirations of the defined target demographic- the poor, also led to a certain amount of dehumanization of the target. Thus making one question the bureaucratic nature of development which could lead it to be a destructive rather than humanitarian social action as also suggested by Escobar.

-Priyanka K.

# data[].attributes.body
Escobar’s point is one of ethnocentrism, that links development to power. With Foucault’s influence, Escobar conveys development as an organised system of power and control – an instrument through which holds the possibility to influence structures in society and alter how people should behave. When reading, I thought Escobar showed development as a form of cultural imperialism, which has been destructive to the “targeted” people who it was supposed to benefit. I think this links to the idea suggested by Amadiume (1987), found in Pailey’s paper, that in order to help de-centre the “white gaze” of development Western women could focus on ensuring that the ethnocentric prejudice in developmental policy is monitored to prevent developing countries to feel inferior or to doubt the importance of their culture.
-Rebecca

# data[].attributes.body
I fully understand Escobar's point of  view, and agree with most that I've read. However, in my opinion, development isn't inextricably linked to modernization for a diverse number of obstacles such as: lack of entrepreneurial skills, lack of institutions to provide capital, lack of technology, lack of motivation and son on. In conclusion, before talking about modernization, we should ensure that children and youth acquire knowledge and skills that will allow their communities to thrive.
Stefania C

Response by Riwa:
I do agree with you, but I think the point he was trying to make was one of the ethnocentricity of development. While it is true that technology today is deemed modern (and it is quite an amazing thing), I think he was trying to say that it was forced upon societies that had still not "reached" that point. Every society needs to progress on its own as every society will take into consideration its own members whereas when its an external force, the individual doesn't matter, only globalisation and modernisation. I could be wrong though and I am open to any other responses

Response by Moustafa:
I think what Escobar is pointing out is the how 'Development' is a discourse to indoctrinate the Global South, most of which is former colonies.

For example, most Economic Development theories utilized in the 20th Century are Western, which are premised on colonial Economic Theory of the 19th Century, and are prescribed to 'developing' countries by economists from the Global North (or those trained in reputable institutions in the Global North).
The capital market is informed by and serves neoliberal capitalists that are not concerned by the 'development' of poor countries

Response: Capitalism deems every group with not enough possessions underdeveloped, erasing the to be seen complexity of "underdevelopment", reducing these people to something which ought to be changed. This implies a disrespect towards their culture which capitalism development would inevitably render obsolete. Also, capitalism treats its own-given badge of underdevelopment as legitimization of it intervening in these cultures. I see this kind of development unethical, and the source is eye-opening in a sense that it points out, capitalism if failed to steer an underdeveloped group onto its "correct path", as least makes it into something which is politically sustainable and dirigible on the altar of capitalism.
Andrew

# data[].attributes.body
What really resonated to me in this article is when Escobar claimed that development projects do not look at culture or people.  There are many examples that can support his argument just as many that can oppose him, yet the former outweighs the latter. Anthropologically, for instance, one could look at Leenhardt's work on the Malenisian where he explains that when the missionaries came to their land, they turned their lives upside down by the simple notion of Christianity (deemed more acceptable and progressive by the Europeans), which emphasised individuality, a concept they were not aware of, driving some to extreme measures such as alcoholism or even suicide.

- Riwa

Response by Priyanka                          Riwa agree with the point you are making there are examples to support and oppose his argument. Thanks for sharing the interesting example. Adding -one of the key methodologies in behavior science and design thinking  being adopted when applied to development is the human centric approach which in its essence takes a bottom up approach and humanises the process and people involved. (Check out work by Ideo)

Response by Karen: This point really resonated with me too in the reading, and also in the lecture when we heard about 'Development with a Human Face'. I like your reference to Human Centered Design. I've used these methodologies a lot in my work as a marketer. They are great, however, sometimes I feel they still are done with stereotypical views of the humans you are serving / without true understanding. Not sure if this is true in the development space, but I suspect so given the constraints in place. There seems to be a need for greater anthropologic thinking / approach to truly get the most from the approach.

Response to Riwa:
I definitely agree with the fact that there are more examples of the former. In my understanding, one of the reasons for this is the much used top down approach that simply presumed the upper echelon would lift the lower ones. Furthermore, many of he key concepts in development, such as modernization are found and based around western ideals and standards. The standards and ways of living they are aiming to get to are those of the west, believing that to be the correct method, and doing so completely disregards to heritage, culture and identity of the individuals they are looking to change.
- Shabazz

Response to Riwa:

I agree on the importance of highlighting the development vs culture debate. Occurrences like this from my perspective emphasise the importance of assessing who are the stakeholders of the implemented development projects and how would they benefit from it- is the development implemented for the improvement of the social and human welfare of a given community, or the underlying intention is profit which could shadow the process almost as a form of neo- colonialism from a cultural perspective.

A great example the illustrates the development vs culture debate raised by the author is Helena Nordberg- Hodge’s ethnography on the Ladakhi community of Tibet.

Followed by the replacement of agricultural by capitalist monetary economy in Ladakh encouraged by the Indian government, the nature of the community changed. They began to experience notions of relative poverty (especially after western television programmes have been introduced) despite, they did not have a word for poverty prior to the imposed developmental changes. Young people began to abandon traditional clothing due to feelings of shame, and many no longer spoke the traditional Ladakhi language due to changes in the educational curriculum.

