in Third

(1)

Jun Hesselberg

The Third World in lransition

The Case of the Peasantry in Botswana

Scandinavian Institute of African Studies, Uppsala

(2)

The Third World in Transition

(3)

(4)

The Third World

The Case of the Pesantry in Botswana

Scandinavian Institute of African Studies, Uppsala 1985

(5)

Jan Hesselberg

is professor in Development Geography at the Department of Geography, University of Oslo. His main research interests are production processes in rural areas and levels of living in the Third World. He has conducted field work several times in Botswana and Sri Lanka.

This book has been published with support from the Norwegian Agency for International Development.

ISBN 91-7106-243-2

@ Jan Hesselberg and Nordiska afrikainstitutet Printed in Sweden by

Motala Grafiska AB, Motala, 1985

(6)

PREFACE

The o b j e c t i v e o f t h e p r e s e n t work i s t h r o u g h t h e c a s e of Botswana t o d i s c u s s

the creation of poverty in the period of transition from tribal to modem society in the Third World today.

T h i s i s d o n e b y a n a n a l y s i s f o c u s s i n g a t

t h e p e a s a n t r y . The r e c e n t l y renewed f a s h i o n o f b l a m i n g t h e

peasants

f o r l a c k o f improved f o o d p r o d u c t i o n a n d t h u s a l s o f o r p o v e r t y a t l o c a l a n d n a t i o n a l l e v e l s i s q u e s t i o n e d .

I n a s h o r t n o t e i n 1 9 6 1 F a l l e r s l e f t no d o u b t t h a t a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c e r s i n A f r i c a c o u l d a n d s h o u l d b e c a l l e d p e a s a n t s e c o n o m i c a l l y , p o l i t i c a l l y and c u l t u r a l l y . P e a s a n t c o m m u n i t i e s a r e more d i f f e r e n t i a t e d t h a n t r i b a l s o c i e - t i e s b u t l e s s s o t h a n modern o n e s . P e a s a n t s c o n s t i t u t e t h e n a c a t e g o r y of p e o p l e f o u n d i n a c o u n t r y w h e r e f u n d a m e n t a l c h a n g e s o c c u r l e a d i n g t o a so- c i e t y o f a d i f f e r e n t k i n d . I t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e semi- autonomy o f p e a s a n t s r e l a t i v e t o l a r g e r s y s t e m s t h a t i s u s e d i n t h e a r g u m e n t o f t h e o p t i o n t h o u g h t a v a i l a b l e t o p e a s a n t s o f

withdrawing

from p r o d u c t i o n f o r m a r k e t s . The main a s p e c t s d e a l t w i t h i n t h e work a r e : s o c i e t a l e v o l u t i o n , a g r a r i a n t r a n s i t i o n , i n e q u a l i t y a n d p o v e r t y , a n d r u r a l s e t t l e m e n t p a t t e r n . T h e s e a s p e c t s p r o v i d e t o g e t h e r a f a i r l y c o m p r e h e n s i v e p i c t u r e o f t h e n a t u r e o f t h e t r a n s i t i o n i n which Botswana f i n d s i t s e l f .

The d a t a u s e d i n t h e e m p i r i c a l p r e s e n t a t i o n a r e p r i m a r i l y t a k e n from L e t l h a - kenq a n d Tutume, two medium- sized v i l l a g e s i n Botswana. S i m i l a r s t u d i e s were c a r r i e d o u t i n 1 9 7 6 a n d 1980 a l l o w i n g f o r a t i m e p e r s p e c t i v e . I n a d d i - t i o n , i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e c o u n t r y a t l a r g e i s u s e d whenever p o s s i b l e t o e n h a n c e t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e f i n d i n g s .

The t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e h a s b e e n t r e a t e d r e l a t i v e l y e x t e n s i v e l y . I t e n - c o m p a s s e s i n a few i n s t a n c e s more t h a n t h e d a t a g a t h e r e d p e r m i t t o t e s t . T h i s i s d e e m e d u s e f u l b e c a u s e o f t h e e x p l o r a t i v e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e s e p a r t s o f t h e work, I t i s a l s o r e g a r d e d t o b e f r u i t f u l t o i n c l u d e a t h o r o u g h d i s c u s s i o n o f

(7)

the concept development, of development studies and of development geography.

At the present early stage in the evolution of development geography, this part of the work may have some merit

per se,

in addition to explaining the choice of research approach.

Over the years I have had recurrent useful discussions with Gerd Wikan.

The arguments forwarded here have also benefitted from her penetrating question-marks. Sylvi Endresen has pointed at several fine nuances of meaning in the manuscript. I am grateful to both of them.

Jan Hesselberg August, 1984

(8)

CONTENTS

Preface

PART I INTRODUCTION

1. DEVELOPMENT AND GEOGRAPHY

Development and related concepts Some empirical observations

Development studies: causes and remedies of inequality and poverty

Development geography

Some problematic aspects of development studies Conclusion

2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

PART I1 THEORETICAL P E R S P E C T I V E 3. PEASANT AND RELATED CONCEPTS

Definitions of peasant Peasant studies

Characteristics of peasant production Conclusion

4. SOCIETAL EVOLUTION AND AGRARIAN TRANSITION Societal evolution

Agrarian transition Peasant differentiation Conclusion

5. AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND RURAL SETTLEMENT PATTERN Agricultural development

Rural settlement pattern

5. THE PEASANT CONCEPT, QUESTION AND HYPOTHESES The peasant concept

Questions and hypotheses Conclusion

PART 111 BOTSWANA

7. APPROACH AND DATA

A note on peasant and related concepts in the literature on Botswana

8. SOCIETAL EVOLUTION 9. AGRARIAN TRANSITION

"Work position" and types of agricultural producers Characteristics of the agricultural production process Multiactivity at the household and individual levels Conclusion

10. INEQUALITY AND POVERTY Inequality

Poverty Conclusion

11. AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

Policies and programmes relevant for agricultural development in Botswana

Viewpoints on agrarian policies in Botswana Conclusions

(9)

12. RURAL SETTLEMENT PATTERN 203 13. THE PEASANT CONTROVERSY

-

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 2 17 APPENDIX

1. Definitions 2 2 4

2 . Functions in Letlhakeng and Tutume 1976 and 1980 229

REFERENCES 231

(10)

PART I

INTRODUCTION

(11)

(12)

CHAPTER 1 DEVELOPMENT AND GEOGRAPHY

DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED CONCEPTS

Development constitutes a process. The concept is normally used at a fairly general level. It includes a wide variety of changing features.

It is in common usage equated with improvements. The word development thus has a positive connotation regardless of how it is defined. To pre- tend otherwise, as Seers (1972) says, is just to hide one's value judge- ments. Moreover, it is often difficult to separate the positive from the negative in a process of change. For instance, the building up of formal education is in most cases a good and necessary element for change. In many Third World countries formal education may nonetheless have negative side-effects such as alienation regarding strenuous work in, for instance, agriculture. Due to the arguments above one may opt for adopting a definition of development which is goal-free. Brookfield (1975) takes this stance when he defines development as "the whole process of change brought about by the creation and expansion of an interdependent world system".

In analytical work it is, however, necessary to establish a concept with a specified content and regarding the process of development also to give the concept a positive meaning. Since concepts such as change and evolution (which are broader concepts) cannot replace development as a general, descriptive and goal-free concept, it seems essential to refrain from de- fining development in a detailed manner.

Development

should instead be used, as is usual, to denote a complex process of change that may, although not necessarily in the short-run then later, result in improved levels of living for the world's population at large, that is, the collec- tive betterment of mankind. In thinking about development it is easy to fall pray to the use of a framework of mechanical evolution, of thinking in linear historical sequences leading to a typical modern Western (or Eastern) society. This is not implied in the concept in the present work.

