This section examines the ambiguities that exist in relation to the development concept, how it is understood, and how the definition of development has evolved over time. Development is understood differently today from how it was viewed in the past. It is important to note that the concept of development is evolving. How it is understood does not remain constant. This is one reason, perhaps, why a ‘developed’ world remains elusive.
Development was framed in economic terms during the time of Truman and the post-World War II era. The recipe for achieving a developed state was via economic means. Development today is no longer primarily determined by economic growth but rather on a range of measures that indicate quality of life.150 Although indicators of development have progressed, the understanding of the concept itself remains ambiguous. Global agencies have prescribed definitions of development over the years, and yet no one definition has been adopted as the development definition.
A background paper for the 2010 Human Development Report (HDR) offers an insight into how human development has been defined and understood over the past 20 years. The author of the paper, Sabina Alkire, examines the definitions provided in each HDR from 1990 until 2009, as well as how definitions of human development have been managed in scholarly literature.
150 For example: The UN Human Development Index, http://hdr.undp/en/statistics/hdi/,
Overall, Alkire provides a comprehensive picture of how the concept has been understood and approached over two decades. Significantly, she discovers that although each HDR honed the definition to correlate with the theme of the particular annual report, the definitions of human development had three common components: ‚capabilities, process freedoms and principles of justice‛.151 What is more, these components were:
< coherent with both the Human Development Report tradition and with the academic literature on human development and the capability approach.152
Although commonalities have been identified within the varying definitions of development, the concept is problematic.
Although the underlying motives behind development are intentionally good, the concept itself is not straightforward. First, there is no one-size-fits-all. The successful implementation of a set of processes in one scenario does not guarantee success in another. Second, the concept of development is ‚based on the ideals and beliefs of one person (or a sum of people) in the conditions in which people should live‛.153 Who determines what is freedom and justice? Peet and Hartwick point out such anomalies as ‚life expectancy and literacy could be quite high in a well managed prison. Basic physical needs are well met in a zoo‛.154 Development, thus, could be viewed as an imposition of ideals, much as it was in the colonial past.
Based on Alkire’s findings, a human development definition is based on the objective and focus of human development, and so incorporates generic principles and acknowledges that the practice of development must be flexible to cater to different needs. As emphasised earlier, there is no one-size-fits-all
151 Sabina Alkire, ‚Human development: Definitions, critiques and related concepts,‛ ODHI
Working Paper36 (Oxford: University of Oxford, 2010), 24.
152 Alkire, ‚Human development,‛ 22 – 23. 153 Ingram, Volunteer Tourism, 37.
in development. The statement of human development drawn in Alkire’s report is:
Human Development aims to expand people’s freedoms – the worthwhile capabilities people value – and to empower people to engage actively in development processes, on a shared planet.And it seeks to do so in ways that appropriately advance equity, efficiency, sustainability and other key principles.
People are both the beneficiaries and the agents of long term, equitable human development, both as individuals and as groups. Hence Human Development is development by the people of the people and for the people.155
The final point, ‚Human Development is development by the people of the people for the people‛, correlates with the practices and ideologies now espoused by development practitioners and scholars in the pursuit of human development.
Since the end of World War II there have been many theories, practices, and ideologies introduced in pursuit of human development. Today, the theories, practices and ideologies have progressed to a point where it is generally accepted that development is best advanced via participative approaches.156 Furthermore, in recognition that the world is a system with finite resources, the development objective has shifted towards ‘sustainable’ development. Sustainable development is defined by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) as:
< development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It contains within it two key concepts:
155 Alkire, ‚Human development,‛ 24.
156 For example, see: Donald Curtis, ‚Power to the people: rethinking community development‛
in Power and Participatory Development: Theory and Practice, eds. Nici Nelson and Wright (London: ITDG Publishing: London, 1995): 115 – 124; John Rapley, Understanding Development: Theory and practice in the Third World (Boulder and London: Lynne Genner Publications, 2007) and Robert Chambers, ‛Paradigm shifts and the practice of participatory research and development,‛ IDS Working Paper No. 2 (Brighton: IDS, 1994).
the concept of needs, in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and
the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs.157
Development objectives continue to evolve over time.
It needs to be acknowledged here that, regardless of the objectives and processes espoused by those working in the development field, development is a complex issue. It is not easy. After all, if it were, then each person in the world today would be enjoying the benefits of equality, good health, wealth and freedom. This, however, is not the case. After decades of government and non-government interventions, the world remains a long way from meeting the objective of sustainable development, yet it continues to be upheld as a desirable pursuit for the poorer regions of the world. The United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are an example of a recent shift in development to what is now a global pursuit.