- Veronika

# data[].attributes.body
I found this to be a very difficulty read actually. I would probably need to read it a couple of times more to understand it better. However, what struck me in this article was the thinking of development as a form of restoration of social order - is this where development got its moral underpinnings I wonder.
-Anuradha-

Response by Laura Torres:
I agree with you. The reading is very dense, I feel I would need to read each author’s ideas more closely to fully understand their thoughts - specially the Saint-Simonias! But, yes! I take out from it that development has always been envisioned as a way to regulate societies or to measure the success of regulated societies. What disturbs me about this notion is how it originally rested upon the assumption that “improvement [is accomplished] through the human effort of labour” (p.12). This idea of Adam Smith is very dangerous... On the one hand, the success of an individual (or a society) depends on multiple things -like background, economic status, environmental conditions, social relations, etc.- so “effort” can’t be the only factor to take into account. On the other hand, this way of thinking leads to the construction of stereotypes that are aimed to justify why some people (countries) make it, and why others don’t: they might be too lazy, too traditional, too simple, etc. I can see how then, development as a way to regulate society, turns into a hierarchy that allows the people of the top intervene the people of the bottom with the excuse that “their effort is better”. My question here would be… if people understand that, as we saw on the lecture, development is only possible because of undervelopment -meaning that the “efforts” of the ones that succed are in truth made of the lack of possibilities of others- would we then see that maybe what is wrong is the social order that we are trying to regulate?

# data[].attributes.headline
Pailey's experience in development and race

# data[].attributes.subject
Pailey's experience in development and race

# data[].attributes.body
I liked Pailey's article because it discusses the white gaze and Eurocentric connotations of development especially on the African continent. Moreover, she discusses her experiences in the development industry (while working in Liberia) and how she noticed that whiteness creates structural power and privilege in development, because whiteness (due to imperialism and colonialism) acts as a indicator of 'expertise'.
In addition, to her working experiences, I like how Pailey discusses how the 'white gaze' of development via international migration and policy biases hat disproportionately affects Black and Brown people, through the hierarchies of passports and geopolitics of citizenship tiers, border controls, travel bans, etc. via right wing conservative policies. This is interesting because we see these biases play out in development policies- especially concerning migration policies involving such crises.

+Phoebe

Response by Rebecca:
I also found this paper very interesting and liked also how Paley considered the bias of development policies concerning immigration. I thought about how ideas of the 'white gaze' and ethnocentrism links to the idea that refugees have been constructed to be 'the other', not belonging to any nation state. This exclusionary discourse negatively impacts the ability for refugees to gain asylum and freedom, controlled by the factors listed (passports, border controls...). This enables nation states to avoid responsibility and holds "the real crisis...in faulty Western policy making" (page 736).

# data[].attributes.body
The idea that development itself has its own needs and is self-fulfilling was an idea that stuck with me. It reminded me of Escobar’s point about ‘the concept of professionalisation’ and the notion that development can be theorised and applied to underdeveloped countries, with certain forms of knowledge being held as ‘truth’. Development as an industry and its establishment as a programme to be studied seems to take away from what should be the fundamental point of development — to improve the conditions of humanity. It struck me that there was a shift towards ‘adjustment with a human face’, which focused on the actual experience of poverty, rather than simply treating the social as a technical issue to be solved rationally, using specialised knowledge and ‘professional’ status. I feel that this could further link to Pailey and the categorisation of development as a series of ‘racial projects’, that reinforce structures of domination based on racial identities, along with Bell’s notion of ‘interest convergence’, which implies that the true interest of development is not always aligned with the interests of marginalised groups.
Izzi B

# data[].attributes.body
I really enjoyed reading Pailey’s heartfelt piece about (call for?) decentring the white gaze in CDS whereby she herself decenters whiteness numerously by referencing works of BPOC writers, scholars etc. I found it interesting to note the violence inherent within something as ostensibly simple as the language we use (e.g. migrant vs expat). One thing I often notice from some of the anti-development discourse is what Pailey refers to as its tendency to essentialize and valorise the ‘traditional’ and ‘indigenous’ as if it were a monolithic, static and untainted thing, which I agree tends to be an unhelpful way of framing it and is very reminiscent of those early anthropologists!! As somebody very new to development, I would love to know if there are examples of when indigenous and new forms of knowledge have been synthesised in an effective way in a development context?
- Ayesha Badat

Response by Sheu Jeen:
Ayesha, there is a global movement called Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas, that aims to support indigenous communities self-determine plans and strategies for protecting territories, using traditional/indigenous knowledge as a vital resource for managing natural resources. Perhaps this could be interesting for you, and while this may seem to be coming from a  "conservation" context, for indigenous peoples, the idea of development is inseparable from the environment. Check out https://www.iccaconsortium.org/

# data[].attributes.headline
What can development learn from intersectional feminist approaches?

# data[].attributes.subject
What can development learn from intersectional feminist approaches?

# data[].attributes.body
It strikes me that while they are coming to it differently, both Escobar and Pailey are resisting the homogeneity / universality in development thinking, and the refusal to both acknowledge and account for differences in the discourse and approach. Here I was thinking about intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991) and how feminism has benefitted from locating discourses at the intersection or race and gender in order to dismantle the hegemony of a single voice – which in this case was the white woman.

