Development Intervention: Actor and activity perspectives PDF
Preview Development Intervention: Actor and activity perspectives
DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTION Actor and Activity Perspectives Tiina Kontinen (ed.). Helsinki – Helsingfors 2004 Development intervention. Actor and activity perspectives. Tiina Kontinen (ed.) University of Helsinki. Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research and Institute for Development Studies ISBN 952-10-1939-5 Taitto: DTPage Oy Hakapaino Oy, Helsinki 2004 Contents 1. INTRODUCTION: ABOUT INTERVENTION AND METHODOLOGIES . . .1 Tiina Kontinen 2. DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTION AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES. . . . .5 Juhani Koponen 3. ACTORS, INTERFACES AND DEVELOPMENT INTERVENTION: MEANINGS, PURPOSES AND POWERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Norman Long 4. DEVELOPMENTAL INTERVENTIONS IN WORK ACTIVITIES – AN ACTIVITY THEORETICAL INTERPRETATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 Jaakko Virkkunen 5. STRIVING TO MAKE CAPITAL DO “ECONOMIC” THINGS FOR THE IMPOVERISHED: ON THE ISSUE OF CAPITALIZATION IN RURAL MICRO-ENTERPRISES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67 Magdalena Villarreal 6. INTERVENTION NEGOTIATED? – PRODUCTION OF SHARED OBJECT AND POWER RELATIONS IN THE PLANNING OF A DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION PROJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82 Tiina Kontinen 7. THE ROLES OF THE RESEARCHER IN DEVELOPMENTALLY- ORIENTED RESEARCH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105 Reijo Miettinen 8. RESEARCHER’S ROLES AND IDEAS OF INTERVENTION – THE INFLUENCE ON RESEARCH OUTCOMES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122 Outi Hakkarainen 9. WHO OWNS THE INTERVENTION? BRINGING THE UNEMPLOYED BACK INTO UNEMPLOYED STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .143 Jussi Silvonen 1. Introduction: about intervention and methodologies Tiina Kontinen Evenwiththegloriouspossibilitiesopenedupbynewkindsofnetworksbrought aboutbyglobalization,atfirstglance,onewouldnotassumethataruralwoman inMexicotakingpartinamicro-enterprisescheme,alabourinspectorinFinland frustratedbythecontinuingproblemsheencountersinhiswork,agovernment landofficialplanningalandreforminPeru,anexecutivememberofasmallTan- zaniannon-governmentalorganisation,anunemployedmaninaFinnishtown, anethnographerinahigh-technologylaboratoryandademocracyactivistcon- ductingresearchintocivil-societyorganisationswouldhaveverymuchincom- mon.Inmanyaspectsthatassumptionisvalid.However,inthiscollectionthe aimistodiscussthesecasesfromthepointofviewofbeingpartofinterventions, in one way or in another. A similar question could be asked from the methodological point of view: whatwouldconnect1)anactor-orientedsociologyofdevelopmentwhichstud- iesdevelopmentinterventionsimplementedbygovernmentsoraidagenciesin developingsocietiesand2)activitytheoreticalstudiesaimedatstudyingandim- provingworkactivitiesintheNorthernhemisphere?Themostobviousansweris thatdespiteaddressingtraditionallydifferentresearchobjects,bothapproaches constitutepartofthemethodologicalpaletteofpresent-daysocialsciencesthat subscribetosomekindofconstructionistepistemology,thatis,tounderstanding theconnectionbetweenactorsandstructuresasatwo-waymovement,andtothe beliefthatphenomenashouldbestudiedastheyarepracticedineverydayactivi- ties.However,aswillbeshowninthechaptersofthiscollection,themethodolo- gies do differ in both their conceptualisation and methodological principles. Thecollectionincludesselectedpapersfromasymposiumon”Development Intervention–MethodologicalApproachesandDebates”thattookplaceonthe 15th and 16th of March 20021. This symposium was arranged in co-operation withtheCenterforActivityTheoryandDevelopmentalWorkResearch2atthe FacultyofBehaviouralSciencesoftheUniversityofHelsinkiandtheInstituteof DevelopmentStudiesfromtheFacultyofSocialSciencesoftheUniversityof Helsinki,Finland.ItwasafirststepinadialoguebetweentheschoolsofDevel- opmentStudiesandActivityTheoreticalStudies,initiatedtodiscussthechal- lengingnotionofintervention.Thesymposiumenabledmainproponentstodis- 1 The grant from the Academy of Finland for arranging the symposium is gratefully acknowledged. 2 TheCenterforActivityTheoryandDevelopmentalWorkResearchisoneoftheCentresofExcellencein2000-2005 nominated by the Academy of Finland. 