Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1525/sod.2023.9.2.172
Nhinh Thi Do, Thorkil Casse, Gvantsa Gverdtsiteli, K. Hyakumura
The global challenge of moving toward a low-carbon energy system heightens the tension between states’ economic development efforts and environmental concerns. In Vietnam, increasing energy demand has led to a boom in hydropower development in recent decades. For local communities, dam construction has brought displacement, involuntary resettlement, deteriorating income and living standards, and rising poverty. However, from the central government’s perspective, the negative local impacts of hydropower projects are negligible compared to their national benefits. This study uses the construction of the Bản Vẽ hydropower plant to illustrate how government entities expand their control of villagers’ livelihoods in the name of environmentalism. Spanning nearly twenty years, our case study reports on changes in the Vietnamese approach to authoritarian environmentalism. The authorities initially promoted voluntary relocation with a brochure depicting the high quality of resettlement areas. When the remaining locals hesitated, because they had heard that the promised new homes had various problems, the authorities forced them to move. Overall, the case study shows the Vietnamese authorities deploying different instruments to implement their will, engaging in little meaningful dialogue with local people. Moreover, when locals sought alternative income from acacia plantations, the authorities cited environmental concerns to justify confiscating their forest holdings.
{"title":"Hydropower Plant Construction and Resettlement in Nghệ An, Vietnam","authors":"Nhinh Thi Do, Thorkil Casse, Gvantsa Gverdtsiteli, K. Hyakumura","doi":"10.1525/sod.2023.9.2.172","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2023.9.2.172","url":null,"abstract":"The global challenge of moving toward a low-carbon energy system heightens the tension between states’ economic development efforts and environmental concerns. In Vietnam, increasing energy demand has led to a boom in hydropower development in recent decades. For local communities, dam construction has brought displacement, involuntary resettlement, deteriorating income and living standards, and rising poverty. However, from the central government’s perspective, the negative local impacts of hydropower projects are negligible compared to their national benefits. This study uses the construction of the Bản Vẽ hydropower plant to illustrate how government entities expand their control of villagers’ livelihoods in the name of environmentalism. Spanning nearly twenty years, our case study reports on changes in the Vietnamese approach to authoritarian environmentalism. The authorities initially promoted voluntary relocation with a brochure depicting the high quality of resettlement areas. When the remaining locals hesitated, because they had heard that the promised new homes had various problems, the authorities forced them to move. Overall, the case study shows the Vietnamese authorities deploying different instruments to implement their will, engaging in little meaningful dialogue with local people. Moreover, when locals sought alternative income from acacia plantations, the authorities cited environmental concerns to justify confiscating their forest holdings.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66955201","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Drawing on the frameworks of moral economy and relational sociology, this article examines how small farmers have developed different dispositions toward risk calculation during the market transition in China. Using interview data and ethnographic observation from a village in northeast China, I show that monocropping farmers tend to view and manage risks differently from diversified farmers. Monocroppers, who rely on state procurement along with migrant work, have developed a personal-relationship-oriented style of risk calculation that avoids unfamiliar connections and prioritizes kinship ties in their economic lives. Diversified farmers have adopted market-cycle-oriented risk calculation due to their experience of boom-and-bust cycles. I find that individuals’ market dispositions are shaped by their lived experience of the immediate environment and have far-reaching effects on actors’ capacity to participate in markets.
