Advertisement

Institutionalisation of Development Concepts

  • Tadashi Hirai
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter reveals that institutions are vital to frame development concepts and to keep them influential against counterpart concepts. At the same time, they are likely to skew development concepts as well and, consequently, similar concepts result in different outcomes in respective institutions. To demonstrate these issues, three different moments of institutionalisation of development concepts are featured: the economic growth model by the Bretton Woods Institutions (BWIs), the basic needs approach by the International Labour Organization (ILO) and later the World Bank, and the human development approach within the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). It leads to the conclusion that the current position of human development seems greatly attributed to a good match between the concept and the unique institutional features of the UNDP.

Keywords

Gross Domestic Product Development Concept United Nations Development Programme International Labour Organization Neoclassical Economic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alkire, S. (2002). Valuing freedoms: Sen’s capability approach and poverty reduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arndt, H. W. (1987). Economic development: The history of an idea. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bøås, M., & McNeill, D. (2004a). Ideas and institutions: Who is framing what? In M. Bøås & D. McNeill (Eds.), Global institutions and development: Framing the world? (pp. 206–224). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Bøås, M., & McNeill, D. (2004b). Introduction. In M. Bøås & D. McNeill (Eds.), Global institutions and development: Framing the world? (pp. 1–12). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Cowen, M. P., & Shenton, R. W. (1995). The invention of development. In D. Gasper & A. L. St Clair (Eds.), Development ethics (pp. 3–21). Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  6. Emmerij, L., Jolly, R., & Weiss, T. G. (2001). Ahead of the curve?: UN ideas and global challenges. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Escobar, A. (1997). The making and unmaking of the third world through development. In M. Rahnema & V. Bawtree (Eds.), The post-development reader (pp. 85–93). London: Zed.Google Scholar
  8. Esteva, G. (1992). Development. In W. Sachs (Ed.), The development dictionary: A guide to knowledge as power (pp. 6–25). London: Zed.Google Scholar
  9. Fine, B. (2006). The new development economics. In K. S. Jomo & B. Fine (Eds.), The new development economics after the Washington Consensus (pp. 1–20). London: Zed.Google Scholar
  10. Gasper, D. (2006). What is the point of development ethics? Éthique et économique/Ethics and Economics, 4(2), 1–30.Google Scholar
  11. Gasper, D. (2004). The ethics of development: From economism to human development. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Gasper, D. (2011). Pioneering the human development revolution: Analysing the trajectory of Mahbub ul Haq. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 12(3), 433–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gasper, D. (2008a). Denis Goulet and the project of development ethics: Choices in methodology, focus and organization. Journal of Human Development, 9, 453–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gasper, D. (2008b). From “Hume’s Law” to problem- and policy-analysis for human development. Sen after Dewey, Myrdal, Streeten. Stretton and Haq. Review of Political Economy, 20(2), 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goulet, D. (1971a). An ethical model for the study of values. Harvard Educational Review, 41(2), 205–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goulet, D. (1971b). The cruel choice: A new concept in the theory of development. New York: Atheneum.Google Scholar
  17. Haas, E. B. (1990). When knowledge is power: Three models of change in international organizations. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hands, D. W., & Mirowski, P. (1998). Harold Hotelling and the neoclassical dream. In R. E. Backhouse, D. M. Hausman, U. Maki, & A. Salanti (Eds.), Economics and methodology: Crossing boundaries—Proceedings of the IEA Conference held in Bergamo, Italy (pp. 322–397). Basingstoke: Macmillan in association with the International Economic Association.Google Scholar
  19. Haq, K., & Jolly, R. (2008). Global development, poverty alleviation, and north-south relations. In K. Haq & R. Ponzio (Eds.), Pioneering the human development revolution: An intellectual biography of Mahbub ul Haq (pp. 63–87). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Haq, K., & Kirdar, Ü. (Eds.). (1986). Human development: The neglected dimension. Islamabad: North South Roundtable.Google Scholar
