Arresting Development: The Power of Knowledge for Social Change

That knowledge is power is a truism. Arresting Development examines the idea that power defines what is considered as the legitimate pursuit of knowledge. The author posits that development theory and research are dominated by the prevailing ideological trends, in particular neo-liberalism. He also talks about the dominance of development economics over other development-related disciplines, such as political science and anthropology, and also the ebb and flow of belief in grand universal theories of development, versus the idea that knowledge is local and specific. He points out that much research is donor-funded and is thus heavily influenced by the donors' views on what is important to know about development, based more on their ideological preferences than the pursuit of development knowledge for its own sake.

Johnson then explains the limitations of neo-classical thinking, following this with an examination of a number of alternative theoretical approaches to understanding knowledge for development, situating them within a broader history of twentieth-century political philosophy. He examines in turn Marxism, Post-Modernism, and 'Foucauldian Discourse', finding each in turn wanting, taking issue for example with Marxism for its failure to offer a blueprint for a viable alternative to capitalism and to sufficiently ignite the revolutionary spirit of peoples around world. The notions of empowerment, focusing on the ideas of Amartya Sen, participatory approaches to development, and the promotion of capabilities, choice, and agency by the poor receive a more favourable treatment in the book. They are still criticised for naivety about the difficulties in confronting traditional power structures and for a degree of ambivalence about neo-liberal reforms.

Towards the end of the book, Johnson builds a case for a greater consideration of broader historical forces when seeking to understanding development, while at the same time allowing for divergent interpretations of what these mean. In the process he elevates the importance of understanding context and interpreting research through this lens, and in particular the need to be wary of broad generalisations of theory based on specific experiences, ultimately warning of the dangers of overemphasising the link between theory and practice at all.

While the title includes 'the power of knowledge for social change', the book is firmly aimed at an academic audience, assuming a considerable degree of familiarity with the evolution of twentieth-century political philosophy and its relationship to development thinking. It is not a light read, with extensive referencing of other works, as well as 11 pages of explanatory notes which, while adding to the intellectual heft, also suppose a fair amount of prior knowledge or a willingness to engage in supplementary reading in order to fully appreciate the author's argument. It is written in a way that might not be easily accessible to either practitioners or decision makers, and it is difficult to glean the specific practical application of what is being discussed, beyond the need to be wary of the influence of current ideological trends in shaping development.

The book places little emphasis on how theory actually affects the practice of development, or how the ideas that it presents might be communicated more broadly to influence those who make the decisions about development research and practice. Likewise the book does not acknowledge the large body of living development knowledge that comes from the experience of practitioners, which while often not explicitly recorded (or not formally constructed as scholarly research) is nevertheless still knowledge that is influential in development practice. An example of this is the use of lessons learned and good practices based on documentation of on-the-ground innovation and learning.

Surprisingly the book also overlooks several important threads in recent development thinking. It is silent on human rights as a framework for understanding development: a significant oversight, given the prominent discussions on the rights-based approach which creates a new lens for theory, research, and practice, also offering an alternative approach to the economics of rational choice, and allocation of scarce resources. The emergence of new donors, particularly BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) and Middle East countries, is also overlooked. Their philosophies of assistance, while not clearly stated, are much less tied to neo-liberal theory, and - while often couched in terms of post-colonial self-sufficiency - in reality are probably much less ideological and based rather on perceived mutual benefit. Another theme is the emergence of social entrepreneurs who use many of the ideas and practices of business, but modify them and apply them to development - often supporting private for-profit enterprise as a means of promoting local self-sufficiency and agency. Although based in part on the theory of rational choice, as well as participation and capability, these approaches are much more practical than ideological in nature.

The timing of this publication was unfortunate, coming out as it did before the magnitude of the current economic crisis became apparent. The crisis has cast a great deal of doubt on an already tarnished neo-liberal approach to development, but at the same time it has strengthened the role of the World Bank and the IMF, while tempering some of their former neo-liberal zeal.

Ultimately the book makes some important points about the role of ideology in driving development studies, and the weaknesses of many of the prevailing models; but it does not make a clear case, either in content or in style, for an alternative which is likely to influence current research priorities or development practice.

(Note: the opinions expressed in this review are mine alone and do not reflect the official opinions of UNICEF.)