{"title":"Becoming A Market Participant","authors":"Shumeng Li","doi":"10.1525/sod.2022.0025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2022.0025","url":null,"abstract":"Drawing on the frameworks of moral economy and relational sociology, this article examines how small farmers have developed different dispositions toward risk calculation during the market transition in China. Using interview data and ethnographic observation from a village in northeast China, I show that monocropping farmers tend to view and manage risks differently from diversified farmers. Monocroppers, who rely on state procurement along with migrant work, have developed a personal-relationship-oriented style of risk calculation that avoids unfamiliar connections and prioritizes kinship ties in their economic lives. Diversified farmers have adopted market-cycle-oriented risk calculation due to their experience of boom-and-bust cycles. I find that individuals’ market dispositions are shaped by their lived experience of the immediate environment and have far-reaching effects on actors’ capacity to participate in markets.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66955660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article, we link ideas from Evans concerning embedded autonomy to forest loss. In doing so, we hypothesize that higher levels of meritocratic hiring, firing, and promotion decisions in a government’s bureaucracy should correspond to less forest loss in low- and middle-income nations. We test this hypothesis by analyzing data from 78 low- and middle-income nations with ordinary least squares regression and two-stage instrumental variable regression models. We find support for the hypothesis across a variety of model specifications, which include other factors that have been linked to forest loss. We conclude by discussing the theoretical, methodological, and policy implications of the study.
{"title":"Connecting Bureaucratic Structures to Forest Loss","authors":"J. Sommer, Michael Restivo, John M. Shandra","doi":"10.1525/sod.2022.0018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2022.0018","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we link ideas from Evans concerning embedded autonomy to forest loss. In doing so, we hypothesize that higher levels of meritocratic hiring, firing, and promotion decisions in a government’s bureaucracy should correspond to less forest loss in low- and middle-income nations. We test this hypothesis by analyzing data from 78 low- and middle-income nations with ordinary least squares regression and two-stage instrumental variable regression models. We find support for the hypothesis across a variety of model specifications, which include other factors that have been linked to forest loss. We conclude by discussing the theoretical, methodological, and policy implications of the study.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"520 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66955634","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Most previous studies of return migration have defined return migration as a return to the place of birth (or village of origin). In this paper, we reconceptualize return migrants as consisting of two groups: those returning to their place of birth (“local returnees”) and those returning to a nearby town, county, or city (“regional returnees”). Using a nationally representative sample from the 2014 China Labor Dynamics Survey, we carry out a systematic comparison and analysis of these two groups of return migrants, along with migrants at their destination and non-migrants at their origin. Our results challenge previous views of the negative socioeconomic selectivity of return migration. Both local returnees and regional returnees play an important role in non-farm economic activities. More importantly, we find that regional returnees have more favorable outcomes than local returnees in terms of income and economic activities. As China makes significant progress in upgrading its transportation infrastructure, and with the growing availability of digital technology for businesses, the proportion of regional returnees should grow over time. We argue that this new form of return migration represents a promising pattern of development and urbanization in China and deserves more attention from scholars and policymakers.
{"title":"Return Migration and Economic Outcomes in Rural China","authors":"Zai Liang, Meng-Tse Cheng","doi":"10.1525/sod.2022.0033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2022.0033","url":null,"abstract":"Most previous studies of return migration have defined return migration as a return to the place of birth (or village of origin). In this paper, we reconceptualize return migrants as consisting of two groups: those returning to their place of birth (“local returnees”) and those returning to a nearby town, county, or city (“regional returnees”). Using a nationally representative sample from the 2014 China Labor Dynamics Survey, we carry out a systematic comparison and analysis of these two groups of return migrants, along with migrants at their destination and non-migrants at their origin. Our results challenge previous views of the negative socioeconomic selectivity of return migration. Both local returnees and regional returnees play an important role in non-farm economic activities. More importantly, we find that regional returnees have more favorable outcomes than local returnees in terms of income and economic activities. As China makes significant progress in upgrading its transportation infrastructure, and with the growing availability of digital technology for businesses, the proportion of regional returnees should grow over time. We argue that this new form of return migration represents a promising pattern of development and urbanization in China and deserves more attention from scholars and policymakers.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66955667","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study draws on world-systems theory to generate new explanations for the uneven patterns of civil violence found in the world today. A large and well-developed literature shows that low-income countries with stagnant economies and undemocratic political systems are the most susceptible to outbreaks of civil violence. This literature, however, fails to consider how countries are positioned relative to the structures of global capitalism. By contrast, world-systems theory has long emphasized that a country’s position within the international division of labor shapes many of its domestic outcomes, including those related to development and democratization. Combining these two literatures suggests that “world-system position” has direct and indirect effects on civil violence, with the indirect effects being mediated by development, democratization, and related factors. Drawing on a sample of 152 countries observed from 1970 to 2018 and using high-quality data on major incidences of civil violence around the world, the study finds compelling evidence that non-core countries are considerably more prone to civil violence than core countries and that this gap is widening, not narrowing, over time. These results are robust to alternative measures of world-system position and various model specifications.