In fact, one should strivc for an acceptance of multitudinous cultural definitions of the good life. ~ h u s , the concept has a certain amount of vagueness. This is as it should be. The concept should refer to a movement of a society as a whole to a better but undetermined position.

(13)

However, this "third option" should imply high economic welfare with low ecological imbalances and a minimum of personal alienation. There may be cases in which beneficial structural changes take place without immediate improvements in material satisfaction. At a later stage such structural changes may prove to be the key to economic and social development.

The point is that we do n o t a

p r i o r i

know what brings about development or what the necessary principal structural changes are in concrete empirical situations.

It is common to split the concept development into economic growth and social change which, for instance, UThant (1965) did at the start of the UN's First Development Decade. Social change is a broad concept and difficult to quantify. In view of the above discussion economic and social development will be used as analytical categories.

Economic devetop- m a n t

refers to economic growth (increases in GNP) and a more equal distribution of economic means (measured by income and employment). It is important to note that economic growth at the national level does not automatically reduce poverty and inequality or provide sufficient employment, at least not in the short-run. Many scholars confuse the concepts of growth and development. The reason is often, as for instance Sundrum (1983) anticipates, that as soon as attitudes and behaviour of people in

their economic activities become more like "economic man", growth becomes automatic and welfare in an encompassing sense ensues. By

s o c i a l d e v e l o p - ment

is meant improvements regarding such aspects as life expectancy, nu- trition and educational standard. In short, social development refers to the realization of the potential of the human personality. This is of course generally accepted. The path to this realization is, however, highly disputed. A pivotal controversy is, for instance, the possible ad- verse effect of redistribution of income on economic growth. Each path advocated of course contains its own contradictions. Development is ge-

r,erally a result of the interplay of "old" and "new" artifacts, social structures and cultural values. Normally, conflicts arise between the

"old" or indigenous and "new" or imported elements. Development accordingly constitutes a dialectical process in a Hegelian sense, that is, a rigorous prediction of societal evolution, as in Marxism, is not included. It is the method that is highlighted, and development in future does not necessarily have to contain similar negative effects everywhere, such

(14)

as the creation of an internal "proletariat". If we then are to under- stand the process of development, we have to look for conflicts and stress created when the "old" and "new" merge without

a p r i o r i

knowing the fundamental forces of change in particular places.

Development has by some been substituted with liberation (Goulet 1971), that is, with social justice and basic political freedom.

L i b e r a t i o n

means the removal of an elite by a majority who then assumes control over its own process of change. The most common example is nation-building by the majority in a country. To use liberation instead of development, to talk about strategies for change of political and economic power

r a t h e r

than how higher material and social levels are to be achieved, is to adopt a revolutionary in contrast to a reformist attitude. To my mind, liberation is nothing but a necessary prerequisite for development in certain countries, and cannot replace development as a concept of general concern.

There are, for instance, few prospects for economic

development

(not to say social development) in South Africa short of a struggle of liberation including violence. After a successful liberation struggle the question arises of what long-run content development should be given. Should the content be limited to economic and social aspects or should also the dimension of control over the forces of change be included? Rodney (1972) includes the latter aspect in his definition of economic development: "A society develops economically as its members increase jointly their capa- city for dealing with the environment". Can Third World countries become masters of their own transitions or must they depend on imports of technology and culture from the West (or the East), or let transnational companies dominate their large-scale economic activities? Undoubtedly, economic development can only in exceptional cases, if at all, take place in isolation from other more developed countries. The dependence on technological know-how is, for instance, a common characteristic of Third World countries

i n t h e i r present s t r a t e g y f o r development.

(BY strategy is meant a set of internally consistent plans deduced from a general or several part- theories given certain goals.) The question then arises whether the nc,ga- tive effects of the relations Third World countries have with developed countries put a number of poor Third World countries at a dead end. The concept

zinderdevelopment

denotes usually, in addition to undesirable conditions for work and life, such a situation where economic development is im-

(15)

possible due to the characteristics of the relations such countries have with developed countries. This is a relational mode of explanation.

Other scholars, who maintain that the developed countries are not

a c t i v e l y

underdeveloping the Third World, argue that

nondevelopment

(or undevelop- ment) is a better description of most Third World countries. This is a non-relational mode of explanation. It should be underlined that none of the economies in the Third World are stagnant, both quantitative and qualitative changes occur, although often at a relatively low level. Nonde- velopment and underdevelopment thus make sense only in comparing levels of development. The choice of words are evidently closely related to views adopted on causes for lack of development, whether the causes are origi- nating mainly internally or externally. (What appears to be internal causes often have an external dimension wholly or in part.) All Third World countries may be said to have been underdeveloped in a historical perspective. However, whoever or whatever is to blame historically for the existing inequality and poverty, the situation today is that an active underdevelopment as the

main

characteristic of the relationships (positive and negative relations will "always" exist) with the developed countries cannot be maintained for all Third World countries. Thus the designation underdeveloped countries is not appropriate for the Third World as a whole.

Nonetheless, both underdevelopment and nondevelopment are useful concepts for sub-groups of the Third World category.

The recent economic growth in some Third World countries has made the concept

dependent development

popular. In particularly the "Newly Industria- lizing Countries" (NICs) economic and social development, if not political development, have occurred to some extent. This development is, however, heavily dependent on foreign inputs of capital both private and governmen- tal. The debt-burden to multilateral development banks (for instance the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and private transnational finance institutions) reduce the freedom of choice for these countries regarding national economic policy generally. A question-mark is therefore put, through the use of the label dependent (in contrast to interdependent), on whether their rapid economic development can be sustained.

S p a t i a l development

is a major concern in geography. To decide whether a spatial pattern is optimal, is difficult in other but a limited economic sense. Once other criteria are included, it becomes less useful to at-

(16)

tempt to establish an optimum pattern. It is thus more relevant to ask if the spatial pattern functions in such a way as to justify the label developed. It is then often easy to see that spatial reorganization is necessary in order to attain economic and social development. Various alternative spatial patterns may thereafter be suggested.

The choice o f

a t e r n to designate the poor and non-modern countries of

the world implies a judgement on what the main causes for poverty or non- modernity are. In the 1950s and 1960s backward regions and less developed countries were commonly used. In contrast to these concepts, the concept "proletarian states" was used to point at the relations between nations as the main explanation for poverty and relatively permanent structural imbalances, that is, underdevelopment. In the 1970s underdeveloped countries gained popularity, as did the more optimistic term developing countries. Personally, I prefer poor countries to the former term but since poverty includes both a quantitative position and a structural dimension, neither poor nor underdeveloped are appropriate designations.

Since the structural changes that take place in many Third World countries are not conducive of economic and social development, the term developing country is not an appropriate description of reality generally. Myrdal

(1968) calls it a diplomatic euphemism. Others may be of another opinion and hence choose this term.

It has been a fashion today to split the Third World into a number of often overlapping categories. oil-importing/oil-exporting developing countries,

low-income/middle-incomedeveloping countries, most severely affected countries, least developed countries, non-oil least developed countries, island developing countries, landlocked developing countries, newly industriali- zing countries and others. (The rest of the world is usually divided into three categories: Industrialized (market) countries, centrally planned economies and capital-surplus oil-exporters.) The more specified and limited categories of Third World countries represent an important reorientation of the development debate because those categories are more empirically relevant than the often extreme generalizations made in the last three decades.

Nonetheless, there are some structural characteristics which are common to the Third World. To my mind, it is most adequate to use the term

Third

World

and T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s at the general level because, as has been said above, only some countries are today being actively underdeveloped and

(17)

only some are developing both economically and socially. Moreover, the concept Third World escapes an explicit comparison with the developed either capitalist or socialist countries. According to Lacoste (1965), the designation Third World was first used by Sauvy in an analogue with

"Tiers Etat" denoting all the disadvantaged groups in France in 1789 that were opposed to the nobility and clergy. The concept Third World is neutral. By using this concept, the scope is open for more complex explanations, and no

a priori

decision is made of the main causes of underdevelopment/nondevelopment at a general level. The First World refers to developed market economies and the Second World to the developed socialist countries. These terms are little used in the literature, and will not be applied here. The last argument for adopting the concept Third World is the implicit notion of (or hope for) a third path, an undetermined but possible path to a "sane society". At least it represents another, undefined option for development thinking and planning.

The Third World is negatively defined "all nations that did not become, during the historical process of the establishment of the present World Order, industrialized and wealthy" (Abdalla 1978). Exploitation and re- shaping of the economy and distortion of social, cultural and psychological patterns during the colonial epoch are essential common factors. The category Third World is therefore still useful in spite of the existing heterogeneity regarding, for instance, population size, resource endow- ment and level of development. This heterogeneity, or rather different combinations of undesirable characteristics, which the Third World countries have, makes a short and positive definition less appropriate. Most countries have all or approximately all of the following characteristics:

Insufficient food supply (or a skewed distribution among groups and/or regions), low productivity in agriculture, high population growth, physical and other resources which are unused or used by foreigners, huge unemployment, low degree of industrialization, incomplete market system, un- equally developed economic sectors hampering economic circulation, large tertiary sector and social structures contradlcotry to economlc optimisa- tion. The relative importance of these factors will vary from country to country. The main point is the existence of a large number of these (and other) factors

at the same time.

This was not the case in the developed countries earlier. In view of the above, the following two examples of definitions (somewhat shortened here) clearly become unsatlsfactory: A

(18)

region is underdeveloped when there are a net flow of capital out from the region, structurally caused unproductivity and increasing poverty (Frank 1967). A country is underdeveloped when it is dominated from outside and when sectors are thereby created which are not linked and have large differences in productivity (Amin 1974).

It is necessary when operationalizing the concept the Third World to rely on measurable aspects. In fact, the GNP together with structural imbalances of a relatively permanent nature give the group of countries included by the United Nations in the category developing countries.

Moreover, since the Third World is not the unit of analysis in the present work, it is in spite of its inadequacies acceptable in certain instances to use the World Bank concept "developing countries", which is adopted in major international statistical publications. The World Bank (1980 a) uses national income per person as the criterion of classification. Low- income (developing) countries (poor Third World countries) are those at or below 300 (1977) US dollars GNP per person. The middle-income developing countries include those countries which have a GNP per person above 300 (1977) US dollars and which are not included in any of the following categories: Industrialized countries, centrally planned economies or capital- surplus oil-exporting countries. The last category includes such countries as Kuwait, Libya, Oman and Saudi-Arabia. The middle-income developing countries comprise also Southern European countries such as Spain and Greece, and Israel and South Africa. These latter countries do not represent Third World countries because they have highly developed and relatively efficiently functioning government administrations. They have lastly no similar colonial experiences as the Third World. The oil-rich countries have such experiences. Furthermore, in these countries wealth and industrial production do not yet coincide. In addition, oil is an exhaustible resource. It is thus possible to argue that the oil-rich countries should, due to structural considerations, be included in the Third World category. The magnitude of their wealth seems, however, to prohibit such a reasoning. China is often not included in statistical publications for lack of data. The reason for arguing that China should be excluded from the Third World category, is that China was never really dominated by a western power. Furthermore, the Chinese culture never collap- sed. Its present coherent social structure, well organized economy and equality (although at a relatively low level of living) may make it appro-

(19)

priate to include China in the category centrally planned economies, and exclude it from the Third World category. Although the Chinese leader- ship maintains that the country belongs to the Third World (South, May 19831, this is not a sufficient reason to include it. It should be noted that the category centrally planned economies is rather heterogeneous in that it contains East-European countries and the Sovjet Union on the one side and China, Cuba, Vietnam and North-Korea on the other.

In sum,

~~>hc-n T

r c ? f & > r to

t h e Third W o ~ l d , I eccclude t h e Southern European c o u n t r i e s , I s m e Z , South A f r i c a , China arid t h e capital- surplus oil-expor- t i n g c o u n t r i ~ s .

Some of these countries may, however, be included when international statistical data are used. To offset this discrepancy, the category

poor Third World c o u n t r i e s

will be preferred whenever possible.

The rationale behind the above delimitation of the Third World is two-fold:

F i r s t ,

poverty and not a relatively low GNP per person is a necessary characteristic of a Third World country.

Second,

underdevelopment in the structural dimension

alone

is not sufficient for a country to be included in the Third World category.

When

poverty

is used here, it implies mass poverty, that is, a relatively large amount of a country's population which is living in either absolute or relative poverty.

Absolute poverty

refers to such aspects as inadequate dietary and health standard; in short, to insufficient provision of basic physical needs. A distinction may also be made between primary and secondary absolute poverty.

Primary ( a b s o l u t e ) poverty

refers to lack of enough food to sustain physical fitness for an individual (Rein 1970).

Secondary povc?rty

exists when the income earned is high enough for physical fitness but is used for other purposes. By

r e l a t i v e poverty

is meant that a part of a country's population has a less than acceptable (related to a national or world standard) satisfaction of basic needs and/or is kept away from political and/or cultural participation. Most often this means a lack of resources necessary to permit participation in diets and activities commonly

approved by society. An interesting question, although of only theoretical significance, is whether there is only secondary poverty in the world today or a redistribution of wealth and income would result in global primary poverty. In the super-industrial and post-industrial societies envisaged by Kahn (1976) the whole world will be inhabited by numerous people who are rich (GNP per person above 2 000 (1975) US dollars) and in control of the forces of nature. Economic growth will slow down and eventually stabilize.

(20)

1 0 0 y e a r s l a t e r t h e g a p b e t w e e n t h e 1 0 % r i c h e s t a n d 20% p o o r e s t c o u n t r i e s , now a t 1 0 0 t o 1 , w i l l b e o n l y 5 t o l . T h i s " economic t r a n s i t i o n " w i l l b e p o s s i b l e w i t h a v a i l a b l e r e s o u r c e s h e r e o n e a r t h . N o n e t h e l e s s , e x t r a - t e r - r e s t r i a l a c t i v i t i e s s u c h a s autonomous c o l o n i e s i n s p a c e i n v o l v e d i n raw m a t e r i a l a n d e n e r g y p r o c e s s i n g w i l l t h e n , Kahn m a i n t a i n s , a l s o e x i s t . I n my o p i n i o n t h i s i s a w r o n g k i n d o f o p t i m i s m . A l t h o u g h o n e s h o u l d c l a i m t h a t d e v e l o p m e n t p a r t i c u l a r l y s o c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t i s p o s s i b l e , i t o u g h t t o b e l o o k e d upon a s a n o n - e n d i n g s t r u g g l e - d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l s u c c e e d o n l y i f t h e w o r l d r e a l i z e s t h a t i t c a n f a i l .

