Towards a trans-disciplinary conceptualization of inclusive development

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.03.004Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Inclusive development (ID) must redefine ‘growth’.

  • Social inclusiveness implies the furthest behind first and rights-based approaches.

  • Ecological inclusiveness contests commodifying nature and externalizing pollution.

  • Relational inclusiveness calls for accountable states and emancipatory politics.

  • Equitable sharing requires renegotiation of the glocal social contracts.

This paper synthesises the review papers on ‘inclusive development’ (ID) in this Special Issue. It concludes that (a) ID must move towards a new collective imaginary, discursively discovered. (b) It argues that Social Inclusiveness must be less paternalistic and more focused on a rights-based approach to ensure equitable access to and allocation of rights, responsibilities and risks with respect to socio-economic resources (e.g. financial, insurance, education). (c) Ecological inclusiveness calls for maintaining biodiversity and the ecosystem services of nature and continued access to, and fair sharing of, ecological resources, responsibilities and risks. (d) Relational inclusiveness calls for revisiting the content of development, calling for good and accountable governments, and the promotion of procedural instruments to promote emancipatory politics.

Introduction

This concluding synthesis paper to our Special Issue on Inclusive Development: A Multi-Disciplinary Issue builds on the other articles in this issue and investigates into the parallel conceptions of inclusive development (ID) [1], mentioned in the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with its 17 Goals (SDGs) [2, 3], in different disciplines and thematic areas. ID has social, ecological and relational components [4, 5, 6] assessing access to and allocation of rights, responsibilities and risks with respect to social (services and infrastructures) and ecological (biodiversity and the ecosystem services (ESS) of nature) resources [7]. This paper first reviews what the different articles say about development, followed by how they treat social, ecological and relational inclusiveness.

Section snippets

Is ‘development’ problematic?

Development and the right to development is often equated with ‘growth/GDP’ as some see growth as essential for inclusiveness [8]. Many in the Global South (and North) would object if the possibility of growth were denied to them [9, 10]. This leads many Southern countries and scholars to adopt inclusive growth [10], green economy (e.g. China) or neo-extractivism (e.g. in Latin America) [9]. Inclusive growth variants [11, 12•, 13, 14] focus on proactive ex-ante efforts at quick, broad-based and

Social inclusiveness

ID implies social inclusiveness (SI) which goes, first, beyond the pro-poor literature [28] to enhance human wellbeing according to people’s own priorities [1] and empowers people with a rights-based approach. The legal literature [29] argues that universal and inalienable human rights are either integral to, a prerequisite of, or the end result of development. Since mal-development often manifests in marginalization, poverty and inequality along the production to consumption chain, human

The case for ecological inclusiveness

ID also encompasses ecological inclusiveness (EI) [5], which includes, first, the maintenance of biodiversity and ESS by reducing resource extraction and pollution [53] in the Anthropocene [54]. Sociologists critique the Anthropocene as a non-contextual, faceless, depoliticized concept based on averages and trends and a vocabulary like ‘humanity’ and ‘global responsibility’ which although seemingly inclusive, glosses over who has rights and responsibilities and who bears the risks of global

Trade-offs and relational inclusiveness

Relational inclusiveness (RI) questions the underlying structural power politics that influence problem solving. RI calls for, first, revisiting the content of development through discursive politics, as discussed above.

Second, the space for discursive politics comes from state institutions which allow for the rule of law and the constitutional protections of citizens. The fact that some states are ‘failed’/or ‘problematic’ states or ‘states in the making’ [71] that use ‘pre-emptive

Conclusion

Table 1 presents the theories and approaches from different disciplines that inclusive development can build on.

What becomes apparent is that many of these approaches have been designed within the growth paradigm (e.g. inclusive finance/business/insurance/innovation; green economy; ecological modernization). This makes the cautionary advice of the critical social science scholars that ID should pre-empt attempts to think within the Big-D and growth paradigms all the more relevant. This requires

References and recommended reading

Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as:

  • • of special interest

Acknowledgements

This research is part of the work of the European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI) Working Group on Inclusive Development, however the views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of this group.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References (80)

  • Inclusive Design: Design for the Whole Population

  • United Nations University (UNU)

    Inclusive Wealth Report: Measuring Progress toward Sustainability

    (2012)
  • A.E.J. Wals et al.

    Education for Sustainable Development. Research Overview

    (2010)
  • A. Thorpe et al.

    Marine protected areas (MPAs). Special feature: editorial

    Environ. Manag.

    (2011)
  • The Republic of South Africa (RSA)

    Biodiversity Fiscal Incentives. A Framework on Fiscal Incentives for Biodiversity

    (2009)
  • L.S. Urgenson et al.

    Stakeholder perceptions of an ecosystem services approach to clearing invasive alien plants on private land

    Ecol. Soc.

    (2013)
  • M. Duffield

    The liberal way of development and the development–security impasse: exploring the global life-chance divide

    Secur. Dialogue

    (2010)
  • J. Gupta et al.

    Water sovereignty and security, high politics and hard power: the dangers of borrowing discourses

  • A.A. Kowalski et al.

    The role of bridging organizations in environmental management: examining social networks in working groups

    Ecol. Soc.

    (2015)
  • S. Hickey et al.

    Exploring the politics of inclusive development: towards a new conceptual approach

  • UNGA: Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Draft resolution referred to the United...
  • J. Gupta et al.

    Sustainable development goals and inclusive development

    INEA

    (2016)
  • N. Pouw et al.

    Inclusive development: a multidisciplinary approach

    Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

    (2017)
  • J. Gupta et al.

    Inclusive development

  • J. Gupta et al.

    Access and allocation in global earth system governance: water and climate change compared

    INEA

    (2010)
  • D. Dollar et al.

    Growth is good for the poor

    J. Econ. Growth

    (2002)
  • U. Brand et al.

    Degrowth and post-extractivism: two debates with suggestions for the inclusive development framework

    Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

    (2017)
  • G. Rauniyar et al.

    Inclusive growth and inclusive development: a review and synthesis of Asian Development Bank literature

    J. Asia Pac. Econ.

    (2010)
  • G. Rauniyar et al.

    Inclusive development: Two papers on conceptualization, application, and the ADB perspective

    (2010)
  • A. Kjøller-Hansen et al.

    Measuring inclusive growth experiences—five criteria for productive employment

  • D. Koralagama et al.

    Inclusive development from a gender perspective in small scale fisheries

    Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

    (2017)
  • D. Mosse

    The anthropology of international development

    Annu. Rev. Anthropol.

    (2013)
  • E. Crewe et al.

    Anthropology and Development: Culture, Morality and Politics in a Globalised World

    (2013)
  • J.P. Olivier de Sardan

    Anthropology and Development: Understanding Contemporary Social Change

    (2005)
  • O.C. Okafor

    Critical Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL): theory, methodology or both?

    Int. Community Law Rev.

    (2008)
  • L. Bakker et al.

    Anthropology and inclusive development

    Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

    (2017)
  • C.B. Gade

    What is Ubuntu? Different interpretations among South Africans of African Descent

    S. Afr. J. Philos.

    (2012)
  • A. Adler

    Gross national happiness in Bhutan: A living example of an alternative approach to progress. Scholarly Commons

    (2009)
  • UNGA: Declaration on the Right to Development. Resolution A/RES/41/128, 4 December...
  • UNFCCC: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 31 I.L.M. 849, 9 May...
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text