Essentialism In and About Development Discourse

Abstract

Several types of essentialism form potential dangers in policy and development discourse. First, essentialism in defining terms, including in claims that a term referring to a broad and multi-dimensional category means ‘essentially’ and exclusively such-and-such and is not ‘essentially contestable’. Second, essentialism about the performance and desirability of policies and policy means, including: the treatment of a means or strategy as having ‘inherent’ performance attributes (strengths/weaknesses); and the treatment of a means as inherently (or ‘basically’) appropriate and ‘proper’. Illustrations come from debates on rural centres, co-operatives, and collectivisation. Thirdly, essentialism in descriptions of schools of development thought and practice, discussed with reference to work by Kitching, Ferguson, Escobar and others on development discourse, and the stream of ‘anti-development discourse’.