1 cussbothapproachesandalsogaveanumberofPhDstudentsachancetopresent papers.Inthecourseofthesymposium,itbecameclearthattheconceptofDe- velopmentInterventioncanbeunderstoodinmanyways.Thepaperspresented coveredissuesrangingfromeconomicinterventionbytheSingaporeanstatetoa verydetaileddiscourseanalysisofaninterventionmeetingconcerningaFinnish health care activity. As Juhani Koponen (Chapter 2) puts it, discussion of intervention has not beenverypopularindevelopmentstudies.Thenotionofinterventionseemsto carrywithitanimmoralconnotationofoutsiderinterventionistsmessingupin- siders’lives. That is understandable, given the mixed history of development, whichstartedundercolonialismandsometimeshadquitedramaticunintended (and,attimes,intended)consequencesforthelivelihoodsofpeople.Koponen argues,however,thatthenotionofinterventioncontinuestobeindispensablefor understandingdevelopmentpractice,butdevelopmentstudiesshouldrethinkits relationshiptoitandtothewholedevelopmentalistcomplexwhichunderliesit. Koponenadvocatesashiftfroman‘ideological’developmentalistapproachtoa more‘methodological’onewhichincorporatesacommitmenttocriticalreflec- tion on and analysis of development discourse and practice. NormanLong(Chapter3)presentsanactor-orientedapproachtothesociol- ogy of development, concentrating on the methodology of interface analysis. This approach has been developed over a number of years by researchers at WageningenUniversity,Netherlands,for“demystifyingplannedintervention” inavarietyofempiricalcontexts.Thechapterdemonstratesthecontributionof interfaceanalysisvis-à-vismorestructuralinterpretationswiththecaseofland reforminPeruandshowshowdetailedethnographicevidencecanchallengethe simplifyingdiscoursesofgeneraltheoriesandpoliciesofdevelopment.Long’s useofthenotionofinterfacefocusesuponthecriticalpointsofdiscontinuitybe- tweenmultipleactors’lifeworldsordomainswhererelationshipsbecomeori- entedtowaysofbridging,accommodating,orcontestingeachothers’socialand cognitive worlds. Inthiscollection,thesometimesscepticalattitudeexpressedbycriticsofin- terventionist thinking in mainstream development studies is challenged by a morepositive,oropen,viewsharedbybothactivitytheoryandactor-oriented analysis.Althoughthelatterislessdirectlyconcernedwithdesigningpractical intervention strategies, like activity theory it conceptualizes intervention (in- cludingthatwhichisgearedprimarilytoresearch)asinvolvingaco-construc- tive,or,co-productiveexercisesharedbytheinsidersandoutsiders,withthepo- tentialtosolvesomeoftheproblemstheyface.Additionally,activitytheoryap- proachholdstheviewthatacquiringknowledgeoftheworldimpliesattemptsto transform it. JaakkoVirkkunen(Chapter4)positionstheactivitytheoreticalapproachin relationtootherapproachestoresearchanddevelopmentofworkactivitiesand organizations.Hemakesthecaseforfocusingontheactivitythatissubjecttoin- terventionratherthanontheinterventionist-practitionerrelationshipthatother approachesemphasise.Suchinterventionisrelatedtothelearningandtransfor- mationofactivitiesinwhichthecreationofnewtoolsandartefactswithinthe dialogical space provided by the researchers plays a central role. 2 Incontradistinctiontointerventionsin,forexample,ruralsettingsindevelop- ingcountries,interventionsinworkplacesareofteninvitedones–atleastbythe management of the company or public service. Another distinction is that in workplaceinterventions,usuallynoadditionalfinancialresourcesareavailable tobedistributedbytheinterventionistsasisthecaseindevelopmentprojectsand programmes. Magdalena Villarreal (Chapter 5) provides an enlightening ac- count of the kinds of social negotiations and transformations that take place whenpoorMexicanwomenareofferedachancetoobtainstart-upcapitalforthe establishment of micro-enterprises. Her contribution provides an interesting viewonthelegacyofthecapitalistlogicindiverseenvironments.Morespecifi- cally her analysis challenges the centrality of the contradiction between use valueandexchangevalueinactivitytheorybyspellingoutthecomplexsetofso- cial contradictions entailed by the network of kinship obligations, reciprocal gift-givingandtheurgencyofobtainingimmediatecashbenefitsinruralcom- munities. Hence Villarreal explores the diverse ways in which actors attribute valuetotheideaofmicro-credit,acommonelementinpresent-daydevelopment programmes. Micro-creditalsoplaysanimportantroleinTiinaKontinen’s(Chapter6)de- tailed micro-analysis of planning meetings within the context of development co-operation