Search

HIV/AIDS is considered not only as the greatest global public health disaster but also as the biggest "development challenge" of the twenty first century affecting the most economically productive population and threatening development achievements in many areas. How HIV/AIDS as a disease entered in the development discourse making it the primary agenda of development in the Third World? How neoliberal globalization as a complex socio-economic, cultural and political process has shaped the discourses of development and HIV/AIDS in the developing countries? This paper explicates some of the complex issues surrounding the above questions and suggests that part of the answer lies in the way Third World countries have been historically produced through development discourses as "underdeveloped," and the way in which HIV/AIDS was later repackaged as the disease of the poor and a direct fallout of "development." Implicit in this argument, we use the notion of "discourse" of a disease that took place in the First World through which "truth" and so "power" was produced. By producing such truths, developed countries created a field of intervention over the developing countries through which "power" could be exercised. Thus HIV/AIDS as a development agenda is primarily Eurocentric that has been universalized through neoliberal globalization. Using an international political-economic approach to the study of disease and development, this paper explicates how the discourses of development and HIV/AIDS facilitated by a process of neoliberal globalization have affected the HIV prevention and care efforts in Third World societies with special reference to India. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author looks at post-World War II development theory and practice to delineate a set of myths that appear â€" and reappear in different guises â€" in the dominating post-World War II paradigms of how richer nations can help catalyze “development” in poore ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper takes within its scope the broad disciplines of Development Studies and International Relations both of which, I argue are predicated upon an implicit narrative of history that takes the state form as the locus of enunciation. That is within both broad realms of study, a narrative of history as the history of the state form, history as the history of the nation state, informs and motivates the methodologies, assumptions and categories of analysis of both disciplines. However, utilizing the arguments made within the field of postcolonial studies, this paper argues that both disciplines within the broader human sciences are also predicated upon an elision or writing out of European colonial history. Thus, from this perspective, it is the writing out of colonial history that makes each discipline and their implicit narrative of history organised around the state form possible. Recent developments within politics and sociology around the incidence of globalisation and the recent flurry of academic and popular writing around the existence of a ‘new’ form of imperialism have produced a discursive tug of war over the relevance and viability of the state form under neo-liberal globalisation. This paper argues that the confused nature of these debates stems in part from the absence of colonial history and an absence of theorisation about empire as a form of politics within the discipline of politics and IR (Hardt and NEgri notwithstanding). Subsequently, I argue that in order to yoke together within the same analytical field both European colonialism and the practice and politics of development in the Twentieth Century, a new theory of history is required, one that places colonial history and the form of empire squarely in the centre of our consideration of global politics, one that explores the connections between empire and the state form, one that theorises the history of capital together with the history of the European colonial project, one that teases out the axes of continuity between the 20th Century trajectory of development and the 19th Century colonial project. Yoking development together with colonialism in the same analytic field needs to be fore grounded by a methodology of inquiry that theorises historical continuity rather than narrative rupture. [364 words] ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that Thomas Friedman and Jeffrey Sachs have hijacked the development debate with their best-selling tomes The End of Poverty and The World is Flat. Their prominent exposure in the US media, and endorsements by superstars like Bono, has narrowed the debate into simplistic slogans of ?more aid? and ?more trade? that serve to maintain the neoliberal development paradigm. They have done so by peddling a series of myths about the poor, development, and the global economy that ignore critical insights about the central role of citizen groups, basic rights, the environment, and governments that took center stage in the late 1990s. In disentangling five key myths, this paper moves: from delineating what is wrong with the ?new? Sachs-Friedman development paradigm (and what is not-so-new about it); to assessing its impact on policy debates about poverty, trade and development; to analyzing challenges posed by the ?alter-globalization paradigm.? ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will look at the spread of social marketing as a global communication technology for translating public health expertise into community practices in a post-colonial world. An interdisciplinary field based in the methods and tools of the behavioral sciences and the entertainment industry social marketing?s roots are transnational and go back to the 1960s and programs in international development. Before being adopted in the US, Europe, and Australia, many of the contemporary commercial marketing methods and techniques used in health promotion were first developed during the 1970s and 1980s for family planning and breast feeding campaigns in South and East Asia, Latin America, and Africa by US private firms and adopted by US-based foundations and international NGOs and organizations. This was often done in conjunction with the World Bank, US government agencies, and national and local governments. As its focus, this paper will look at a social marketing firms (for example, The Academy for Educational Development) and its worldwide activities in terms of claims for social marketing as a flexible, ?systems approach of universal application regardless of problem or local situation?; methods of segmenting populations and assessing consumers? ?needs? (through focus groups, etc.); the choice of communication media; and neoliberal forms of government. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My paper deals with the campaign against structural adjustment programs and conditionality by the World Bank and the IMF. I argue that this campaign takes place at both the global and local level.It involves transnational networks of civil society actors, but in order to succeed, they need the suppor of local authoriites. Advocacy groups in this arena have been limited by the impermeability of IFIs to external accountability. For this reason, I suggest that the role governments play in the South should be reassessed. I take the case of Argentina as an example of the potential for a heterodox alliance between activists and state officials in the developing world. My paper discusses the case of water privatization in Buenos Aires. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current discourses on international political economy generally contend that the decade of the 1970s generated significant shifts in economic, intellectual and political spheres that continue to shape national and global development. On the economic level, these discourses claim that the period saw the emergence of a serious global recession characterized by decline in production, high inflation, crisis of profits for the majority of firms, technological developments, rise in government deficits and massive layoffs for workers. These economic developments and major changes in the political landscape of major countries in the global North—the rise of Margaret Thatcher in the UK, Helmut Kohl in Germany and Ronald Reagan in the United States—and intellectual shifts that called for the dismantling of the global Keynesian economic framework are highlighted as core factors that ushered in a new phase of globalization underpinned by neo-liberal economic discourse. In the context of African countries, analysts argue that these global economic, political and intellectual shifts have had significant impacts on the continent’s development process. In the economic realm, for instance, the core features of neo-liberal economic globalization are said to have contributed to an economic downward spiral in most African countries. These countries, however, are not the only ones that have faced major economic crisis, for as John Rapley has argued, the crisis of capital accumulation has been a core feature of the current phase of globalization in all parts of the world. In essence, the onset of this phase of globalization marked the end of the post-1945 ‘golden age’ of global capitalism which had seen significant economic growth in the global North and various parts of the global South. In Africa, the crisis of postcolonial capitalism was characterized by a serious economic crisis, evidenced by decline in economic surplus, levels of investment and savings, inability of African states to meet their debt obligations to public and private lenders, and failure of these states to maintain what Yusuf Bangura has termed as the post-colonial social contract. The developments that emerged globally in the 1970s have, over the years, seen states institute various economic and political strategies in efforts to address the economic crises and other contradictions generated by neo-liberal globalization. This paper’s objective is to examine the ways in which African states have responded to neo-liberal globalization, with a specific focus on their New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) initiative. The underlying argument of the paper is that African states, like other states elsewhere, have not been bystanders in the evolution of the contemporary phase of globalization and other global shifts that characterize the current global conjuncture. Situating my arguments within the critical international political economy tradition, the paper argues that the launching of NEPAD demonstrates the political agency of these states but contends that their agency is mediated by local and global factors and thus challenges the dominant theoretical perspectives to studies on African states especially the neoliberal approach that tends to represent their agency as unfettered by external developments. Please contact Eunice N. Sahle at eunice@email.unc.edu for a copy of the paper. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on cosmopolitan democracy has suggested that processes of globalization, although initially triggered by private economic forces, create the conditions for new forms of transnational democracy and citizenship. Much of this scholarship is focused on the experience of European integration, but elsewhere the validity of this correlation has not been proved. This paper reviews the recent experience of Latin America with neo-liberal reforms to suggest that the prospects for deepening democracy and popular participation are obscured by such consequences as increased levels of social exclusion, income inequality and the retrenchment of welfare provision by public authorities. I propose that the role of the state be reconsidered in debates about “de-territorialization”, particularly when evaluating the consequences of globalization for the perdurability of social and economic rights. . ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite widespread analysis of the World Bank’s lending operations by both supporters and critics, there has been little external or systematic analysis of the Bank’s research department. This is remarkable, given that the Bank has become the hub of development research worldwide. This article begins to fill in that gap by exploring the political economy of the research conducted within the World Bank’s Development Economics Vice- Presidency (DEC). Despite the Bank’s public presentation of its research arm as conducting “rigorous and independent” work, this article examines how the Bank’s research has historically become skewed toward reinforcing the dominant neoliberal policy agenda. The article includes a detailed examination of the mechanisms by which the Bank’s research department is able to play a central role in what Robert Wade has elsewhere termed “paradigm maintenance,” including incentives in hiring, promotion, and publishing, as well as selective enforcement of rules, discouragement of dissonant data, and actual manipulation of data. The author’s analysis is based on in-depth interviews with current and former World Bank professionals, as well as examination of internal and external World Bank documents. The article includes analysis of the Bank’s treatment of the work of two of its researchers who write on economic globalization and development: David Dollar and Branko Milanovic. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]