The specific question I am asking is, if the study of communities is such an integral part of development, and if development needs to be placed in a social and cultural regime, then how might it  benefit from intersectionality – i.e, how can it account for multiple grounds of identity when considering how the social world is constructed (Crenshaw, 1991) To put it in another way, what can development learn from feminist intersectional approaches? I’d love to hear some thoughts.
-Anuradha-

Response by Moustafa:
I think your question depends on what you mean by "development." If we follow Pailey's (and Escobar's) argument, I do not think (the machine of) Development is waiting (or willing) to learn from a decolonized point of view. However, if it is knowledge production for example, I think anthropology can contribute to what 'development' means for different groups

Response to Moustafa:

I agree that the area of development must be specified before we can answer Anuradha's question; however, I can think of a few historical examples where Western development did indeed borrow from Indigenous practices, such as with the birth of permaculture. Bill Mollison, an Australian biologist, only founded this field after spending a considerable amount of time studying a community of Aboriginals in Tasmania. I think it would be more accurate to say that one of the main issues  lies in “the machine” of development not being willing to acknowledge the origins of such innovations, while also applying and adjusting “decolonized” practices to fit a colonized world. - Mahali

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with how the top down approach has led to dehumanisation, in addition to these agencies of development (who are meant to be working and implementing policies in the interest of a particular demographic), are frequently ignored from the development process. Furthermore, Escobar discusses that despite the work of these institutions benefitting people, their efforts have not been completely innocent on their behalf, such as contributing to underdevelopment. This is seen in many parts of the world with development agencies doing sinister and inhumane things, such as injecting women with chemicals that control fertility (which looks like population control to me). In addition, Escobar’s discussion on the bureaucratic nature of development shows how forms of powers have normalised and controlled knowledge by bureaucratising social action, which reinforces the top down approach and power relations, which maintains a hierarchy in development

+Phoebe

# data[].attributes.headline
Response to Priyanka on Escobar's criticism of the top down approach

# data[].attributes.subject
Response to Priyanka on Escobar's criticism of the top down approach

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Priyanka but would like to add the each "problem" is viewed individually into poverty, health, education, infrastructure with experts, agencies and departments tasked to fix each. A bottom up engaged, hollistic view that lack of education leads to job insecurity, the inability to access health care, food poverty, homelessness etc. through engagement with local communities would hopefully alleviate the longstanding paternalistic and neocolonial approach.

# data[].attributes.body
I really enjoyed this text. In particular, I am fascinated by the quote from Charles W. Mills:  "room has to be made for race as both real and unreal: that race can be ontological without being biological […] shaping one’s being without being in one’s shape“ because it proves how imagined concepts can be so rooted in our understanding of the world that we turn them into something painfully real. In this sense, development is the same as race: there is no agreement on its definition, there is no real way of measuring what it implies... I feel that development by itself does not even exist. We have turned it into something real by imagining what we want it to be, and we have hierarchized the world according to that imagination.

It makes me wonder... if we were to understand development as both real and unreal, would we still be talking about the First and the Third world?

Laura Torres

Response to Laura -
This is such a profound way of looking at the issue Laura. So many more themes come out of this. Lived experience versus knowledge. Visible versus invisible. Economic outcomes versus power structures. Which of this is real and which is unreal?

Response to Laura:

I also loved the reference to that quote. It's so important to recognise that something can be ideological, and yet have material dimensions and consequences. We cannot dismiss the very 'real' impact of race simply by calling it a 'construct' and, therefore, thinking of it as 'unreal'.
-Maria

# data[].attributes.headline
On development and ‘Development’ – Moustafa Yamada

# data[].attributes.subject
On development and ‘Development’ – Moustafa Yamada

# data[].attributes.body
Through this text, I realized how I was fixated on ‘Development’ as a neocolonial project that more or less started with the Marshall Plan, although I have previously studied post-enlightenment colonial economic theory. Cowen and Shenton provided a descriptive account of the history of development, which I found to be disturbing, although expected.

While I was unable to ‘read’ where Cowen and Shenton stand with regard to the positivist development doctrine, I could but disagree with Comte and J.S.Mill on Progress and Development. Edward Said (2003:14) criticizes knowledge production of the that time of being racial charged and imperialistic, in which the Global South is “inferior,” which also sets a foundation for knowledge production at large that reproduces the position of the “Orient.” This can also be read in the accounts of Mill’s Principles of Political Economy where he refers to local Indians of being too poor or of limited intelligence.

# data[].attributes.body
I like your take on this [caveat - have not read Paley yet  so pls give me the benefit of doubt]  failing the  intersectionality test is a reason for concern.  The equation race=power is one aspect, not the only - it may be sufficient but it is not necessary,  I am thinking about concepts of development within State vs between States - think North-South  development conception in Europe for example, or - how does race intersect with class?  Back to positionality.

# data[].attributes.body
Reading Escobar opened my eyes to the historical trajectory of how “development” as we know it came to be in its present form. As a practitioner, I can attest to the challenges posed by the “industrialisation and professionalisation of development”; flying in foreign experts to fix problems and address needs in underdeveloped countries, among others. There will never be true development in any sense until the very people who stand to gain, or lose, the most from these interventions can speak, decide and act for themselves. This requires a paradigm shift in the development discourse and re-aligned power flows. Where do we even begin to take apart and rebuild the global aid machine?
- Sheu Jeen

Response to Sheu Jeen
Great question Sheu Jeen. And I would definitely love to hear views. As someone new to development, while I have been vaguely aware of the politics of aid, its only now I am becoming aware of its weaponizing impact. On a separate note, isn't it interesting that there are so many "war" metaphors used to describe  development processes?!
-Anuradha-

Response to Sheu Jeen,
That is the good question. I want to share that, on the one hand, probably we could not deny the benefits carried by modernisation-development; but on the other hand, each ethnic or local or traditional group of people are practicing their own particular conditioned life in certain ways. But if the modernisation is everywhere and 'traditional/local' groups can not avoid it, the way we can do is that to explore the balanced way, not perfect one. To find the specific needs of local communities for specific aid from the project of development. To hear local own voices, but also give assessments, for getting rid of some certain purpose. Probably anthropologists could undertake such jobs? Haha, professionalisation again.