To q u a n t i f y p o v e r t y i s d i f f i c u l t . I t i s v i r t u a l l y i m p o s s i b l e t o a r r i v e a t a n o b j e c t i v e c a l c u l a t i o n of a b s o l u t e p o v e r t y . P o v e r t y c a n b e shown t o v a r y i n a c o u n t r y f o r t h e same y e a r a c c o r d i n g t o a c c e p t a b l e b u t d i f f e r e n t o p e r a - t i o n a l i z a t i o n s o f t h e c o n c e p t . F u r t h e r m o r e , d i f f e r e n t s c h o l a r s may f i n d t h a t p o v e r t y d e c l i n e s o r i n c r e a s e s o v e r t i m e i n t h e same c o u n t r y f o r s i m i l a r r e a s o n s . T h i s h a s o b v i o u s l y i m p o r t a n t p o l i c y i m p l i c a t i o n s . The s e l e c t i o n o f i n d i c a t o r s a n d c h o i c e o f m e t h o d s f o r m e a s u r i n g a b s o l u t e o r r e l a t i v e p o v e r t y o r f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g a c o m p o s i t e i n d e x , a s o c a l l e d

po73erty l i n e ,

c a n n o t b e d o n e w i t h o u t v a l u e judgement. M o r e o v e r , a p o v e r t y l i n e w i l l b e r e l a t i v e when u s e d i n a c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d y . D i f f e r e n t s t u d i e s h a v e , f o r i n s t a n c e , g i v e n t h a t t h e p o v e r t y l i n e i n USA i s 1 0 t o l 7 t i m e s t h a t o f I n d i a ( S c o t t 1 9 8 1 ) . I n a T h i r d World c o u n t r y u r b a n a n d r u r a l d i s p a r i t i e s a r e a l s o impor- t a n t , making t h e p o v e r t y l i n e c o n c e p t a r b i t r a r y t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t . An example p r o v i d e d b y S c o t t c l e a r l y shows t h e d i f f i c u l t y i n " d r a w i n g a l i n e " : I n r u r a l W e s t - P a k i s t a n i n 1 9 6 3 / 6 4 34% o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n would f a l l below t h e p o v e r t y l i n e i f a Rs 2 2 5 income was u s e d f o r i n d i v i d u a l s . I f t h e same amount was u s e d b u t t h i s t i m e m e a s u r i n g e x p e n d i t u r e 2 6 % were b e l o w t h e l i n e . By u s i n g 2 1 0 0 c a l o r i e s a s a minimum r e q u i r e m e n t a s much a s 808 o f t h e p o p u l a - t i o n c o u l d b e s a i d t o b e a b s o l u t e l y p o o r . The c o n c l l ~ s i o n i s 1 . t h a t i t 1s b e t t e r t o r e l y on a l e s s g e n e r a l c o n c e p t t h a n a b s o l u t e p o v e r t y , s u c h a s mal- n o u r i s h m e n t , a n d 2 . t h a t it i s more u s e f u l t o o p e r a t e w i t h a d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n o v e r t h e income r a n g e . The p o o r would t h e n , f o r i n s t a n c e , b e t h e 20% w i t h l o r r e s t income. I n a c o u n t r y w i t h o u t a l a r g e p o r t i o n o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n i n wage employment, o r o t h e r w i s e e a r n i n g money, o r w i t h o u t a n i n - come p o l i c y , i t i s more i n t e r m s w i t h r e a l i t y t o u s e d u r a b l e consumer g o o d s

( e . g . b l a n k e t , t o r c h ) i n g e n e r a l demand i n t h e a r e a s t u d i e d t o e s t a b l i s h t h e c o n c e p t o f r e l a t i v e p o v e r t y . The f u n d a m e n t a l p o i n t i s t h a t p o v e r t y d e n o t e s n o t j u s t l a c k o f r e s o u r c e s , i t r e f e r s t o l a c k o f r e s o u r c e s u s e d ( a n d f e l t t o b e r i g h t l y u s e d ) b y t h e r i c h .

(21)

SOME EMPIRICPL OBSERVATIONS

T h e r e i s a t p r e s e n t a d i s m a l o v e r a l l s i t u a t i o n i n t h e T h i r d World d e s p i t e t h e e x i s t e n c e of economic growth on a v e r a g e and g e n e r a l improvements on some s o c i a l i n d i c a t o r s . Below t h i s i s d i s c u s s e d .

T h e r e h a s even i n t h e p o o r T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s been

economic growth

p e r p e r s o n i n t h e p e r i o d 1960-1980. The a v e r a g e a n n u a l growth p e r p e r s o n (con- s t a n t p r i c e s ) was 1 . 7 % (World Bank 1 9 8 1 b ) . I n d u s t r i a l m a r k e t economies had i n comparison a 3.3% growth.

The income gap i s t h u s widening b y t h e r i c h c o u n t r i e s g e t t i n g r i c h e r , and n o t t h e poorer g e t t i n g poorer.

~t s h o u l d b e u n d e r l i n e d t h a t t h e r e a r e v a r i a t i o n s i n s i d e t h e g r o u p o f poor T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s . I t was i n 1970 t h o u g h t p o s s i b l e f o r t h e T h i r d World t o a c h i e v e a n economic growth p e r p e r s o n of 3.5-4.5% (Heppling 1 9 7 1 ) . Moreover, t h e P e a r s o n r e p o r t (1969) h e l d t h a t 3.5% economic g r o w t h p e r p e r s o n o r 6% t o t a l growth would s u f f i c e t o c r e a t e economic development on a s u s t a i n e d b a s i s . The growth t h a t o c c u r r e d was, a s shown above, much lower t h a n e x p e c t e d , and lower t h a n t h e n e c e s s a r y l e v e l f o r development t o speed up.

The income d i s - t r i b u t i o n among people i n t h e poor Third World c o u n t r i e s has n o t improxed during t h e

1 9 7 0 s . The p e r c e n t a g e of income r e c e i v e d by t h e l o w e s t 20% was 4.9 i n 1970 and 4 . 1 a r o u n d 1977 (World Bank 1980 b). These d a t a i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e r e i n s e v e r a l T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s h a s been an i n c r e a s i n g inequa- l i t y and t h u s no

economic development

a l t h o u g h economic growth may have t a - ken p l a c e . I f unemployment i s i n c l u d e d a s a n i n d i c a t o r on economic development, t h e above c o n c l u s i o n i s s u b s t a n t i a t e d , t h e p r o p o r t i o n of t h e economic a c t i v e p o p u l a t i o n s e e k i n g work i s i n c r e a s i n g . A f u r t h e r i m p o r t a n t p o i n t i s t h a t self- employment o f t e n y i e l d s a n i n a d e q u a t e income t o meet b a s i c needs f o r a f a m i l y . Those who a r e self- employed may t h u s want ( a d d i t i o n a l ) work w i t h o u t a c t u a l l y s e e k i n g i t . T h e e s t i m a t e d f i g u r e of underemployment (of t h e t o t a l . l a b o u r f o r c e ) i n t h e T h i r d World was a s much a s 36% i n 1975 ( K i m and Hanson 1 9 8 2 ) .

On some of t h e i n d i c a t o r s of

s o c i a l development

t h e r e h a s been a p o s l t i v e change i n t h e 1970s. L i f e e x p e c t a n c y i s s t e a d i l y i n c r e a s i n g on a v e r a g e i n t h e T h i r d World. The same i s t h e c a s e w i t h t h e p e r c e n t a g e of t h e popula- t i o n which i s l i t e r a t e . I f food p r o d u c t i o n p e r p e r s o n i s u s e d a s an i n d i - c a t o r f o r n u t r i t i o n a l s t a n d a r d , t h e p i c t u r e i s n o t p o s i t i v e (assuming a n unchanged d i s t r i b u t i o n ) . The a v e r a g e i n d e x (1969/71 = 1 0 0 ) f o r 1977-1979 was 97 f o r t h e poor T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s ( I n d i a e x c l u d e d ) (World Bank

(22)

1981 b ) . S o c i a l development may e v i d e n t l y be s a i d t o occur o r n o t occur a c c o r d i n g t o i n d i c a t o r s s e l e c t e d .

