Re-imagining development by (re)claiming feminist visions of development alternatives

ABSTRACT

Over the past 30 years, new frameworks and procedures have influenced the language of development, as well as the understanding of what ‘good development’ and success look like. While feminist concepts have been incorporated into some of these approaches, the core challenges of patriarchy, race, as well as class and gender inequalities are not centre stage. Approaches that address development as a complex political project have receded (though not disappeared), and given way to a development characterised by logic language, technical changes, planned and achievable in the short term, measured by standard metrics. This article is a personal reflection by a long-term feminist in development about the power of language, policies, and procedures in shaping the work, and the need to reconnect to the roots of feminism to reimagine a more radical and transformative development.

Au cours des trente dernières années, de nouveaux cadres et procédures ont influencé le langage du développement, ainsi que la manière de comprendre ce qui constitue un « bon développement » et la « réussite ». Les concepts féministes ont été incorporés dans certaines de ces approches, mais les défis centraux du patriarcat, en plus des inégalités de race, de classe et de genre, n’occupent pas une position centrale. Les approches qui abordent le développement comme un projet politique complexe ont reculé (sans pour autant avoir disparu), et ont cédé la place à un développement caractérisé par le langage de la logique et par des changements techniques, planifié et réalisable à court terme, et évalué selon des systèmes de mesure standard. Cet article est une réflexion personnelle menée par une féministe active depuis longtemps dans le secteur du développement sur le pouvoir du langage, des politiques et des procédures au moment de donner forme au travail, et sur la nécessité de se reconnecter aux racines du féminisme pour réimaginer un développement plus radical et transformateur.

En los últimos 30 años, nuevos marcos y procedimientos han incidido en el lenguaje de desarrollo, así como en la comprensión de la forma en que se valora el “buen desarrollo” y el éxito. Si bien los conceptos feministas fueron incorporados en algunos de estos enfoques, los desafíos centrales que plantean el patriarcado, las desigualdades de raza, clase y género no aparecen en primer plano. Aunque no han desaparecido, los enfoques que abordan el desarrollo como un proyecto político complejo han retrocedido, dando paso a una noción del desarrollo caracterizada por un lenguaje lógico, cambios técnicos, planificados y alcanzables a corto plazo, medidos por métricas estándar. El presente artículo recoge una reflexión personal de una feminista de largo aliento, involucrada en aspectos de desarrollo, quien aborda el poder del lenguaje, las políticas y los procedimientos para dar forma al trabajo, a la vez que señala la necesidad de volver a conectar con las raíces del feminismo para plantear un desarrollo más radical y transformador.

KEYWORDS:

• Development
• feminism
• race
• aid procedures
• aid hierarchies
• standardisation of approaches
• radical change

Notes on contributor

Tina Wallace is a consultant based in the UK, working mainly with small and medium development NGOs, focusing especially on gender equality, strategy, and learning. Postal address: c/o The Editor, Gender & Development, Oxfam House, John Smith Drive, Oxford OX4 2JY, UK. Email: [email protected]

Notes

1 For an account of this experience, see Wallace in Porter et al. (1999).

2 Later, the language used to refer to these countries was ‘less-developed’, or ‘developing’ – both terms continued to deny the politics which had created poverty and marginalisation.

3 In the UK, the Charity Commission oversees and regulates charities within England and Wales. For more information, see www.gov.uk/government/organisations/charity-commission (last checked 17 January 2020).

4 The Heineken effect referred to advertising for Heineken beer that claimed it could ‘reach the parts that other beers could not reach’.

5 Live Aid was a concert organised in 1985 to raise funds for the famine in Ethiopia, and it became an ongoing music-based fundraising initiative. The original event, organised by Bob Geldof and Midge Ure, was held simultaneously at Wembley Stadium, London (attended by 72,000 people) and John F. Kennedy Stadium in Philadelphia (attended by about 100,000 people). Globally, 1.9 billion people watched the concert in 150 countries.

6 Andrea Cornwall at the University of Sussex and myself, among others, have tried to track the UK DfID funding to INGOs and private-sector companies. There are no annual aggregated figures, and it has not proved possible to track spending through figures published by DfID due to the huge volume of data. Freedom of Information requests, even on specific projects, have not worked to date. Specific data collected on individual INGOs about their sources of income have been researched but are held in evaluations not open to the public. Published financial data are generic, and hard to analyse.

7 Others have written about these trends and their impact, including: the GADN, ‘The New Aid Environment and Civil Society Organisations’, Helen Collinson, Helen Derbeyshire, and Brita Fernandez Schmidt, GADN, London, January 2008; and the DSA Ireland conference focused on these issues with a very good Working Paper 2018/001, ‘NGOs and the Political Economy of Development: An Irish Perspective’, Tanja Kleibl and Ronaldo Munck, August 2018.

8 There is no clear agreement on what ‘value for money’ means or how to do it, though much debate. Looking at the issues from a women’s and local partner/staff perspective has been explored in action research by ActionAid. The researchers asked who is defining these concepts, and turned the process on its head, asking what has value for local women, and what matters to them most? What changed that was important in improving their lives and communities? (D’Emidio et al. 2017).

9 Two examples suffice to show the tensions this creates for gender staff. While many have raised issues of sexual harassment over decades, they have been largely marginalised. When the Haiti crisis hit INGOs in 2018, those same staff were expected to come up with solutions and speak for the agency. A second is that when large contracts are opened, many INGOs write their bids without fully involving those staff who have worked for years on the issues. I have seen this many times in recent years.

10 For more information and to get in touch with this women’s empowerment organisation, based in Delhi, see http://azadfoundation.com.