Bo Yang

Response to Anuradha and Bo Yang:
Totally agree on the use of the war metaphors, that was something I picked up on as well! Hope to discuss more in the tutorial.

Bo Yang, love the idea of the balanced way and not the perfect way! And to a large extent I do agree and have observed that the social sciences are not incorporated enough into aid and development work (e.g. technical areas like healthcare and shelter often have doctors and engineers/architects as experts, but still lack social science expertise)
-Sheu Jeen

response to Sheu Jeen

Theres a great metaphor  which relates to your point about  "flying in foreign experts to fix problems". It describes a bar in Madagascar where colonial officers and their families used to sip gin and tonics served by black Madagascans. Now it is exactly the same, but the pith helmets and linen suits have been replaced with NGO branded t-shirts and beige shorts. The bar staff are the same.
I like the metaphor in its illustration that development is not actually doing anything new, it is just a well rebranded colonial project that claims to "raise everyone up" but to what level? Who determines development except those who claim it for themselves?
Flora LH

# data[].attributes.headline
The origins of development can be traced through the parallels of economic and sociological theories based on the industrialisation of Britain and the position of the British East India Company from the 18th century. Beginning with the Enlightenment with theories developed by Ferguson and Smith that the role of the state was to set the rules for labour and for the market to operate to them for the benefit of all. This law, when applied to the position of the British East India Company, led position led to extreme corruption and abuse as recognised by Edmund Burke in the late 18th century. In the case of British industrialisation, Malthus argued against the Smith asserting that industry could thrive while doing nothing for the labourers while landowners could control the market through restricting and driving up prices rather than maximising productivity. Later theories developed by Comte and expanded by JS Mills in the 19th century, stressed the need for trusteeship. In the case of the British East India Company, by advocating for trusteeship and recognition of the village level community structure, public projects were developed including road building and railways. It could be argued that the 19th century trustees have been replaced today by NGOs, partnerships and charities who continue the follow the path of development with recognition of local level engagement. 

# data[].attributes.subject
The origins of development can be traced through the parallels of economic and sociological theories based on the industrialisation of Britain and the position of the British East India Company from the 18th century. Beginning with the Enlightenment with theories developed by Ferguson and Smith that the role of the state was to set the rules for labour and for the market to operate to them for the benefit of all. This law, when applied to the position of the British East India Company, led position led to extreme corruption and abuse as recognised by Edmund Burke in the late 18th century. In the case of British industrialisation, Malthus argued against the Smith asserting that industry could thrive while doing nothing for the labourers while landowners could control the market through restricting and driving up prices rather than maximising productivity. Later theories developed by Comte and expanded by JS Mills in the 19th century, stressed the need for trusteeship. In the case of the British East India Company, by advocating for trusteeship and recognition of the village level community structure, public projects were developed including road building and railways. It could be argued that the 19th century trustees have been replaced today by NGOs, partnerships and charities who continue the follow the path of development with recognition of local level engagement. 

# data[].attributes.body
Susie Brand

# data[].attributes.headline
On the reproduction of imaginaries - Moustafa Yamada

# data[].attributes.subject
On the reproduction of imaginaries - Moustafa Yamada

# data[].attributes.body
I resonated with Pailey's article the most, as it is very close to my own research interest. As a practitioner who took up different professional positions in development, I could see her argument in my day-to-day work.

At this point there is not much that I can share than to reiterate her own question (p:730) "How complicit are we in upholding and reproducing the racial hierarchies that underpin this field?"

# data[].attributes.headline
Personally, Pailey’s article strikes me the most as it was most fascinating to read. Pailey’s, out of all articles, discusses and argues most about the ‘white gaze’ and the connection to development. Furthermore, she takes her own experiences in the field of development and states what she has noticed concerning whiteness and the power and privileges they have in the institutions or organisation.  She has a very interesting take on race and the development sector. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Personally, Pailey’s article strikes me the most as it was most fascinating to read. Pailey’s, out of all articles, discusses and argues most about the ‘white gaze’ and the connection to development. Furthermore, she takes her own experiences in the field of development and states what she has noticed concerning whiteness and the power and privileges they have in the institutions or organisation.  She has a very interesting take on race and the development sector. 

# data[].attributes.body
Tessa

# data[].attributes.body
Pailey's article was engaging, clear and thorough. I really enjoyed reading it. Her insistence upon mainstreaming the concept of race within development, raising it to a similar level of priority as, say, gender, is incredibly important. One of the most outstanding parts of the piece was her discussion of Mills' concept of The Racial Contract, an idea which is powerful and useful when thinking about the invisibility of race in development discourses. The notion that it is 'We the white people' who are involved in the social contract chimes with the overriding idea of white paternalism that still persists in mainstream development policies.

