Decolonising Southern knowledge(s) in Aidland

ABSTRACT

South–South Co-operation (SSC) has become increasingly important in international development policy and practice as both alternative and complementary to North–South Co-operation. Crafted through the acceptance, appropriation, and instrumentalisation of a colonialist idea of an underdeveloped world, SSC has been historically defined as an expression of Southern solidarity, through which developing countries collaborate to achieve progress, modernity, and development. It is often claimed to involve mutually beneficial, horizontal exchange of resources between developing countries – particularly knowledge – and to foster decolonising practices. In this paper, I argue that while one of the starting points for SSC was opposition to North–South knowledge hierarchies, its legitimisation has been constructed through postcolonial power inequalities and new forms of authoritative knowledge that reiterate old hierarchies. Drawing on in-depth ethnographic research conducted as part of my doctoral studies, I show how the building and international legitimatisation of Brazilian ‘best practices’ – in the gender equality field – has produced a political economy of opportunities and mobility for these professionals; their professional pathways to Mozambique are indicative of the processes of production of Southern expertise and new knowledge hierarchies. I also discuss Brazilian development workers’ discourses about the relevance of Brazilian experiences to Mozambique. Theoretically, the paper is inspired by critical development theory with a feminist and postcolonial approach. It uses postcolonial literature, usually applied to relations between colonisers and former colonies, to look at how colonial discourses and discourses about Africa, the ‘Third World’, and the West historically intervened in the encounters between people from former colonies and continue to be activated. Specifically, I analyse imaginaries of ‘Southern’ and ‘developing country’ identity embedded in expertise claims.

La Coopération Sud-Sud (CSS) a acquis une importance croissante dans les politiques et les pratiques du développement international comme élément alternatif ainsi que complémentaire à la Coopération Nord-Sud. Élaborée sur la base de l'acceptation, de l'appropriation et de l'instrumentalisation d'une idée colonialiste d'un monde sous-développé, la CSS a traditionnellement été définie comme une expression de la solidarité dans l'hémisphère Sud, dans le cadre de laquelle les pays en développement collaborent en vue de parvenir aux progrès, à la modernité et au développement. On prétend souvent qu'elle englobe un échange de ressources - en particulier de connaissances - horizontal et mutuellement avantageux entre pays en développement, et qu'elle favorise des pratiques décolonisantes. Dans le présent document, je soutiens que, si l'un des points de départ de la CSS était l'opposition aux hiérarchies de connaissances Nord-Sud, sa légitimation a toutefois été construite à travers les inégalités de pouvoir postcoloniales et de nouvelles formes de connaissances faisant autorité qui réitèrent les anciennes hiérarchies. Je m'appuie sur des recherches ethnographiques approfondies menées dans le cadre de mes études doctorales pour montrer comment la légitimation internationale des « meilleures pratiques » brésiliennes - dans le domaine de l'égalité des genres - a donné lieu à une économie politique d'opportunités et de mobilité pour ces professionnels. Les parcours professionnels qui les ont menés jusqu'au Mozambique illustrent les processus de production de savoir-faire « du Sud » et de création de nouvelles hiérarchies de connaissances. Je me penche par ailleurs sur les discours des travailleurs de développement brésiliens sur la pertinence des expériences brésiliennes pour le Mozambique. Sur le plan de la théorie, ce document s'inspire de la théorie critique du développement avec une approche féministe et postcoloniale. Il a recours à la littérature postcoloniale, généralement appliquée aux relations entre les colons et les anciennes colonies, pour se pencher sur la manière dont les discours coloniaux et les discours portant sur l'Afrique, le « Tiers-Monde » et l'Occident sont, au cours de l'histoire, intervenus dans les rencontres entre populations des anciennes colonies et continuent d'être activés. Plus précisément, j'analyse des imaginaires de l'identité « du Sud » et « des pays en développement » ancrés dans des revendications de savoir-faire.

