000			01757nab a2200181 4500
999			_c10653 _d10653
003			OSt
005			20201027110536.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			200923b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aZiai, Aram _930581
245			_aTowards a More Critical Theory of ‘Development’ in the 21st Century
260			_bJohn Wiley _c2019
300			_aVol. 50, Issue 2, 2019:(458-467 p.)
520			_aIn response to the article by Horner and Hulme which opens this Debate section, this contribution argues that while the call for a shift from international to global development by Horner and Hulme is justified, their approach is confined to what has been called traditional or problem‐solving theory. On the levels of concepts, theory and metatheory, it fails to transcend orthodox approaches in development theory. Concerning concepts, it employs the traditional concept of ‘development’ without recognizing its ambiguity, referring at different times to social change, positive social change or social change according to the European model. Concerning theory, it is based on the nation-state as a unit of analysis, not differentiating between different socio‐economic groups or classes, and neglects questions of power. Concerning metatheory, its knowledge interest, epistemology and methodology also remain within orthodox boundaries, for example reproducing the measurement of aggregate per capita income and its evaluation as progress. In the last section of this article, the author presents an outline sketch for a more critical theory of ‘development’.
773	0		_08737 _915395 _dWest Sussex John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1970 _tDevelopment and change _x0012-155X
856			_u https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12484
942			_2ddc _cART