Dora

# data[].attributes.body
I think this brief article by Escobar well illustrates the frustration and impending need for reform experienced at the end of the last century. His statement "instead of seeing change as a process rooted in the interpretation of each society's history and cultural tradition... these professionals sought to devise mechanism and procedures to make societies fit a preexisting model that embodied the structures and functions of modernity (p.386)" succinctly points out the problems of post-war development schemes, such as "big D development" which overly emphasized economic growth and neoliberal thinking.
However, as the century turns and the "development" started to encompass wider indexes, his argument, which is largely dichotomous, may have to be reexamined to highlight the changes in the field.

Ryoko

# data[].attributes.headline
This is a simple point, but the concept of big D vs little D development really resonated with me. I must admit that, while doing the readings, I was a bit confused about what development really meants (vs. how I've always used the term). This notion that it has many meanings - and that context is key - helped broaden my perspective on what it is / what it could be.

# data[].attributes.subject
This is a simple point, but the concept of big D vs little D development really resonated with me. I must admit that, while doing the readings, I was a bit confused about what development really meants (vs. how I've always used the term). This notion that it has many meanings - and that context is key - helped broaden my perspective on what it is / what it could be.

# data[].attributes.body
I can see where Escobar's analysis is aimed at.  I wonder though whether he is too simplistic.  The creation of discourse is one aspect.  The handling of reaction and feedback of the 'developed' is neglected in his views though (at least in this paper).  Thinking about the use of carrot (progress) and stick (repression), the creation of the good poor (eager recipient, promoter of 'bottom up' and 'participation') vs the bad poor. 'Help them in their Country' as it goes / Emanuela

Response to Emanuela:
I agree that Escobar's argument comes down overwhelmingly on one side, and doesn't focus on the nuances between the discourse, or the lexicon of development. Perhaps in the context of the late 90's when Escobar is writing, the need to radically rethink the failing neoliberal model of development leads him to this more black and white take on it?
Bea

Response to Bea and Emanuela

One frustrating aspect of Escobar’s approach - to pick up on Bea’s comment - is that he focuses exclusively on the ‘failures’ of the system. In a presentation earlier this year (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-o0merYDLA) he stated that “We don’t have to accept the one future that is offered to us by capitalism, by high technology, by the West and by heteropatriarchal (?recording unclear) capitalism”. For Escobar, is ‘successful’ development possible or is ‘development’ no more than a discourse supporting the ethnocentric, capitalist world system?  To express this in more concrete terms: should we think of the  Human Development Index in Escobar’s terms as merely another failed component of the top-down world system that he criticises or is there some value in seeing it as an  attempt to focus attention on the disparities in  health, education and the life opportunities that people have in an imperfect  world?
Jennifer H

Response to Emanuela, Bea and Jennifer:

I am not sure if Escobar is arguing in terms of binaries, although I would agree with him that 'Development' is failing, being a person that has been working in the field for more than 6 years myself. If you examine how the system functions, you will get to see that the usual business is that OECD countries create categories and "interventions" that are imposed on governments and individuals from the Global South.

On the other hand, South-South cooperation, most recently Chinese Aid in Africa, is also a project of exploitation and neocolonialism in which China gains access to cheap resources...
Moustafa Yamada

In response to Moustafa:

I think that South-South developmental cooperation/exploitation is something that is really interesting to bring up in this context and represents a gaping hole in the literature as I read it. The case of Chinese development initiatives in Africa really interesting. I think its important to note that in addition to the economic benefit that China is able to reap through investing in Big D infrastructure style development projects across Africa (largely in mining), there is huge global political influence to be won through the expansion of the Chinese One Belt, One Road project into Africa.
Claudia

# data[].attributes.body
I think it’s important to consider that, as well as an ideological gain, there is also a financial gain on behalf of the ‘developed’ countries. As development discourse becomes hegemonic, the socioeconomic structures of ‘developed’ and ‘underdeveloped’ countries become increasingly linked. Development can be seen as a method of creating an ever-expanding captive market – and ensuring that the socio-economic connections are in place so as to allow the ‘developed’ country to become the financial beneficiary of this expansion.
- Maria

Response to Maria:
That is a very valid and strong point. Escobar said it himself that 'Poverty, illiteracy, and even hunger became the basis of lucrative industry for planners, experts, and civil servants.' In light of this statement there is no arguing with your perspective. However, it is also worth mentioning the political gain that can be benefited from. Whilst the development efforts were not successful, they managed a political and technically manageable level of underdevelopment. As far fetched as this may sound, at the beginning their was a fear from developed countries of the social unrest that could be caused by underdeveloped ones. In a more current global climate, there is a constant scramble to retain power as one of the "greater" nations, to that aim, a politically and technically manageable underdevelopment is a beneficial tool to maintain a position in the global structure of power.

- Shabazz

Response to Shabazz and Maria: I agree with both your comments on the benefits that ‘developed’ countries have from development projects. In relation to this I wanted to add a comment on the historical/political context of the post-war development. Although not strongly emphasized by Escobar, I think that the cold-war context with its opposition between URSS communism and Wester capitalism influenced the choices of western country to “apply” capitalism over ‘underdeveloped’ countries as a system (or the only system) that would have led them toward development and wealth. Probably they ‘honestly’ thought that it was the best working mechanism, but I am keener to think that by ‘developing’ poor countries they also wanted to assert the superiority of capitalism. This was just to further stress that developed countries cannot be thought, as you mentioned, to have acted out of altruism.
- Sarah M.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading this piece, I found myself feeling slightly disheartened that such knowledge — though radical for its time — worked its way into development discourse just over 20 years ago and yet still so little has been done to address it. It is true that “Diversity and Inclusion” programs have become the norm among agencies and institutions that wish to be more inclusive by hiring more people of color. Yet, as exemplified in Pailey’s article, the opportunities for upward mobility or executive positions within these organizations still fall overwhelmingly in favor of white males (p. 731), thus showing that these efforts have actually in practice done very little to break down the eurocentric, ethnocentric nature of development that Escobar describes.