involving Finnish and Tanzanian NGOs. She applies the activity theoretical approach to understand a local development planning process and discussesthepeculiarityofpowerrelationsinthisprocess.Dealingwithpower andasymmetrieswasoneoftheissuesidentifiedasachallengetoactivitytheo- retical analysis at the symposium. IfpowerrelationsarecentraltoNorth-Southrelationshipsthentheeffectsof powerarealsopresentintheresearchactivityitself.Intheproductionofscien- tificknowledge,theresearcheroccupiesapositionofpowerandauthorityinse- lectingtheoreticalapproaches,dataandinterpretations,andmuststrugglewith thequestionofwhosesidehe/sheison.Thedilemmabetweennormativeandan- alytic types of research and the degree of engagement of academics in policy processes have been much debated in development studies. Reijo Miettinen (Chapter 7) enters this discussion by examining the diverse roles of the re- searcherinthefieldofconstructivistscienceandtechnologystudiesandpartici- patory learning approaches in organisational learning. OutiHakkarainen(Chapter8)providesamorepersonalappreciationofthe rolesofaresearcher.Shereflectsonthediverserolesshehasplayedinvarious researchprocessesinLatinAmericaasacivil-societyresearcher,beingsimulta- neouslyademocracyactivist,awomanandamother,andplotstheimplications for the results of the research. Ifthemainconcernofanactor-orientedsociologyofdevelopmenthasbeen thatofopeningupthe‘blueprint’modelofplannedintervention,andthepreoc- cupationofactivitytheory-baseddevelopmentalresearchhasbeenthatofcon- ductinginterventionswhosemethodologyhasbeenwellplannedinadvancebut whosecontenthasbeencontext-specific,thenclearlytheeffortofthepsycholog- ical intervention sciences has been to try to standardize both. Jussi Silvonen (Chapter9)discussesanexperimentalinterventionwithinthefieldofunemploy- mentstudies.Hepresentsthecentraldilemmaofownershipandfidelityinexper- 3 imental intervention and proposes a fruitful combination of experimental and ethnographicmethodsinattemptingtounderstandtheeffectsandprocessesof intervention in peoples’lives. Theindividualcontributionsinthiscollectionprovideamany-sided,ifnotex- haustive,treatmentofthenotionofintervention.Themainmessageofthecontri- butions is the call for the abandonment of simplifying and idealized conceptualisationsandastrongpleafortheneedforexploringsocialpractices andreallivesinalltheirrichnessandfuzziness.Forthereadercomingfromde- velopment studies, the contributions give fresh views on bread-and-butter no- tionssuchas‘participatory’approaches,‘facilitation’and‘ownership’.Forthe reader interested in developmental interventions in workplaces, the contribu- tions provide a number of surprising angles from which developmental and developmentalistactivityitselfmightbebetterunderstood.Foraresearchersin- terestedinsocialactionandreal-liferesearch,thecontributionsprovideuseful methodologicalinsightsforfurtherconsideration.Wewishthatthiscollection wouldbeanopening,ratherthanconclusion,ofadialogueondevelopmentinter- vention and methodologies. The contributors OutiHakkarainen(MA)isaresearcherwiththeServiceCenterforDevelop- mentCo-operationandaPh.DcandidateattheInstituteofDevelopmentStudies Tiina Kontinen (MA) is an Assistant at the Institute of Development Studies andaPh.DcandidateattheCenterforActivityTheoryandDevelopmentalWork Research at the University of Helsinki, Finland. JuhaniKoponenisProfessorofDevelopmentStudiesattheUniversityofHel- sinki, Finland. NormanLongisaProfessorEmeritusintheSociologyofDevelopmentatthe University of Wageningen, the Netherlands. ReijoMiettinenisaProfessorinInnovationandResearchattheCenterforAc- tivityTheoryandDevelopmentalWorkResearch,UniversityofHelsinki,Fin- land. JussiSilvonen(Ph.D)isaResearchFellowattheCenterforActivityTheoryand Developmental Work Research, University of Helsinki, Finland. MagdalenaVillarreal(Ph.D)isaresearcherattheCentrodeInvestigacióny Estudios Superiores de Anthropologia Social (CIESAS), Guadalajara, Mexico JaakkoVirkkunenisaProfessorinDevelopmentalWorkResearchattheFac- ulty of Education, University of Helsinki, Finland. 