Anti-Development Thesis

Following WWII, the Marshall Plan set out to reconstruct Europe to repair the war-ravaged European economy. This became the primary form in which the Western country assisted growth depiction.

The route of ‘development’ began in Western nations, assuming that developing countries are ‘behind’ and should follow the path of development management for modernisation, similar to Westernisation. This development strategy is more capital-intensive and new technology-focused to improve the technology management part of this management, the attitude that ‘anti-developmental theorists’ confronted. 

Ideology behind Anti-Development

Supporters of anti-development argue that this is not about finding the best way to provide development but rather about calling the concept of development into question. The true definition of development is economic progress, but academicians describe it as meeting necessities, improving the quality of life, etc.

They said that the growth process weakens and destroys the variety of many systems such as regional culture, politics, etc. They believe that an externally imposed uniform social paradigm has hampered the combination of these systems. According to them, the primary purpose of development is to increase the daily output rate to increase profit. This has resulted in the ruthless exploitation of the Earth’s natural resources. The economic repercussions were immense, and many nations are now in debt. Moreover, several people have been displaced due to massive dam building and the operation of various industrial projects.

They correctly rejected the Western countries’ development management paradigm. They never referred to themselves as ‘anti-developmentists’. Still, they desired a more thoughtful approach to the development that took into account various aspects of different living situations, such as local people’s needs, a more sustainable approach to the environment, and the management of local resources. They were standing up for society communities’ involvement and going forward together.

Some examples of individuals opposing development include the Green Belt Movement, the act for conserving trees. People embraced trees as they were about to be chopped down called the ‘Chipkoo Andolan’, headed by Sunderlal Bahuguna, and a movement against the industrial sector’s groundwater exploitation.

Debate for Development

The entire development discourse may be understood as a dispute between three significant schools of thought or perspectives: mainstream, reformism, and radicalism.

Mainstream: Consists of the concepts of maximising macroeconomic growth and minimising trickle-down, which have held influence for the previous five decades. The majority viewpoint is owned by both the original creators and supporters of the current LPG policy.

Reformist: Includes the ideology of supporting gradual reforms instead of sudden reforms or revolution.

Fundamental Perspective by Radicals: It supports the transformation or replacement of a political system or society through revolution, social change, etc.

Anti-Development Thesis by Robert Chambers

Robert Chamber, a development scholar, known for the book Vestiges of the natural history of creation, promoted the anti-development thesis by employing a unique strategy and method.

Currently, all crucial theoretical viewpoints are in the same position, focusing on: 

 More Balanced Use of Nature and the Resources of it

•  Development of humans, and not the development of the economy
•  Environmental problems and environmental protection 
•  Egalitarian development approaches
•  Feminist concerns

Anti-development forces create a theoretical framework that includes some general ethical values such as social justice, political freedom, justice, prioritisation of basic needs over meeting basic needs, ecological responsibility, admiration for nature, respect for solidarity, cultural diversity, nonviolence, truth, independence, women’s principles (the relationship between women and nature’s tenderness and nurturing), cooperation principles, and scepticism. 

Objectives

1. Tendency to represent secondary development as an opposite point by integrating all anti-establishment social forces that oppose development. It ignores the fundamental desire to create a powerful opposition coalition. 
2. Tendency to compare development with modernisation and secondary development, the tendency to equate democratisation with alternative development, based on ‘incompatibility of modernization and human development’. 
3. There is a tendency to view and describe alternative development as fringe alternatives, a dystopia possessed by various social actors in countries outside significant divisions, and perhaps a stimulus to Western development. In other words, it is an Excel or ‘open area’ approach to alternative development. 

The Paradigm of Alternative Development 

The trends of the paradigm of anti-development are characterised below.

1. The tremendous increase in the number and influence of NGOs has increased the need for planning and thus theory. 
2. Environmental issues and the importance of sustainability have weakened the economic growth paradigm and have given momentum to the alternative and a greener economy. 
3. Decades of explicit failure in development have helped shake the mainstream paradigm of growth. 

Censure of the Anti-Development Thesis

It is too simplistic to ignore development as a European criticism simply. This is based on the assumption that countries of the Third World are passive recipients of ideas from Western countries. This is an unjust critique of countries’ abilities from the Third World.

Despite the challenges of development, the theorists of anti-development focus on the negative side of development and do not consider the fact that development, despite all its shortcomings, could be empowering. 

Opposition to development tends to be somewhat ambiguous about alternative and romantic regional cultures.

Conclusion

Anti-development is a development model as opposed to the conventional theory of development. The meaning of anti-development thesis in public administration is to design alternative practices in the human-centred development and the redefinition of development goals. This thesis failed for looking into converting the behaviour of growth concerning time. The anti-development theory did not go beyond the dualism of the dominant and subordinated tradition and modernity.