The conclusion must therefore be that important improvements have taken place i n the social dimension i n the Third World, but on the whole social deve lopment, as economic deve Zopment, i s not found.

I t i s t h e n n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h a t t h e number of ( a b s o l u t e ) poor i s h i g h and i n c r e a s i n g . A t p r e s e n t a b o u t 750 m i l l i o n people a r e h e l d t o be e i t h e r " d e s t i t u t e " ( i n a c u t e p o v e r t y ) o r " a b s o l u t e " poor i n t h e T h i r d World. The f i g u r e w i l l i n c r e a s e t o 850 m i l l i o n s by t h e y e a r 2 000 accor- d i n g t o t h e low-growth World Bank s c e n a r i o which i n c l u d e s "unprecedented economic and s o c i a l advance i n some p a r t s of t h e world". The poor a r e b a r e l y s u r v i v i n g on incomes judged i n s u f f i c i e n t t o s e c u r e t h e b a s i c n e c e s s i - t i e s of l i f e . (The p o v e r t y l i n e used i n t h e s e c a l c u l a t i o n s a r e based on r e a l buying power i n each c o u n t r y . )

Although t h e r e a r e p o c k e t s of p o v e r t y i n developed c o u n t r i e s , t h i s p o v e r t y i s a r e s u l t of a skewed d i s t r i b u t i o n of income, t h a t i s , t h e r e i s secondary p o v e r t y . I n t h e poor T n i r d World c o u n t r i e s t h e r e i s l i t t l e t o d i s t r i b u t e a l t h o u g h t h e i n e q u a l i t y of income and a s s e t s o f t e n i s extremely h i g h , t h a t i s , primary p o v e r t y i s found a t n a t i o n a l l e v e l . Although t h e number o£

undernourished and hungry i n t h e T h i r d World i s n o t known, e s t i m a t e s p u t i t a t 500-600 m i l l i o n s ( B r a n d t 1 9 8 0 ) . About 8 m i l l i o n c h i l d r e n below 5 y e a r s of age d i e every y e a r from d i a r r h e a caught from p o l l u t e d w a t e r . Many f u r t h e r examples c o u l d be g i v e n . T h i s s u f f i c e , however, t o p o i n t a t t h e bad s t a t e of o u r p r e s e n t world.

DEVELOPMENT STUDIES: CAUSES AND REMEDIES OF INEQUALITY AND POVERTY

A f t e r t h e Second World War t h e d e b a t e concerning p o v e r t y and i t s c a u s e s i n t h e T h i r d World s t e a d i l y i n c r e a s e d i n p o p u l a r i t y . Development was i n t h e beginning seen t o be a problem of

Lack of capital and s k i l l s .

T h i s was a l s o t y p i c a l of t h e 1950s. G a l b r a i t h (1979) m a i n t a i n s t h a t what t h e developed c o u n t r i e s c o u l d a s s i s t t h e T h i r d World w i t h , were t a k e n t o be t h e c a u s e s of p o v e r t y . I n a long p e r i o d i n t h e 1950s p o p u l a t i o n p r e s s u r e on l a n d and food supply were, a c c o r d i n g t o G a l b r a i t h , n o t r e g a r d e d t o be c a u s e s of p o v e r t y because t h a t would have a l i e n a t e d t h e C a t h o l i c s of t h e developed c o u n t r i e s f o r whom f a m i l y p l a n n i n g was i d e o l o g i c a l l y i m p o s s i b l e . The development op- t i m i s m of t h e 1950s e x i s t e d a l s o i n t h e n e x t decade, t h e F i r s t Development

(23)

Decade. Nonetheless, it was now recognized by most scholars that eccnomic factors were not the only relevant factors for explaining or eradicating poverty. The "low-equilibrium trap", "cumulative circular causation" or

"vicious circle of poverty" became catch words.

A large number o f i n t e r - n a l f a c t o r s

(economic, social, psychological, political etc.) were seen to go together to produce a situation where a change had to be initiated in several dimensions in order to bring about progress. Although technology still was held to be the key factor, it was realized that technological adoption was not a sufficient condition for development. The "discovery"

of the limited ability of economics to solve the question of poverty in the Third World, resulted in that development studies became popular in many social sciences and in history. Nonetheless, modernization in the sense of westernization (the Western societies were made equal to the state of being modern, Bernstein 1973) continued to be the prevalent goal of development. This ethnocentrism was not widely criticized until the end of the 1960s. The view that development constituted a "total process" em- phasized the need to transcend the conventional segregation of economic and non-economic factors. This was the base for the diffusion of the fashion of multidisciplinary research and "General Systems Theory" in the early 1970s. This fashion led to little actual empirical research but resulted in that team work of scholars of several disciplines became more common. In the 1970s particularly history and sociology brought studies of colonialism and neo-colonialism and of class relations to the forefront of development studies. Poverty and (structural) underdevelopment were seen to be closely related to the various

p r e v i o u s and p r e s e n t Z i n k s between d e v c l o p c d c o u n t r i e s and t h e T h i r d World.

During colonialism people were, according to Mabogunje (1980),

"...

reduced to a state of imitative dependence, a highly degraded state associated not only with an inability to provide themselves adequately with the material means of sustenance but also with the loss of cultural and psychological integrity". The remedy was logically a (selective) delinking from the developed countries. In economics critical voices were heard, for instance, in the attack on the notion of comparative advantage and the doctrine of free trade among countries at different levels of development. As in the two previous decades, the empirical relevance or testing of statements were often inadequate.

Each discipline has a tendency to magnify its own importance. The result in this connection is that core subjects of a discipline are often made into

(24)