La cooperación Sur-Sur (SSC) ha cobrado cada vez más importancia en la política y la práctica del desarrollo internacional como alternativa y complemento a la cooperación Norte-Sur. Conformada a partir de la aceptación, la apropiación e instrumentalización de la idea colonialista de la existencia de un mundo subdesarrollado, la SSC se ha definido históricamente como una expresión de la solidaridad del Sur, a través de la cual los países en desarrollo colaboran para alcanzar el progreso, la modernidad y el desarrollo. A menudo se afirma que implica un intercambio horizontal y mutuamente beneficioso de recursos -especialmente de conocimientos- entre los países en desarrollo, además de fomentar prácticas descolonizadoras. En este artículo sostengo que, si bien uno de los puntos de partida de la SSC fue la oposición a las jerarquías de conocimiento Norte-Sur, su legitimación se ha construido con base en desigualdades de poder poscoloniales y nuevas formas de conocimiento autoritario que reactualizan viejas jerarquías. Partiendo de una profunda investigación etnográfica realizada en el marco de mis estudios de doctorado, muestro cómo la construcción y la legitimación internacional de las “mejores prácticas” brasileñas -en el ámbito de la igualdad de género- ha producido una economía política de oportunidades y movilidad para estos profesionales; sus trayectorias profesionales hacia Mozambique son indicativas de procesos de producción de conocimientos especializados desde el Sur, así como de nuevas jerarquías de conocimientos. Aunado a ello, analizo los discursos de los cooperantes brasileños en torno a la relevancia que las experiencias de este país tienen para Mozambique. Desde el punto de vista teórico, este documento se inspira en la teoría crítica del desarrollo con un enfoque feminista y poscolonial. Utiliza la literatura poscolonial, normalmente aplicada a las relaciones entre colonizadores y antiguas colonias, para examinar la forma en que los discursos coloniales y los discursos sobre África, el “Tercer Mundo” y Occidente no sólo intervinieron históricamente en los encuentros entre personas de antiguas colonias, sino que, además, éstos siguen activándose. En concreto, analizo los imaginarios relativos a la identidad de los “países del Sur” y los “países en desarrollo” incrustados en las reivindicaciones de la experiencia.

KEYWORDS:

• South–South relations
• development workers
• identity
• knowledge hierarchies
• authoritative knowledge

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Anne-Marie Fechter and Alex Shankland for their reliable and engaged support during my doctoral studies. I am grateful to Julia Schöneberg and Anandita Ghosh for their valuable comments on this paper.

Notes

1 It is not the purpose of this paper to discuss the controversies around concepts and terms of ‘Third World’, ‘developing countries’, or ‘global South’ in depth. There is extensive postcolonial literature problematising the first two terms because of their Eurocentrism, i.e. being based on a notion of development rooted in socioeconomic changes that happened in Western countries. My focus is rather on how these terms have been used in SSC institutional discourses and on the meanings attributed to them by research participants. For example, ‘Third World’ is a debatable term, initially used to characterise countries who purportedly did not align with either side of the Cold War, i.e. the US and the former Soviet Union, but was rapidly associated with poorer nations of the world. This term has been instrumentalised by poorer nations of the world to forge solidarity and is essential in shaping thinking around SSC (Grovogui 2011; Levander and Mignolo 2011). As Prashad (2007, 1) notes, ‘the Third World was not a place; it was a project’ associated with a political position against colonialism and imperialism. The term ‘global South’ has also been appropriated and resignified. According to Levander and Mignolo (2011, 10), ‘the global south is taking the place of the Third World and the implied global north the place of the first world’. Caison and Vorman (2014, 68) underline the space-based and temporal dimension of the North–South divide, evidenced in the linking of the ‘global South with theories of underdevelopment in economic and/or social terms and the time-lag of modernity in humanistic inquiry’. This divide also reflects a homogenising understanding of reality that obscures differences between ‘developing countries’ as well as similarities between ‘developing’ and ‘developed’ countries, as has been pointed out by various scholars and activists (Mohanty 2003). By doing so, it both dramatises distance between developing and developed countries and proximity between developing countries. It is not the purpose of this paper to discuss what the ‘global South’ is. My focus is on how ‘global South’ and other associated terms have been used in SSC’s institutional discourses and on the meanings attributed to them by research participants, including the ways in which the incorporation of the ‘South within the North’ in conceptualisations of ‘global South’ is perceived. Yet, I also seek to follow Caison and Vorman’s (2014, 68) note of caution and ‘resist apply totalizing mechanisms of analysis to vastly different groups of people that each experience the effects of globalisation in unique ways and face different emancipatory conditions of possibility’; this is done by looking at these terms as social constructions that serve particular purposes and by critically analysing the claims embedded in their use.