{"title":"Structural Position in the Global Economy and Major Episodes of Civil Violence, 1970 to 2018","authors":"Christopher Kollmeyer","doi":"10.1525/sod.2022.0021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2022.0021","url":null,"abstract":"This study draws on world-systems theory to generate new explanations for the uneven patterns of civil violence found in the world today. A large and well-developed literature shows that low-income countries with stagnant economies and undemocratic political systems are the most susceptible to outbreaks of civil violence. This literature, however, fails to consider how countries are positioned relative to the structures of global capitalism. By contrast, world-systems theory has long emphasized that a country’s position within the international division of labor shapes many of its domestic outcomes, including those related to development and democratization. Combining these two literatures suggests that “world-system position” has direct and indirect effects on civil violence, with the indirect effects being mediated by development, democratization, and related factors. Drawing on a sample of 152 countries observed from 1970 to 2018 and using high-quality data on major incidences of civil violence around the world, the study finds compelling evidence that non-core countries are considerably more prone to civil violence than core countries and that this gap is widening, not narrowing, over time. These results are robust to alternative measures of world-system position and various model specifications.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135953806","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Samuel Cohn, Jose Morales, Madison Poe, Yilin Li, Bryson Bassett
Leontief multipliers are an important component of economic growth. However, input–output analysis is generally treated as a methodological tool for studying other questions in development. The size of multipliers themselves is of interest, as they determine how much nations benefit economically from the growth of base industries. Of the three types of multipliers—industrial supply purchases by firms, consumer goods purchases by workers, and growth derived from all sources—only the first has attracted attention in the global value chain literature; the other two have been neglected. We use OECD data on a large sample of nations in 2005, 2010, and 2015 to show that significant cross-national and inter-industrial differences exist in the size of multipliers. Contrary to expectations, higher-income countries can sometimes have lower multipliers than lower-income countries. The largest multipliers tend to be in the global South. We then provide a model explaining the differences in multipliers in terms of the domesticity of purchases, the wage intensity of production, the geographical size of the country, and the changing roles of GDP per capita and education as societies develop. The significance of these findings for development policy is discussed.
{"title":"Why Economic Growth Stimulates More Growth in Some Countries Rather than Others","authors":"Samuel Cohn, Jose Morales, Madison Poe, Yilin Li, Bryson Bassett","doi":"10.1525/sod.2022.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2022.0017","url":null,"abstract":"Leontief multipliers are an important component of economic growth. However, input–output analysis is generally treated as a methodological tool for studying other questions in development. The size of multipliers themselves is of interest, as they determine how much nations benefit economically from the growth of base industries. Of the three types of multipliers—industrial supply purchases by firms, consumer goods purchases by workers, and growth derived from all sources—only the first has attracted attention in the global value chain literature; the other two have been neglected. We use OECD data on a large sample of nations in 2005, 2010, and 2015 to show that significant cross-national and inter-industrial differences exist in the size of multipliers. Contrary to expectations, higher-income countries can sometimes have lower multipliers than lower-income countries. The largest multipliers tend to be in the global South. We then provide a model explaining the differences in multipliers in terms of the domesticity of purchases, the wage intensity of production, the geographical size of the country, and the changing roles of GDP per capita and education as societies develop. The significance of these findings for development policy is discussed.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"481 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135058430","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper examines endorsement of developmental idealism (DI) about marriage in the United States, as well as differences in such endorsement by demographic characteristics. It is the first study to assess whether Americans relate changes in marriage to societal development—a key dimension of DI. The analysis draws on nationally representative survey data with 44 items designed to measure DI beliefs and attitudes about nine different marriage attributes. Overall, endorsement of DI about marriage, as well as unions more broadly conceived, is widespread in the United States. Large majorities of Americans believed “modern” marriage attributes are more common in developed countries, thought development causes marital change, believed marriage changed in the past, and expected marriage will change in the future in ways that are consistent with DI. Large majorities also believed long-standing “modern” marriage behaviors are good, but not newer “modern” behaviors of cohabitation, premarital sex, and same-sex marriage. Endorsement of marriage DI also differed consistently by race, education, and age: it was greater among non-Hispanic Whites, more educated individuals, and younger people. Differences by marital status and gender were small or nil.