l e a d i n g c a u s e s o f p o v e r t y , s u c h a s gemeinschaft-gesellschaft i n s o c i o l o g y , c a p i t a l - o u t p u t r a t i o s i n e c o n o m i c s a n d a b s e n c e o f n a t i o n a l p o l i t i c a l i n - s t i t u t i o n s i n p o l i t i c a l s c i e n c e . H i s t o r i a n s made c o l o n i a l i s m i n t o t h e main e x p l a n a t o r y f a c t o r . A l t h o u g h l a c k o f s k i l l s i s h e l d b y some s c h o l a r s t o b e e v e n more e s s e n t i a l , h i s t o r i a n s may s a y t h a t l a c k o f s k i l l s i s o n l y a c a u s e i n t h e s e n s e t h a t c a u s e s a n d c o n s e q u e n c e s r e i n f o r c e e a c h o t h e r . The r e a s o n f o r l a c k o f s k i l l s may, f o r i n s t a n c e , b e f o u n d i n t h e b a n o n manu- f a c t u r i n g w h i c h E n g l a n d i n t r o d u c e d i n many o f i t s c o l o n i e s . E l i t e s a n d do- m i n a n t c l a s s e s i n a l l i a n c e s w i t h " c a p i t a l i s t s " i n d e v e l o p e d c o u n t r i e s a r e s e e n b y many t o r e p r e s e n t t h e main p o s t - c o l o n i a l c a u s e o f l a c k o f d e v e l o p - m e n t i n t h e T h i r d World. A s o c i a l i s t s t a t e i s t h u s a d v o c a t e d . O t h e r s would a r g u e t h a t s o c i a l i s m i n t h e T h i r d World t o d a y would p u t a h e a v y c l a i m on t h e s c a r c e s t r e s o u r c e - a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t a l e n t . They t h e r e f o r e a r g u e t h a t e n t r e p r e n e u r s a n d m a r k e t s a r e i n e v i t a b l e i n p o o r T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s . Of l e a d i n g c a u s e s r e l a t e d t o n a t u r e , u n f a v o u r a b l e c l i m a t e , b a d s o i l s a n d m a l a r i a a r e o f t e n m e n t i o n e d . I n t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l dimension " a c c o m o d a t i o n t o p o v e r t y " , t h a t i s , t h e f a c t t h a t p e o p l e o f t e n p r e f e r t o s t a y w i t h w h a t t h e y a r e a c - c u s t o m e d t o , i s h e l d t o b e a s t r o n g e x p l a n a t i o n f o r u n s u c c e s s f u l d i f f u s i o n o f i n n o v a t i o n s . The s p a t i a l s t r u c t u r e o f i n f r a s t r u c t u r e and economic a c t i - v i t i e s which w e r e l e f t when t h e c o l o n i e s a t t a i n e d i n d e p e n d e n c e , shows a t y p i - c a l p a t t e r n o f " p e r i p h e r y - c e n t r e " d i r e c t i o n . The r a i l w a y l i n e s g o from t h e i n t e r i o r t o t h e c o a s t w i t h few o r no l i n e s c o n n e c t i n g " p e r i p h e r y " w i t h " p e r i - p h e r y " . O t h e r c e n t r e s o f economic a c t i v i t i e s t h a n t h e p l a n t a t i o n s o r m i n e s from w h i c h t h e r a i l w a y l i n e s commonly o r i g i n a t e d a r e l o c a t e d a t p o i n t s b e s t s u i t e d f o r t r a d e w i t h E u r o p e o r f o r s e t t l e m e n t o f w h i t e p e o p l e u s e d t o a more t e m p e r a t e c l i m a t e . L o c a t i o n s t h a t would h a v e b e e n s e n s i b l e i n r e g a r d

t o t r a d e a n d o t h e r r e l a t i o n s w i t h n e i g h b o u r i n g c o u n t r i e s h a v e s e l d o m become c e n t r e s .

The a b o v e s k e t c h o n l y r e v e a l s t h e d o m i n a n t t r a i t s o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t l i t e r a - t u r e . The v a r i o u s o p i n i o n s o n c a u s e s a n d r e m e d i e s o f i n e q u a l i t y a n d p o v e r t y h a v e e x i s t e d a n d c o n t i n u e t o e x i s t

7:n r'ifferc7n/,* m i l i e u s .

T h e r e h a s b e e n a n a c c u m u l a t i o n o f p a r a d i g m s p r a c t i c e d b y d i f f e r e n t m i l i e u s o r b y i n d i v i d u a l s c h o l a r s . The s h i f t o f p a r a d i g m i n f a s h i o n i s a r e s u l t o f , among o t h e r t h i n g s , t h e l a c k o f s u c c e s s i n t h e e f f o r t s o f d e v e l o p m e n t i n m o s t T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s . I n a number o f c o u n t r i e s t h e r e h a s i n f a c t b e e n economlc growth n o t w i t h d e v e l o p m e n t b u t w i t h i n c r e a s i n g p o v e r t y . Today a n d s u r e l y i n t h e r e s t o f t h i s d e c a d e a w i d e v a r i e t y o f r e m e d i e s t o p o v e r t y a r e and w i l l con-

(25)

tinue to be suggested - from extreme isolationistic self-reliance to maximum borrowing of foreign capital from multilaterial development banks. Poverty is, however, a many-sided and highly integrated phenome- non. Remedies must therefore also be of such a kind. The one-factor solution does not exist. Some scholars accordingly argue that "invest- ments in the poor" will yield positive results such as higher productivity and production by an appropriate mix of infrastructural provisions.

Obviously,

deuelopment p ~ m n i n g

should in this situation include, as an explicit goal, the "satisfaction of an absolute level of basic needs"

(ILO 1976). Development efforts should hence be more directly focussed on the poorest groups of people.

McNamara's speech at the World Bank annual meeting in 1973 was seminal in redirecting the attention (at least at the level of rhetoric) to poverty as the essential preoccupation of aid. Economic growth was then accepted not to be a sufficient indicator, in fact, development was no longer thouyhtto follow automatically from economic growth. In addition, it was decided that the smallholder was a legitimate unit to support in order to increase global food production. The lending policy of the World Bank did, however, not change much in the following years. (In the period 1975-1978 only 9.6% of the Bank's loans went to the "least developed countries", while 30.3% was given to the "upper middle-income group"

(Laar 1980).) Undoubtedly, both economic growth and redistribution are necessary to solve the problem of poverty. Other scholars maintain that there is no alternative but to rely on the modern sector either the plan- tation or the export industry sector as the engine of growth and thus development. The urban slums become in this perspective a necessary evil in a period of transition.

The optimism of the 1950s and 1960s and the critical views of the 1970s have been replaced by a widening pessimism in the early 1980s, despite a short-lived fairly general optimism around the turn of the decade based on the high rates of growth achieved by the NICs before their serious balance of payment difficulties became too apparent. No wonder that slogans such as "alternative" or "another development" find ample space In journals.

The stagflation of the world economy has made Keynesian economics insufficient. According to Frank's (1967) thesis, there should now be a better

(26)

possibility for self-centred economic and social development (as he showed was the case for a short while in Latin America during the depression from 1929 onwards). The common view is, however, that the relatively high degree of interdependence among most countries today, leads to the opposite conclusion, the Third World will be adversely affected by global economic stagnation. Warren (1980) was a representative of the orthodox Marxists maintaining that capitalism is presently developing the Third World and that this development of the productive forces is a necessary stage in the evolution towards a

s u c c e s s f u ~

socialist revolution. The immediate preoccupation of orthodox Marxists is similar to the only preoccupation of conservatives and liberals, that is, the identification of the forces in the market economy and elsewhere that hamper a market economy development. Although a full-fledged market economy development eventually will arrive, the strategy is to assist this process by removing barriers, also barriers which are created by the process itself (figure 1).

Neo-Marxists (for instance Amin 1974, 1977, 1980, Wallerstein 1974, 1979) base their writings more on Luxemburg (1913), Lenin (1917) and Baran (1957) than on Marx. They argue that peripheral or dependent capitalism in the Third World has qualitative differences from capitalism in the centre.

The existence of poverty in the Third World is an outcome of the peripheral nature of capitalist expansion in most of the Third World and of insufficient socialist mobilization in other Third World countries. In the former case the market forces are not able to eradicate traditional forms or production completely but they are strong enough to transform these forms of production into what may be called a transitory - not completely traditional, not fully modern

-

^form.