4 2. Development intervention and development studies Juhani Koponen Indevelopmentdiscourseonedoesnothearmuchofinterventionthesedays.For many people engaged in development, the word ‘intervention’has become an uglyonethattheyprefertoshun.Onthebroaderglobalscene,interventionis mainly associated with things such as conflict, violence and military action, whiledevelopmentislinkedwithco-operation,partnershipandsustainability. Developmentactivistsseethemselvesasengagedindevelopmentwork,devel- opmentefforts,ordevelopmentco-operation,notinintervention.Butleavinga word unuttered does not undo a practice practiced. Themainstreamofdevelopmentdiscoursehasawell-knowntendencytopro- duceavocabularythatissomewhatoutofsyncwithwhathappensontheground. Interminology,developmentaidhasbeenreplacedbydevelopmentco-opera- tion,donorsandrecipientsarecalled“developmentpartners”andstabilisation andstructuraladjustmenthavebeenovertakenbypovertyreductionstrategies. Sucheuphemismisobviouslyconductedinthebeliefthatwordscontributeto theconstructionofreality,andthefirststeptowardschangingrealityistochange the words. Yetwecontinuetoneedanalyticalnotionsthathelpustodescribe,understand andexplainwhatishappeningintheworld.Tomakesenseofdevelopment,Ibe- lievethatinterventionisindispensableasananalyticalnotion.Thisiswhyitisso refreshingfordevelopmentscholarstoco-operatewithfieldssuchasActivity TheoryandDevelopmentalWorkResearch,inwhichinterventionisseenasa centralconceptandameansofworkingtowardscommonlysharedobjectives. Thepurposeofoursymposiumandthispublication,astepforwardinthepro- cess,istoallowsomeofthedifferentapproachesandideaswehavetointeract and see whether something new emerges from the encounter. Development and developmentalism Mybasicclaimisthatdevelopmentasunderstoodbyusinourcontext,interna- tional development, or development of developing countries, is in a very real senseimpossiblewithoutintervention.Toputitdifferently:interventionispart andparcelofdevelopment,anddevelopmentisanexercisewhichisthoroughly interventionist. What do I mean? 5 Usuallywhenweusetheword‘development’,weprobablyhavetwothingsin mind:oneisthegoal,theaim,andtheotheristheprocess,themovementtowards thatgoal.Developmentasaprocessisunderstoodasleadingtowardsdevelop- mentasthegoal.Thegoalisthoughtofasidealandtheprocessisthoughtofas factual.Ifdevelopmentisaverynormativenotion,itisbecauseasagoalitisseen assomethingdesirableandworthpursuingandfurthering.Itisalsothoughttobe assomethingthatisgoodforall,somethingtowardswhichallfair-mindedpeo- ple are bound to strive. So where does the intervention come in? Myargumentisthatinterventionispresentallthewaythrough.Ithastobeseen asthethirddimensionofournotionofdevelopment.Withoutittherewouldbe nosuchnotion,andnotmuchactionforthatmatter.Thisnotion,whichIcallthe modernnotionofdevelopment,includes,orconsistsof,threedifferentdimen- sions.Inadditiontothegoalandtheprocessthatleadstothedesignatedgoal, therealsoistheinterventionitself:somethingthoughttobenecessarytostartor triggerofftheprocessthatwillleadtothegoal.Inthisvision,developmentisnot somethingthatsimplyhappensandtakesthingsinabetterdirection;itissome- thingthathastobepurposefullycreated,oratleastfacilitatedbydevelopment intervention. Thisnotionofdevelopmentisolderthanisoftenrealised,andhasfirmrootsin the ideology of European colonialism. However, it is only since the Second WorldWarthatithasbeenusedforitspresentpurpose,namelytoprovideacon- ceptualbasisforaworldorderofwhichstatesemergingfromcolonialismarean integral part. Whatmakesthisnotion,andtheawarenessandanalysisofit,ofcrucialimpor- tanceisthatitprovidestheintellectualandmoralunderpinningforthoseideas, discourses,waysofaction,institutionsandotherstructuresthathavegrownupto furtherdevelopmentduringthelastfiftyyearsorso–tosupportallthecloselyin- terconnecteddiscourseandactivitywenowundertakeinthenameofdevelop- ment.Amultitudeofinternational,nationaland,increasingly,localactorsarein- volved in this complex of discourse and action that I propose to call developmentalism. Suchdevelopmentalismrestsontwoideologicalpremises.Thefirstisthatde- velopment, whatever the prevailing interpretation of its ‘right’social and eco- nomiccontents,isthoughttobeachievableanddesirableandbeneficialtoall. Thesecondisthebeliefthatthatawell-meaning,rationallyconstructedinter- ventioninasocialprocesswillleadtosuchdevelopment,andthatitisinevery- one’slong-terminteresttofostersuchinterventionsanddevelopment.Thecon- tentsofdevelopmentalismhavechangedandkeeponchanging.Whatremainsis theideologicalconvictionaboutthedesirabilityof‘development’andthecon- comitant moral imperative to foster it through development intervention. Ifthisisthecase,whyistherethensuchareluctancetodiscussintervention openly, in plain terms, among development activists and researchers? 6
The list of books you might like