{"title":"Developmental Idealism and Beliefs about Marriage in the United States","authors":"Derek Richardson, K. Allendorf","doi":"10.1525/sod.2022.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2022.0007","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines endorsement of developmental idealism (DI) about marriage in the United States, as well as differences in such endorsement by demographic characteristics. It is the first study to assess whether Americans relate changes in marriage to societal development—a key dimension of DI. The analysis draws on nationally representative survey data with 44 items designed to measure DI beliefs and attitudes about nine different marriage attributes. Overall, endorsement of DI about marriage, as well as unions more broadly conceived, is widespread in the United States. Large majorities of Americans believed “modern” marriage attributes are more common in developed countries, thought development causes marital change, believed marriage changed in the past, and expected marriage will change in the future in ways that are consistent with DI. Large majorities also believed long-standing “modern” marriage behaviors are good, but not newer “modern” behaviors of cohabitation, premarital sex, and same-sex marriage. Endorsement of marriage DI also differed consistently by race, education, and age: it was greater among non-Hispanic Whites, more educated individuals, and younger people. Differences by marital status and gender were small or nil.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66955622","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The scholarship on the consequences of social revolutions contends that social revolutions boost state capacity and strengthen the state’s developmental projects. Social justice and addressing the needs of ordinary citizens were central themes in the discourse of the Iranian Revolution and the Islamic Republic that emerged as the post-revolutionary regime with the fall of the monarchy in Iran. In this essay, I assess the performance of the post-revolutionary state in Iran according to various development indicators, comparing the post-revolutionary regime with the pre-revolutionary regime. My examination of indicators relating to health, education, poverty, income inequality, and housing presents more of a mixed result than the overall improvement that scholarship has anticipated and that the post-revolutionary regime promised. Furthermore, there is evidence of declines in some important areas of development and welfare provision. Based on this analysis, I propose directions for future research on the developmental outcome of revolutions.
{"title":"Social Development and Revolution in Iran","authors":"M. Kadivar","doi":"10.1525/sod.2021.0029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2021.0029","url":null,"abstract":"The scholarship on the consequences of social revolutions contends that social revolutions boost state capacity and strengthen the state’s developmental projects. Social justice and addressing the needs of ordinary citizens were central themes in the discourse of the Iranian Revolution and the Islamic Republic that emerged as the post-revolutionary regime with the fall of the monarchy in Iran. In this essay, I assess the performance of the post-revolutionary state in Iran according to various development indicators, comparing the post-revolutionary regime with the pre-revolutionary regime. My examination of indicators relating to health, education, poverty, income inequality, and housing presents more of a mixed result than the overall improvement that scholarship has anticipated and that the post-revolutionary regime promised. Furthermore, there is evidence of declines in some important areas of development and welfare provision. Based on this analysis, I propose directions for future research on the developmental outcome of revolutions.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66954143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In what ways, if any, do development workers practice solidarity? In-depth interviews with 42 current and former workers for the Canadian federal development agency reveal that emotions are important factors in how solidarity is enacted and where it breaks down. Almost all the interviewees described feelings of frustration and reward in their development work, but whether these emotions contribute solidarity is contingent on the extent to which these workers identify with their partners. The more they identify, the more they push for the development outcomes they believe will best serve their partners, often despite Canadian political priorities. However, the conflict between Canadian and development interests can lead to burnout, especially for women, who are more likely to challenge the organization—and to face professional hurdles as a result. In contrast, workers who see themselves as primarily accountable to Canadians experience less frustration and easier career paths. For this group, the reward of “doing good” becomes an additional source of privilege that further separates them from development partners. The case of Canadian development workers highlights the challenges of solidarity as an elusive yet important development ethic and sheds light on broader questions of how solidarity can challenge privilege to redress inequalities.