  21. Haq, M. U. (1976). The poverty curtain: Choices for the third world. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Haq, M. U. (1989a). Human dimension in development. Journal of Development Planning, 19, 249–258.Google Scholar
  23. Haq, M. U. (1989b). United Nations role in human development. Development, 89(4), 41–45.Google Scholar
  24. Haq, M. U. (1995a). A new framework for development cooperation. In M. U. Haq, R. Jolly, P. Streeten, & K. Haq (Eds.), The UN and the Bretton Woods Institutions: New challenges for the twenty-first century (pp. 239–245). Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haq, M. U. (1995b). Reflections on human development: How the focus of development economics shifted from national income accounting to people-centred policies told by one of the chief architects of the new paradigm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Haq, M. U. (1995c). The vision and the reality. In M. U. Haq, R. Jolly, P. Streeten, & K. Haq (Eds.), The UN and the Bretton Woods Institutions: New challenges for the twenty-first century (pp. 26–33). Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Haq, M. U., Jolly, R., Streeten, P., & Haq, K. (1995). Overview. In M. U. Haq, R. Jolly, P. Streeten, & K. Haq (Eds.), The UN and the Bretton Woods Institutions: New challenges for the twenty-first Century (pp. 3–14). Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jahan, S. (2002). Evolution of the Human Development Index. In S. Fukuda-Parr & A. K. Shiva Kumar (Eds.), Readings in human development (pp. 152–163). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Jolly, R. (1985). Adjustment with a human face. Development: Seeds of Change, 4, 83–87.Google Scholar
  30. Jolly, R. (1989a). Restoring momentum for human development in the 1990s. Journal of Development Planning, 19, 259–263.Google Scholar
  31. Jolly, R. (2005). The UN and development thinking and practice. Forum for Development Studies, 1-2005, 49–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jolly, R. (2007). Society for International Development, the North-South Roundtable and the power of ideas. Development, 50(S1), 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jolly, R. (2014). UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund): Global governance that works. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Jolly, R., Emmerij, L., Ghai, D., & Lapeyre, F. (2004). UN contributions to development thinking and practice. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Jolly, R., Emmerij, L., & Weiss, T. G. (2009). UN ideas that changes the world. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Kirdar, Ü. (1984a). An overview. In K. Haq (Ed.), Crisis of the ‘80s (pp. 199–207). Washington, DC: North South Roundtable.Google Scholar
  37. Kirdar, Ü. (1984b). Impact of IMF conditionality on human conditions. In K. Haq & C. Massad (Eds.), Adjustment with growth: A search for an equitable solution (pp. 229–242). Islamabad: North South Roundtable.Google Scholar
  38. Kirdar, Ü. (1986). International institutions and human development: A critique. In K. Haq & Ü. Kirdar (Eds.), Human development: The neglected dimension (pp. 421–436). Islamabad: North South Roundtable.Google Scholar
  39. Kirdar, Ü. (1989). A review of past strategies. In K. Haq & Ü. Kirdar (Eds.), Development for people: Goals and strategies for the year 2000 (pp. 181–200). Islamabad: North South Roundtable.Google Scholar
  40. McNeill, D. (2007). Human development: The power of the idea. Journal of Human Development, 8(1), 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McNeill, D., & Clair, A. L. (2009). Global poverty, ethics and human rights: The role of multilateral organisations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Mirowski, P. (1990a). The philosophical bases of institutionalist economics. In D. Lavoie (Ed.), Economics and hermeneutics (pp. 76–112). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Mirowski, P. (1990b). The rhetoric of economics. History of the Human Sciences, 3(2), 244–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mirowski, P. (2002). Machine dreams: Economics becomes a cyborg science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Mirowski, P. (2005a). A revisionist’s view of the history of economic thought. Change, 48(5), 79–94.Google Scholar