I was also struck by how he writes about the homogenization of “third world” countries: “...a squatter in Mexico city, a Nepalese peasant, and Tuareg nomad become equivalent to each other as poor and underdeveloped” (p. 386).  It once again stresses the importance of thinking outside of the limited, homogeneous identities that have become tethered to specific regions (the Middle East, Central America, etc) and the “Global South” as a whole.  - Mahali

# data[].attributes.body
This a great essay that direct our attention to the role of 'race' in so-called development. In terms of 'White Gaze', it is absolutely a true contributor that forming the accounts and reality of 'development'. However, it also triggers me to think that, where is the 'Male Gaze' or 'Elite Gaze' or ‘Bourgeoisie Gaze’?

I feel that Paley has not shown that why race is so specific for issues of development. Then, to some extents, at least for me, the racism is overlapped with issues of gender and class and something else socially constructed (if so). The concept about 'phenotype' is just mentioned once time, but not fully explained. I believe it is better if Paley could provide one specific case that a particular project of development in a specific region that conditioned by racism-related biological signifier, historic attribution and contemporary sociocultural structure. The cases in Liberia is one for 'de-centre white gaze', and also lack theoretic clarification about its specific feature in comparison to ethnic, gender, class issues.

I like the quotation from Escobar, '... the result of the establishment of a set of relations... the systematization of these relations to form a whole'. I think such relations are always inscribed in power relations, the power (im)balance between races, genders, classes, ethnicities, religions and so on. They are significantly, but not only, socially constructed.

Bo Yang

# data[].attributes.body
In this article, Escobar showed us how "development" as discourse was tightly bound with an entire system of knowledge about modernization. Fundamentally, such discourse dominated the representation and identity of the third world as poverty, underdevelopment and archaic. By introducing knowledge and technique that can be studied through processes of institutionalization and professionalization as "solutions" to underdevelopment, development was specified and packaged as a neutral science of social development, while behind which is the politics of the conceptualization and problematization of a third world. As a result, modernization, followed by industrialization and urbanization, was defined as the "right value". In light of Escobar's discussion, I think development, along with its conceptual link to modernization, needs to be analysed in a historical context. With reflection on such link, we can see how a "development-modernization" discourse is misleading and restrictive to our image of what development is and what a society is; and only by breaking such restriction, an alternative, which is not that generally modernized, could be possible.
Zhenyuan Fang

# data[].attributes.body
There are many great observations and points made by Escobar and his fundamental understanding of the negative effects of the top down approach and use of the artificial construct called underdevelopment are completely agreeable in my opinion.

Of the many things to unpack, what resonates to me through out Escobar's writing is the focus of development in the mid 40's-50's. There was such an "effort" to address the poverty, hunger, illiteracy, technological issues, agriculture and the cultural values of the "underdeveloped" territories. These issues were prominent in areas such as Asia, Africa and Latin America. If we are to understand that what development is now, found it's starting point in the mid 90's, then we should bear in mind many of these issues in the third world were caused by imperialism and colonization, which halted the development of many territories. Therefore, we can see how the creation of development as discourse is a tool to study the mess in the wake of imperial and colonial behavior.

If we look deeper into Escobar's description of underdeveloped being an artificial construct, you will find a better understanding of much of the academic discourse in various fields of study had heavy western influences. The term developed was defined through economic standards and the existing standards of the European lifestyle, not only that both the culture and practices of the Europeans was considered modern. Therefore modernization aimed to get lesser territories to that standard. From the very beginning all those inhabiting a "lesser" developed territory lost any and all power to define and control their lives.

Escobar has very eloquently illustrated how much power, Western countries hold in the realm of development. Which is a sentiment that is later echoed in the works of Pailey.

In my opinion development studies in the mid 40's-50's was just a tool devised to study a mess of their own making.

- Shabazz

# data[].attributes.body
1. I find very illuminating the fact that silencing the role of race in development (and not only) is symptomatic of racism – rather than indicator of its absence, as it could be more ‘comfortably’ been assumed.

2. Considering the history of development being strongly entangled with European history and history of ‘though’, as presented by Cowen and Shenton, and (thus) suffering from a white gaze, is there another way to think of development? In other words, does its legacy inevitably make it impossible to shift development toward a less western-centric discipline/approach/intention? Is there an alternative path, or is development intrinsically and inevitably ‘rotten’? Pailey writes that past and present theories of development have created “phenotypic others”, and similarly Escobar describes how “development proceeded by creating ‘abnormalities’ (such as the ‘illiterate’, the ‘undeveloped’[…])”. What is the path, if there is any, for development theories to be applied without “otherizing” and “categorizing”?
- Sarah M.