Figure 1. The penetration and contradiction of capitalism

Capitalist

penetration

--c--- l =

Traditional

Contradictory forces

(27)

T h u s , t h e c o n d i t i o n s p r e v a i l i n g i n r u r a l a r e a s i n t h e T h i r d World a r e r a t h e r a r e f l e c t i o n o f t h e c o n t r a d i c t o r y f o r c e s i n t h e e x p a n s i o n o f t h e m a r k e t economy t h a n t h e r e s u l t o f a s i m p l e d i f f u s i o n p r o c e s s . The p e - n e t r a t i o n o f m a r k e t f o r c e s c r e a t e s b o t h o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r a n d o b s t a c l e s t o d e v e l o p m e n t . The e m p i r i c a l v a r i e t y o f l o c a l a n d r e g i o n a l a r e a s a r e f u r t h e r m o r e o f p a r t i c u l a r i m p o r t a n c e . However, more s o e a r l i e r t h a n t o - d a y . I n c r e a s e d i n t e g r a t i o n h a s c h a n g e d t h e o f t e n u n i q u e r e s u l t s o f t h e c o m b i n a t i o n o f l o c a l t r a d i t i o n a l economy and c u l t u r e a n d t h e p e n e t r a t i o n o f o u t s i d e f o r c e s . E a r l i e r , economic r e l a t i o n s w e r e t h e d o m i n a n t f o r c e s , b u t now c u l t u r a l u n i f i c a t i o n o f t h e West a n d t h e T h i r d World i s a l s o h a v i n g a t r e m e n d o u s i m p a c t on t h e T h i r d World. The i n d i r e c t e f f e c t s o n d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e s e p r o c e s s e s a r e v i e w e d t o b e o n e o f t h e p r i m a r y r e a s o n s b e h i n d t h e c r e a t i o n o f ( m a s s ) p o v e r t y i n t h e T h i r d World.

The t r a r i s l t o r y f o r m of t h e p r o d u c t i o n s t r u c t u r e ( a n d s o c i e t y a t l a r g e ) i s t h o u g h t t o b e o f a r e l a t i v e l y p e r m a n e n t c h a r a c t e r . The c o n c e p t '%Locked transition" i s a p p l i e d t o t h i s s i t u a t i o n . S i n c e t h e b l o c k e d t r a n s i t i o n h a s b e e n c r e a t e d b y t h e p e n e t r a t i o n o f g l o b a l m a r k e t f o r c e s , some s c h o l a r s i n t h i s s c h o o l o f t h o u g h t m a i n t a i n t h a t a d e l i n k i n g from a t l e a s t t h e w o r l d m a r k e t i s a n e c e s s a r y p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r a i ~ t o n o m o u s a n d s e l f - c e n t r e d economic a n d s o c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t .

I n my o p i n i o n i t i s i m p o r t a n t n o t t o u s e t h e t e r m c a p i t a l i s m when r e f e r r i n g t o t h e m a r k e t e c o n o m i e s e x i s t i n g t o d a y . The r e a s o n f o r t h i s i s t h a t t h e a l r e a d y w i d e l y u n d e r e s t i m a t e d p r e s e n t and p o t e n t i a l r o l e o f t h e s t a t e i n many T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s i s f u r t h e r e d . The s t a t e may, i f t h e p o s i t i v e a n d n e g a t i v e f o r c e s of t h e p r e s e n t m e r g e r o f "new" a n d " o l d " p r o c e s s e s a r e i d e n t i f i e d , a s s i s t t h e good and hamper t h e had f o r c e s and t h u s c r e a t e d e - v e l o p m e n t . A l s o t h e t e r m m a r k e t economy h i d e s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e i s a mixed economy i n m o s t T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s . C o u n t r i e s s u c h a s C h i n a and T a n z a n i a h a v e p r i v a t e a g r i c u l t u r a l p l o t s a l o n g s i d e t h e c o l l e c t i v e o n e s . B u t e v e n t h e s o c a l l e d c a p i t a l i s t c o u n t r i e s may h a v e s t a t e f a r m s a n d v a r i - o u s f o r m s o f c o o p e r a t i v e s . I n r e a l i t y t h e r e a r e d e g r e e s o f mixed economy i n m o s t c o u n t r i e s . S i n c e t h e t e r m mixed economy a c c o r d i n g l y i s n o t a d e q u a t e , m a r k e t e c o n o m i e s a n d s o c i a l i s t c o u n t r i e s w i l l b e u s e d . The r e a - s o n f o r h e t e r o g e n i e t y i n s o c i a l i s t T h i r d World c o u n t r i e s may l i e i n t h a t t h e s o c i a l i s t form of p r o d u c t i o n i s n o t i m p l e m e n t e d i n a l l s e c t o r s o r i n

(28)

all parts of a country, because of, for instance, lack of political or military strength. Finally, it should be stressed that the problem of development in most Third World countries is specific to each country, that is, in no circumstances will a "selective delinking" or "forced

socialization" be sufficient conditions for development. Furthermore, development in the Third World is, on the whole, qualitatively different from the transition from tradition to modernity in Europe. The Third World exists in a fundamentally different world than Europe did during, what Hettne (1982) has called, the original transition.

DEVELOPMENT GEOGRAPHY

Development geography is a subdiscipline which together with similar sub- disciplines within economics, social anthropology, sociology, political sclience etc. are called development studies.

Development studies

may be defined as studies that are dealing with the alleviation of poverty in the Third World and with the reduction of inequality inside the Third World and between the Third World and developed countries. To conduct a geographical study in a Third World country thus does not automatically qualify a scholar for the category development geographer. The aim and often also the approach of the study must beseleckd in such a way as to allow a discussion of poverty and development related matters in order for the scholar to be included in this category. Development geography is accordingly a subdiscipline of a particular kind because it comprises topics which are studied in various other subdivisions of the discipline.

It should be mentioned that it is not possible to formulate development relevant research objectives regarding all the topics studied in geography.

No single (sub)discipline holds the key to such a compiex problem as the existing global misery. The development geography's point of view high- lights some aspects neglected or only rudimentary treated by other social sciences. There is, as mentioned above, a constant risk that a discipline overemphasizes the importance of its own core subject matter. In

develop-

ment g e o g r q h y

spatial variation has been given a dominant place in the discussion on development. In reality geography as a spatial science is regarded by most other scholars and even some geographers to be of less centrality to the question of development. It is essential to relate spatial variation and spatial flows to the broader structure of society in

(29)

o r d e r t o g a i n e x p l a n a t o r y power. I f t h i s i s a c c e p t e d , i t becomes a m a t t e r of d i s p o s i t i o n whether economic, s o c i a l , p o l i t i c a l and o t h e r p r o c e s s e s r e - l e v a n t i n a p a r t i c u l a r c o n t e x t should be d i s c u s s e d b e f o r e o r a f t e r t h e t r e a t m e n t o f s p a t i a l a s p e c t s . I n t h e p r e s e n t work t h e s p a t i a l a s p e c t s a r e p l a c e d a t t h e end. Geography (geography i s used and n o t human geography t o e n s u r e t h a t p h y s i c a l a s p e c t s a r e understood t o be of r e l e v a n c e i n human geography) may p r o v i d e d a t a , i n s i g h t s and an u n d e r s t a n d i n g v a l u a b l e t o t h e development d e b a t e . The d i s c i p l i n e s deemed most u s e f u l r e g a r d i n g an under- s t a n d i n g o f t h e problem o f p o v e r t y d e p e n d on t h e a s p e c t s of t h e problem looked a t . The r e l a t i v e importance of economics and geography concerning economic development may a t f i r s t hand be s a i d t o favour t h e former. How- e v e r , t h i s i m p l i e s t h a t t h e r e i s a g e n e r a l agreement on t h e c a u s e s of underdevelopment o r nondevelopment. T h i s i s n o t t h e c a s e . I n t h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n of incomplete knowledge, a determining of t h e r e l a t i v e r e l e v a n c e of d i f f e r e n t d i s c i p l i n e s i s n o t p o s s i b l e t o undertake. I n p a r t i c u l a r con- t e x t s t h e a s p e c t s thought t o be of l e s s r e l e v a n c e may e v e n t u a l l y prove t o b e key f a c t o r s .