{"title":"“Just Push It Through”","authors":"Sophia Boutilier","doi":"10.1525/sod.2021.0039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2021.0039","url":null,"abstract":"In what ways, if any, do development workers practice solidarity? In-depth interviews with 42 current and former workers for the Canadian federal development agency reveal that emotions are important factors in how solidarity is enacted and where it breaks down. Almost all the interviewees described feelings of frustration and reward in their development work, but whether these emotions contribute solidarity is contingent on the extent to which these workers identify with their partners. The more they identify, the more they push for the development outcomes they believe will best serve their partners, often despite Canadian political priorities. However, the conflict between Canadian and development interests can lead to burnout, especially for women, who are more likely to challenge the organization—and to face professional hurdles as a result. In contrast, workers who see themselves as primarily accountable to Canadians experience less frustration and easier career paths. For this group, the reward of “doing good” becomes an additional source of privilege that further separates them from development partners. The case of Canadian development workers highlights the challenges of solidarity as an elusive yet important development ethic and sheds light on broader questions of how solidarity can challenge privilege to redress inequalities.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66954636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over the past two decades, the range of efforts to address global poverty and development has expanded dramatically. Yet, many of these approaches foreground market-based development and extend harmful neoliberal practices. Scholars have critiqued these practices for expanding capitalism to new realms, while others are more optimistic about the potential benefits of markets. In this study, I add a racial analysis to this conversation, arguing that colorblind racism plays a key role in justifying market-based development practices and obscuring enduring racial inequalities in development. I focus on a growing subfield of development—development engineering education—to demonstrate how colorblind racism informs students’ and practitioners’ approaches to development. Through interviews and observations of two development engineering programs and affiliated development organizations, I found that students and practitioners employed colorblind frameworks to legitimize market-based development, embracing the market as a seemingly race-neutral mechanism, in contrast to the overt racism that they connected to development aid. This research shows that to understand the popularity of neoliberal approaches to development, it is necessary to attend to how colorblind racism lends support to market-based practices. Further, this study illustrates the need to address multiple and mutating forms of racism in development.
{"title":"Colorblind Racism and Market-Based Development","authors":"Skye Niles","doi":"10.1525/sod.2020.0035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/sod.2020.0035","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past two decades, the range of efforts to address global poverty and development has expanded dramatically. Yet, many of these approaches foreground market-based development and extend harmful neoliberal practices. Scholars have critiqued these practices for expanding capitalism to new realms, while others are more optimistic about the potential benefits of markets. In this study, I add a racial analysis to this conversation, arguing that colorblind racism plays a key role in justifying market-based development practices and obscuring enduring racial inequalities in development. I focus on a growing subfield of development—development engineering education—to demonstrate how colorblind racism informs students’ and practitioners’ approaches to development. Through interviews and observations of two development engineering programs and affiliated development organizations, I found that students and practitioners employed colorblind frameworks to legitimize market-based development, embracing the market as a seemingly race-neutral mechanism, in contrast to the overt racism that they connected to development aid. This research shows that to understand the popularity of neoliberal approaches to development, it is necessary to attend to how colorblind racism lends support to market-based practices. Further, this study illustrates the need to address multiple and mutating forms of racism in development.","PeriodicalId":36869,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of Development","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66953253","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：