# data[].attributes.body
Overall I was impressed by Paley's compelling critique of the "white gaze" of development. As I read through the article I thought of how critiques and doubts on "white is always right and West is always best" (p 733) are rising in today's Chinese society. I wonder if that also comes along as part of the refections on the value of our own culture and the doubts of the long lasting western superiority, or is the discussion allowed by the authority because it is used as a tool in promoting this new-era nationalism in our country. Questions and thoughts keep coming in mind as I read the article. Some parts really spoke to me.

Siwei (Shelley) Tan

# data[].attributes.body
I found Escobar’s analysis of development very brilliant. “It
comes as no surprise that development became a force so destructive to third world cultures, ironically in the name of people’s interests”.

I cannot stop thinking about the fact that most of the organizations dealing with “development” or that are operating in the international system were created after WWII in a specific environment and also in “paternalistic mindset”. If I can use Escobar’s words, I would say that the mindset was: influenced by a top-down ethnocentric and technocratic approach, that always treated people of the “third” world as an abstract way. This generated fear and underestimation, of their own cultures, in the third world populations.

Because of all that, it is very difficult to believe that development theories were set up only in the name of people’s interests, especially knowing that all the knowledge produced about the third world is used and promoted by institutions through applied programs, conferences, international consultant services held by western countries or carry out by people with a vision of development still linked to the aspect of economic growth.

Is it possible to affirm that development theories after 1945 were a continuation of colonial practices? Is it possible to interpret the evolution of each country as a process rather than a development?

-Susanna Owusu

# data[].attributes.headline
Different ways of understanding Development

# data[].attributes.subject
Different ways of understanding Development

# data[].attributes.body
I’m sure that trying to find a unique definition of “development” is now very arduous for me.

I have always been used to analyse the word “development” taking in consideration only the debate after 1945 and from an economic point of view, furthermore, I believed that some indicators to analyse the condition of developing countries were sufficient to define the status of each nation in the evolutionary process.

I always knew that the theories of development came from a Eurocentric conception, but I ignored its historical origins. Thanks to the lectures and readings I now understand the technical evolution of the term "development" and its transformation over the years.

-Susanna

# data[].attributes.body
I  really enjoyed this article, it is a breath of fresh air in a development  discourse (modern, well-communicated, critical, multi-diciplianry...). Development's tendency to so often preoccupy itself with concerns about monolithic concepts in general- be that "poverty", "indigeneity", "modernity" or even "development". The assumed neutrally of language and the quiet violence that it brings with it is a very important point. Does the history of development curtail our ability to expand past these tendencies to generalise? If this "project", born in whiteness and Christianity and violence and colonialism is to ever move beyond its beginnings do we have to change all the language? Should we want to move beyond? Is development worth saving?
Flora LH

# data[].attributes.body
Given international migration policy’s pertinence to current political discourse, I appreciated to see how Pailey included it as yet another “channel for reinforcing the white gaze of development” (736). The “sedentary policy bias” she speaks of has never been more visible. Just in the past week we have seen the UK Home Office release plans to stop migrants’ boats with nets, while the US Immigration & Customs Enforcement have ramped up deportations of Haitians and Cameroonians. The utilization of harsh, inhumane tactics like these has been a direct response to the manufactured “migration” or “refugee crisis,” which serves no other purpose but to “keep black and brown people in their place” (736) as part of the Western nation-state’s quest for homogeneity.

Though Pailey’s mention of how the “white gaze” manifests within charity work is brief, this is something that I believe must be analyzed as thoroughly and critically as international migration policy itself. If the world of development is as rife with whiteness and racism as she writes, then surely the same is true of humanitarian aid, where policymaking and practice is still primarily in the hands of white North-Americans and Europeans. - Mahali

# data[].attributes.body
Given international migration policy’s pertinence to current political discourse, I appreciated to see how Paily included it as yet another “channel for reinforcing the white gaze of development” (736). The “sedentary policy bias” she speaks of has never been more visible. Just in the past week we have seen the UK Home Office release plans to stop migrants’ boats with nets, while the US Immigration & Customs Enforcement have ramped up deportations of Haitians and Cameroonians. The utilization of harsh, inhumane tactics like these has been a direct response to the manufactured “migration” or “refugee crisis,” which serves no other purpose but to “keep black and brown people in their place” (736) as part of the Western nation-state’s quest for homogeneity. 
Though Pailey’s mention of how the “white gaze” manifests within charity work is brief, this is something that I believe must be analyzed as thoroughly and critically as international migration policy itself. If the world of development is as rife with whiteness and racism as she writes, then surely the same is true of humanitarian aid, where policymaking and practice is still primarily in the hands of white North-Americans and Europeans. 

# data[].attributes.body
I completely agree with your point about the phenomenon that has overtaken development and undoubtedly humanitarian aid as well, where notably “white” foreigners considered experts in their field are flown in by NGOs with seemingly endless budgets. Building on that, something I have always found very strange and patronizing is how Western, white scholars can, after studying any region or group for a few years, be known as “experts” on said regions or groups. Meanwhile, African and Asian scholars are generally limited to becoming “experts” on their own regions only, while also having their expertise questioned on the basis that the issues are “too close to home,” thus suggesting an inherent, internalized bias. I would argue that the acknowledgement and break down of these stereotypes has the potential to be the first step towards reconstructing the development sector as a whole. If we can lift the limitations that academics and experts of color are subjected to, we will eventually get closer to the voices of those impacted most by aid interventions. - Mahali

# data[].attributes.body
When discussing his perspective on power and control in relation to development, Escobar suggested, the process of problematising poverty within certain countries almost functions as a tool that justifies the interference of another country that is viewed to have a more robust economic and social structure, therefore taking a position in the role of the saviour. Although it appeared to be a somewhat monolithic view at first, Escobar’s thought made me think of the potential impact of some fundamental developmental theories, such as Rostow’s five stages of growth and Wallerstein’s world system theory more critically. Considering their hierarchal illustrations of levels of development based on a given subjective measure, I was wondering if the latent effect of these theories could be influential on the predisposition of power asymmetry as they could also be utilised to indicate who might be the saviour and who needs saving, therefore possibly reinforcing and reproducing the unequal relations.