The major s o u r c e of new i d e a s and concepts f o r development geography w i l l , a s was t h e c a s e i n t h e p a s t , probably be development ( s u b ) d i s c i p l i n e s i n o t h e r s o c i a l s c i e n c e s . I n n o v a t i o n s may, b u t i s l e s s l i k e l y t o o r i g i n a t e i n development geography i t s e l f because of t h e r a t h e r l i m i t e d m i l i e u s . Another s o u r c e o f novel c o n c e p t s b u t p a r t i c u l a r l y of methods of s t u d y i s o t h e r p a r t s o f geography. To t e s t t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y of such i n n o v a t i o n s i n t h e T h i r d World should be a t a s k f o r development geography i n f u t u r e . I t must n o t b e f o r g o t t e n t h a t t h e main t h e o r e t i c a l and methodological de- b a t e i n geography a s w e l l a s most e m p i r i c a l g e o g r a p h i c a l s t u d i e s f o c u s on developed c o u n t r i e s

.

Development geography h a s c o n t r i b u t e d l i t t l e t o development t h e o r y . T h i s i s p r i m a r i l y due t o t h e r a t h e r weak t r a d i t i o n of e x p l a n a t i o n i n geography.

Both

r e g i o n a l geography,

which was t h e l e a d i n g paradigm b e f o r e and s h o r t l y a f t e r t h e Second World War, and t h e

d i f p s ~ s i o n studies

of t h e 1960s (Gould 1964, Soya 1968) were r a t h e r d e s c r i p t i o n s of f a c t s than e l u c i d a t i o n s of c a u s e s . The d i f f u s i o n paradigm was taken from economics, p o l i t i c a l s c i e n c e and s o c i o l o g y of t h e 1950s. T h i s s o c a l l e d modernization paradigm r e s t s on t h e n o t i o n o f d u a l i s m , and of development through i m i t a t i o n and i n t e g r a -

(30)

tion with the western world. Development was equated with spatial diffusion of modern elements from growth centres. The diffusion was thought to occur eventually after an original phase of polarization. These studies have been heavily criticized (Brookfield 1973, 1978, Slater 1974, 1977). For instance, the sophisticated modernization surfaces produced by Gould (1970) and Riddell (1970) reveal little about the process of development. (These studies are nonetheless part of development geography because the assumption of the studies is that development is brought about through a "trickling down" of modern, i.e. western techniques, organization and culture, that is, development is regarded primarily to be a process of diffusion.) The diffusion paradigm was not replsced but two other categories of development geographical studies appeared to become more popular in the 1970s. The first wasneo-

Marxist dependency studies

(an approach based on a particular theory), the other

multidiscipZinary studies

(not necessarily based on any explicit theory). These two categories remained largely at the prcqraarmatic level. Few studies used explicit Marxist concepts and methods of study.

The multidisciplinary studies turned out to become team work consisting of disciplinary specialists rather than one scholar combining concepts from and studying research objects "belonging" to a number of other disciplines. The conclusion that can be drawn is that mainstream geography continued to prevail. This in fact applied also to many of those scholars who used non-traditional geographical concepts. Since the basic approach used was mainstream geography, the use of some "new" concepts became a form of "window-dressing" with certain exceptions. Those adhering to the Marxist category focussed explicitly on spatial structures. This has been called the dialectic development geography approach (De Souza 1982). To those more inclined toward multidisciplinary team work, space seldom became the dependent variable. Poverty and resource use became the foci of study. Space was nonetheless included whenever it was regarded to be of relevance; the spatial point of view was never lost sight of. Browett (1980,1981) maintains that if the neo-Marxist dependency approach is accepted by development geography generally that would imply a repetition of the mistake of the 1960s of adopting the diffusion approach when that ap- roach was being discarded in other social sciences. To Browett there are two paths for development geography in future: The reformist

path

con- cerned with micro-macro scale dialectics and the

(orthodox;.) MamZst path,

that is, a structural, political economy approach with historical analyses

(31)

of the "totality" and of the fundamental processes of change. Of course, dependency theory in its crude (Frankian) form is not tenable. However, to deny the existence of dependency relations between developed countries and transnational companies on the one hand and many Third World countries on the other would be false and imply to "throw out the baby with the bath water".

Since the

r a i s o n d ' z t r e

of development geography is relevance to major global problems,

geography a s a s p a t i a l s c i e n c e i n a narrow s e n s e

^will often be inappropriate. It is important not to limit geography to "a discipline in distance". Geography confined to a spatial science, for instance, in the form of correlations of spatial patterns, is in danger of spatial determinism. This is not to say that

space a s t h e o b j e c t of r e s e a r c h

cannot be of relevance in the Third World. The point is rather that

space

as

a p o i n t o f view

on another (the primary) topic is held to be of greater significance to an understanding of poverty. Although a truism, it must not be forgotten that socio-economic processes are not reducible to spatial patterns, and furthermore that people and groups of people are active agents of change. In other words, spatial relationships must be given meaning through other processes in order for geography to become explanatory. "...spatial structures are implicated in social structures and each has to be theorized with the other." (Gregory 1978). Space should be regarded as one of a number of relevant factors, such as the physical environment, that need to be taken into consideration in an analysis of inequality and poverty. This does not, however, mean, as pointed out above, that space is thought to have a crucial explanatory power on inequality and poverty as implied by Soya (1980) in his call for socio-spatial dialectics. I argue accordingly for a pragmatic and broad view of geography, in contrast to a narrow and, according to Johnston (1979), spatial separatist view.

There is only one possible path for a geographical discipline aiming at explanation. This path is

s y s t e m a ~ i c geography,

that is, the selection of one topic for analysis and the study of this topic in several places or through time, thereby enabling generalization. To reach beyond the stage of classification through area1 differentiation (Hartshorn 1939, 1959) has proved futile. Regional geography in the sense of a study of the interre- lations of features in specific localities (in contrast to regionalism)

(32)

has furthermore been fairly widely accepted to be empirical, inductive and inescapably caught in the web of uniqueness. There are of course a number of interesting exceptions to general findings which must and should be studied as unique cases. But for a science generalization is necessary because that is the basis of theory. Without theory we are left with sub- jectivity, and in the case of regional geography often a form of art. If the above fundamental difference between systematic and regional geography is accepted, the frequently quoted argument of Berry (1964) that geographical studies may be found anywhere in a continuum from many characteristics in one locality to one characteristic in many localities, is mis- leading. It gives the impression that there is no fundamental difference between systematic and regional geography. The characteristics of a locality, its "total milieu", cannot but be unique and therefore, if that is the purpose of study, there is a fundamental difference between systematic and regional geography. If the purpose is not the character of the locality

per se

but a topic, then the question arises of appropriate approach.

The objective of the present work is to contribute to an enhanced understanding of poverty and the nature of the process of development. This is a complex subjective matter and a choice has been made to analyse this at what could be called middle-level complexity. The study does not pur- port to be "holistic" in any sense but to include a number of variables that are thought to be of general relevance. A case-study approach was thus regarded to be most appropriate. This type of approach may be a longer route to generalization but its aim is nonetheless the formulation of hypotheses and testing of theory. Studies at "middle-level complexity"

are important in order to gain insight into relatively comprehensive processes. This point should be seen in the light of the urgent need for in- formation of development planning institutions.

I n c o n c ~ u s i o n ,

the distinguishing features of geography, besides the preoccupation with space, is the interest in

resources, t h e production pro-

c e s s and l e v e l of l i v i n g of s p e c i f i c groups of people i n p a r t i c u l a r Zo-

c a l i t i e s .

I agree with Gregory (1978) that what makes geography different as a social science, is not the falsely stated aim of eventually at- taining the grand synthesis of man and nature but "its attempts to operate within specifically regional contexts". Although the overall aim of development geography is description and explanation of uneven spatial de-