2 The United Nations Office for South–South Cooperation (UNOSSC) defines SSC as a ‘broad framework for collaboration among countries of the South in the political, economic, social, cultural, environmental and technical domains. Involving two or more developing countries, it can take place on a bilateral, regional, subregional, or interregional basis. Developing countries share knowledge, skills, expertise and resources to meet their development goals through concerted efforts’. A central assumption of this definition is that ‘countries of the South’ are ‘developing countries’, as illustrated by the interchangeable use of the two terms. In this paper, I go beyond the term SSC and integrate other relations that do not necessarily take place under a specific framework of collaboration and or are not necessarily defined by its participants as SSC, such as those between Brazilian and Mozambican feminists.

3 BAPA contained recommendations to foster SSC to fight poverty and underdevelopment and establish a new international economic order; it reinforced the idea of technical co-operation, framed as horizontal exchanges between equal parties as opposed to vertical assistance from Northern institutions, as the foundation for strengthening South–South links. BAPA’s implementation encompassed the set-up of in-country SSC mechanisms as well as the institutionalisation of SSC in regional co-operation bodies between the early 1980s and late 1990s.

4 A landmark and blueprint on women’s rights and gender equality adopted by the UN during the Fourth World Conference on Women, held on September 1995, in Beijing, China.

5 Created in 1987 as part of Alexandre de Gusmão Foundation, an organ of the Ministry of Foreign Relations. In the 1980s and most of the 1990s, ABC’s work was mainly focused on foreign assistance received by Brazil. In the early 2000s, it increased delivery of aid, under the frame of SSC (Cabral and Weinstock 2010; Costa Vaz and Inoue 2007).

6 In 2012, for example, the Secretariat for Women’s Policies of the State of Pernambuco were recognised with a UN Prize for excellence in gender-sensitive public service delivery, specifically for the Chapéu de Palha Mulher, an economic empowerment programme targeting rural women workers.

7 These are pseudonyms.

8 Organisational name was changed.

9 Organisational name was changed.

10 Organisational name was changed.

11 A particular focus of contestation has been the triangular co-operation Programa de Cooperação Tripartida para o Desenvolvimento Agrícola da Savana Tropical (ProSAVANA, Programme for Agricultural Development of the Tropical Savannah), as civil society actors from Brazil and Mozambique joined to opposed Brazilian agribusiness interests, particularly a component of the programme focused on significant private-sector investment in commercial agriculture and agro-processing (see Shankland, Gonçalves, and Favareto 2016). An example of controversial interventions of Brazilian corporations are the mining activities of Vale do Rio Doce in Tete Province, in Central Mozambique, and conflict with local populations due to unfulfilled promises made during resettlement processes.

12 SeeHanne (2016).

13 Although ‘feminist popular education’ and ‘popular education’ share the basic methodological principles of valuing and building upon the experiential knowledge of learners, feminist popular education has a clear focus on ‘de-constructing and constructing gender’ (Walters and Manicom 1996, 3) and on transformation of gendered power relationships (Manicom and Walters 2012).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by a doctoral scholarship from the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission.

Notes on contributors

Katia Taela

Katia Taela is a Mozambican feminist anthropologist with over 18 years of experience working as an independent researcher and consultant on themes related to gender equality and women’s rights, social inclusion, governance and accountability, and South–South relations. She holds a Masters in Gender and Development and a PhD in Development Studies from the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, UK. She is an Honorary Associate with the Institute of Development Studies and an Associate with Gender@Work, an international feminist knowledge network. Postal address: Avenida Vladimir Lenine, 2404, PH5, 2.4, Maputo-Mozambique. Email: [email protected]