- Veronika

# data[].attributes.body
As a development majoring student in bachelor, it was not very new to know that the origin of development was from the Europe and the US, however it was meaningful to organize the history fo development in chronological order in order to see how so-called 'developed countries' have been incorporated into this neocolonialism which is publicly knows as development project.

-Ayaka

# data[].attributes.body
Despite finding Cowen and Shenton's piece dense and difficult to get through in general, I picked up on how the mentioned Trusteeship in the 19th Century and how it impacted the discourse of development. Those who viewed themselves as developed, felt that those who were not developed like them, could benefit from their development. Therefore, they took it upon themselves to determine what this process of development would look like. This has led to Development having a Eurocentric discourse, that to be developed, is to emulate European ways, as well as it being used as the justification of imperialism and colonialism from the 19th century onwards.

Furthermore, while discussing the theory of trusteeship Cowen and Shenton, point out how Saint Simonians that "only those who had the ‘capacity’ to utilise land, labour and capital in the interests of society as a whole should be ‘entrusted’ with them". To me it shows how trusteeship in these circumstances looks like taking over in the 'interest of other', which it is not but for the interests of themselves, which is a key characteristic in colonialism.

+Phoebe

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with your point overall, especially regarding does development really work in the best interest of the people and how development agencies work in a top down approach. It also makes me wonder further whether some of these development agencies and aids keep people in a dependent state and what does it take from development to happen from below, instead of relying too much on external forces, which tend to ignore voices of actors and stakeholders. Also, I think the reason why a country's evolution is described as development and not just a process because development is heavily rooted in colonial discourse and to be "developed" and I believe colonialism has interrupted and disrupted the natural progression of societies previously colonialised.

+Phoebe's response

# data[].attributes.headline
Discourse and the lack of mentions on race

# data[].attributes.subject
Discourse and the lack of mentions on race

# data[].attributes.body
Pailey highlighted the lack of mentions of race in discussions of development within scholarly discourse, as out of all the abstracts submitted for the 2019 Development Studies Association conference, only two references have been made to race. I was surprised by these findings, considering in order to get a holistic perspective of a complex phenomenon, it seems incomplete by starting not to consider the assessment and discussion of the representation and inclusion of race for a functional approach. Similarly to Pailey’s paper and Escobar’s discussion on discourses, I found Eriksen’s theory of globalisation and neo-colonialism somewhat to provide an understanding of the impact of this matter. Eriksen suggests that dominance is now established through ideologies rather than physical force. Therefore, the lack of mention could equal to the lack of flow of concerns and attention around race within the development discourse, meaning that it is being undermined, and would further contribution to the potential increase of unequal relations through the process of “development”.

- Veronika

# data[].attributes.body
The definition of development keeps altering as we perceive it from the eyes of different theorists and socialists. Escobar brings about the ideas of ethnocentrism in play as he correlates it with the idea of development. The constant application of a superpower's or dominant ruling agency's power (their thoughts, values, ideas) over the "third" world countries has been observed in various situations. This imposed judgement has derailed development in many ways but has also has been beneficial in the areas of education, urban development, business ventures etc.The 'side effect' or 'instrument-effect' of "development" activities may be far more important than their effect on the problem they officially address. Escobar goes on to argue about how institutional activities lay out the path that leads to the formation of these social relations and division of labor which is then portrayed in the world as a sign of development.

-Enakshi

# data[].attributes.body
I completely agree with you especially in the approach that was taken by Escobar to relay his understanding of "development". We see how the top-down approach is distinctly present in Escobar's work of elucidating the term development as we see a constant exploitation by these superior agencies to regulate the belief system of the third world parties, and to have seen this trend since colonialism has made me question the progression of development in today's world and how we have been playing a role in this technocratic world.

# data[].attributes.body
development have several stages to improve the economy and life stand.
JIahao

# data[].attributes.body
Escobar highlights how development in discourse describes both a means and a goal, how it is eurocentric in nature and how it proves to serve, once again, a westernized agenda.
He goes on to link his perspective on development with Foucault's findings about power and control, and he proves that development, exercised as an action, is a top-down eurocentric approach in which the 'legitimized' few  make decisions in the name of many, with the aim of 'development'.
I cannot help myself and see a resemblance between the way we practice development in the modern society and the way in which we used to colonize in the past. The resemblances are found in the way we determine what and whom needs to be developed, or changed, or evolved and for what reasons. An example I can think about here is the appearance of more and more supermarkets and hypermarkets near rural regions in Romania, which have lead to a massive drop in farming and cultivating careers, and has rendered many people poorer than they were before, as their labour cannot bring them close to the stock and the prices found in supermarkets. Many people have stopped farming, have become poorer, less educated, and are now dealing with a lack of purpose, many of them resorting to alcoholism or substance abuse. - Ioana Illes