  46. Mirowski, P. (2005b). How positivism made a pact with the postwar social sciences in the United States. In G. Steinmetz (Ed.), The politics of method in the human sciences: Positivism and its epistemological others (pp. 142–172). Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mirowski, P. (2006). Twelve theses concerning the history of postwar neoclassical price theory. In P. Mirowski & D. W. Hands (Eds.), Agreement on demand: Consumer theory in the twentieth century—Annual supplement to, History of political economy (Vol. 38, pp. 343–379). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Mirowski, P., & Hands, D. W. (1998). A paradox of budgets: The postwar stabilization of American neoclassical demand theory. In M. S. Morgan & M. Rutherfold (Eds.), From interwar pluralism to postwar neoclassicism (pp. 260–292). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Morgan, M. S., & Rutherfold, M. (1998). American economics: The character of the transformation. In M. S. Morgan & M. Rutherfold (Eds.), From interwar pluralism to postwar neoclassicism – Annual supplement to, History of political economy (Vol. 30, pp. 1–26). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Murphy, C. (2006). The United Nations Development Programme: A better way? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. North South Roundtable (NSRT) & UNDP. (1983, August 29–September 1). Statement from Istanbul: A report on the Istanbul Roundtable on world monetary, financial and human resource development issues. Istanbul.Google Scholar
  52. Ponzio, R. (2008). The advent of the Human Development Report. In K. Haq & R. Ponzio (Eds.), Pioneering the human development revolution: An intellectual biography of Mahbub ul Haq (pp. 88–111). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Rahnema, M. (1997a). Introduction. In M. Rahnema & V. Bawtree (Eds.), The post-development reader (pp. ix–xix). London: Zed.Google Scholar
  54. Rahnema, M. (1997b). Towards post-development: Searching for signposts, a new language and new paradigms. In M. Rahnema & V. Bawtree (Eds.), The post-development reader (pp. 377–403). London: Zed.Google Scholar
  55. Rist, G. (1997). The history of development: From western origins to global faith. London: Zed.Google Scholar
  56. Sen, A. K. (1989). Development as capabilities expansion. Journal of Development Planning, 19, 41–58.Google Scholar
  57. Sen, A. K. (1997). Development thinking at the beginning of the XXI century. In L. Emmerij (Ed.), Economic and social development into the XXI century (pp. 531–551). Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar
  58. Sen, A. K. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Singer, H. (1995). An historical perspective. In M. U. Haq, R. Jolly, P. Streeten, & K. Haq (Eds.), The UN and the Bretton Woods Institutions: New challenges for the twenty-first century (pp. 17–25). Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. St Clair, A. L. (2004). The role of ideas in the United Nations Development Programme. In M. Bøås & D. McNeill (Eds.), Global institutions and development: Framing the world? (pp. 178–192). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. St Clair, A. L. (2007). A methodologically pragmatist approach to development ethics. Journal of Global Ethics, 3, 141–162.Google Scholar
  62. UN. (1970). Yearbook of the United Nations 1970, New York.Google Scholar
  63. UN. (1976). Yearbook of the United Nations 1976, New York.Google Scholar
  64. UN. (1980). Yearbook of the United Nations 1980, New York.Google Scholar
  65. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (1967–74). Pre-Investment News, New York.Google Scholar
  66. UNDP. (1974–86). Report of the Administrator, New York.Google Scholar
  67. UNDP. (1975). Commitment, New York.Google Scholar
  68. UNDP. (1975–77). Action UNDP, New York.Google Scholar
  69. UNDP. (1987–89). UNDP World Development Annual Report, New York.Google Scholar
  70. UNDP. (1988–92). World Development, New York.Google Scholar
  71. UNDP. (1990–91). UNDP Annual Report: World development, New York.Google Scholar
  72. UNDP. (1992–2009). UNDP Annual Report, New York.Google Scholar
  73. Wade, R. H. (2001a). Making the World Development Report 2000: Attacking poverty. World Development, 29(8), 1435–1441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wade, R. H. (2001b). Showdown at the World Bank. New Left Review, 7(January/February), 124–137.Google Scholar
  75. Wade, R. H. (2002). US hegemony and the World Bank: The fight over people and ideas. Review of International Political Economy, 9(2), 201–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Weiss, T. G., & Carayannis, T. (2005). Ideas matter: Voices from the United Nations. Forum for Development Studies, 1-2005, 243–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. World Bank. (1980). World Development Report 1980. DC: Washington.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tadashi Hirai
    • 1
  1. 1.The University of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations