Futures of Development

Lasay, Fátima. "Triad: Knowledge, Technology and Autonomy." Prepared for the Workshop on the Creation of Masterclasses on Art and Design, Technology and Culture in the Mediterranean Rim and Gulf (Brucknerhaus, Keppler Saal, Linz, Austria) August 2004, from "Lessons from the Philippine Triad" for the Melilla 5 Cultures Festival, July 2004. Access via http://portal.unesco.org/culture>. Also see http://www.geocities.com/imaginero/index.html>

As far as I know, essays like this are rare, so rare that many have wondered whether there is any point in a 'critique' of the ICT4Dev discourse at all. But "[p]roblematising this discourse and its assumptions is not a negation of the potential role of ICTs for development initiatives, but instead is a critique of the apolitical technological determinism underlying much of the international ICT and development discourse", as Wilson writes, sz

One of the background papers of the (ongoing) ‘Alternative Regionalisms’ project that is part of the process of envisioning alternatives to the WTO. See http://www.tni.org/altreg/index.htm> for current information as well as other texts by Keet, sz

Cook, Bill. "From Colonial Administration to Development Management." DPM Discussion Paper Series - Working Paper No. 63 (2001). http://idpm.man.ac.uk/publications/wp/dp/dp_wp63.shtml>

Picciotto, Robert. "Aid and Conflict: The Policy Coherence Challenge." WIDER Conference on Making Peace Work (4-5 June 2004). http://www.wider.unu.edu/conference/conference-2004-1/conference2004-1.htm>. Also see http://www.globalpolicyproject.org/>

Klingebiel, Stephan, and Katja Roehder. „Development-Military Interfaces: New Challenges in Crises and Post-conflict Situations.” Reports and Working Papers No. 5 (2004). Bonn: German Development Institute (GDI). http://www.die-gdi.de/>

Stiglitz, Joseph E. “Globalization, Technology, and Asian Development.” Asian Development Review 20.2 (2003).  

Hayami, Yujiro. “From the Washington Consensus to the Post-Washington Consensus: Retrospect and Prospect.” Asian Development Review 20.2 (2003).  

“The past two decades have witnessed major changes in the paradigm of international development assistance. During the 1980s the import-substitution industrialization strategy (ISI) advocating for government market interventions to promote large-scale modern industries gave way to a new paradigm referred to as the Washington Consensus, which identified the market as a universally efficient mechanism to allocate scarce resources and promote economic growth. Scarcely a decade later, in the mid-1990s, the Washington Consensus was replaced by a contrasting paradigm called the Post-Washington Consensus. It emphasized the need for different institutions in different economies and recognized cases in which government market interventions can play a positive role. The post-Washington Consensus focused on poverty reduction, emphasizing the need for delivery to the poor of social services, such as education and health care, by government and civil society. Sustainability of this approach is questioned, however, because of its relative neglect on the provision of production-oriented infrastructure and services needed to supply profitable work opportunities for poor people.”