Ideological Interests Play a Significant Role in Shaping Development Research Essay

Introduction

Since the category of “development” was understood as a process of getting rid of an underdeveloped state and realising modernisation, development research was originally understood as a theory of studying the transition from a traditional agrarian society to a modern industrial one (van den Akker, 1999). With the advent of globalisation, development research has also shifted from specialised to overall research on various social forms and global development. As for ideology, it is the sum of concrete ideas, viewpoints, and concepts that are directly related to the economy and politics of a certain society or country.

It is a unique reflection of the economic foundation and political system of community, as well as political relations between humans (Ergazakis, Metaxiotis and Askounis, 2013). There is an opinion that specific ideological interests can play a severe role in shaping development research. In order to support this point of view, several ideologies are discussed in this paper. In the following sections, the World Bank’s adherence to the systems of free market and growthism, as well as the United Nations’ social democratic views, are explored regarding poverty and unemployment rates and promotion of development research.

Free Market Ideology

Free market capitalism is one possible ideology that is known to significantly influence the world itself and development research. Unfortunately, this influence is not always positive, and there is a vast number of adverse consequences of free-market ideology (Fix, 2019). To define this economic system, it is essential to mention that it promotes the production and distribution of services and goods without or with restricted involvement from governmental authorities (Kardos et al., 2016).

Thus, this type of economy is generally based on demand and supply. People have the control of making their own economic decisions, meaning that power and order are decentralised, and bureaucracy is absent (Heath and Gifford, 2006). Competition is the source of low prices and efficiency, and the main motivator for all economic choices is self-interest (Fix, 2019). Though it may seem that this is a rather beneficial type of economy, free-market ideology has much more disadvantages than strengths, and probably the most dangerous among them is higher rates of poverty and unemployment.

Increased Unemployment as a Result of Free Market Ideology

The main weakness of this economic system is that it usually leads to increased rates of poverty and unemployment. The free market requires people to have skills and abilities in order to resist competition. Therefore, those who have nothing to offer cannot get access to the market (Fix, 2019). People, including children, the elderly, or those who have health problems, do not have marketable skills and have to face unemployment (Heath and Gifford, 2006). After being left behind be the economy, such members of society fall into poverty, which increases the overall rate (Kardos et al., 2016). Considering all information mentioned above, it becomes evident that free-market ideology can play a major but negative role in sharing development research.

The World Bank and Its Attempts to End Poverty

The World Bank is a unique association of five multilateral institutions that hold a significant amount of power and influence. The Bank’s core mission is to eradicate global unemployment and poverty, and much effort has been put into this objective for the last few years. This is mentioned in its 2019 World Development Report (World Bank, 2019). Nevertheless, researchers critique the World Bank for trying to achieve this purpose by foisting free-market ideology on developing countries, which causes severe adverse consequences and is a great example of how ideological interests may influence the development research.

In its report, the World Bank (2019) states that governments should invest in human capital in order to make sure that citizens can develop specific skills in demand in the labour market. However, this does not fully correspond with the Bank’s position regarding the market and employers, which is actually based on the free market system (Masters and Chatzky, 2019). For example, according to Masters and Chatzky (2019), “the bank’s attempts to rapidly impose free markets on developing countries in the 1980s and 1990s, known as economic “shock therapy,” produced a “record of failure” in Latin America, Africa, and former Soviet countries” (para. 5). Therefore, the free market ideological interests of the Bank directly define its role in development research.

Growthism

Growthism or productivism is another basic ideology that may play a substantial role in shaping development research. This system is based on the assumption that the primary purpose and objective of humans are measurable growth and productivity (Douglas, 2008). According to Daly (2019), growthism aims to increase the number of any produced goods since this is the best way for people to enjoy their lives and achieve harmony in their relationships. Moreover, believing that more production is only positive, growthism ideologists consider it the key way to eliminate unemployment and poverty (Douglas, 2008). Nevertheless, this ideology is not perfect, and its disadvantages, including increased poverty rates, make it possible to find it more damaging than beneficial.

Growthism as the World Bank’s Ideology

Despite the fact that the World Bank was designed and is considered to be apolitical, a thorough study of its reports and activities allows one to make certain assumptions. According to researchers, it is possible to suggest that productivism is the ideology close to the Bank (Daly, 2019). After an in-depth reading of its 2019 and 2020 World development reports, one may notice that both of them are focused on increasing overall productivity and therefore achieving global objectives (World Bank, 2020).

For example, in the 2019 report, the authors state that the governments should help citizens enhance their skills, invest in children’s educations and boost humans’ productivity so that it is easier to fight poverty (World Bank, 2019). However, this report produces a rather controversial effect on the readers, and they may get an opinion that the only possible way to eliminate all problems is to work and increase the creation of goods and services.

Indeed, it is hard to disagree that in times of acute shortage of any products, it becomes imperative to increase their creation and distribution so that more people can get the minimum they need. However, researchers disagree that growthism is a good way to eliminate poverty and unemployment (Daly, 2019). Due to the rapid development of technology, increased production will not lead to job growth (Douglas, 2008). At the same time, the higher volume of produced goods does not guarantee that people below the poverty line will receive them because not all employees will be willing to work for the poor and share with them. Nevertheless, the World Bank most likely adheres to this particular ideology, which influences its sharing development research.

Social Democracy

Social democracy is a particular economic, political, and social ideology that is based on both socialism and democratic principles. In this system, citizens and government together play significant roles in controlling the economy and market. What is more, the core purpose of government is to support all citizens, notwithstanding their abilities to contribute to general growth and development.

While sustaining a competitive economy, this ideology also helps those individuals who do not have enough income so that they are protected in case of losing their jobs. Equal rights are guaranteed for everyone, which is the main principle of this political structure. Simultaneously, unlike the free market, there is an extended government’s power and control over industries. Certainly, there are both strengths and weaknesses of social democracy, but this ideology has proven its relevance and positive impact on the elimination of poverty and shaping development research.

The United Nations’ Adherence to Social Democracy

Just as in the World Bank case, despite the official apoliticality, the United Nations has a tendency towards social democracy (Kastning, 2013). According to the 2019 and 2020 Human development reports, the United Nations see the global problem in various inequalities weakening economic growth and social cohesion, which damages citizens’ trust in their authorities and their power (Conceição, 2019). Increased production of goods or implementation of the free market system are not considered the ways of elimination poverty in these reports. On the contrary, Conceição (2020) perceives people’s unity as the best solution.

To achieve decreased poverty and unemployment rates, it is only essential to support each other and demonstrate that the authorities can and will help. The United Nations are also focused on protecting the equality of rights, which proves its social democratic views (Joshi and O’Dell, 2013). Overall, according to Steffek and Holthaus (2018), the UN approach to solving global issues is close to democratic, which is probably the secret of its relative success. Finally, this also proves the role of this ideology in shaping development research.

Conclusion

To draw a conclusion, one may say that the ideologies mentioned above are indeed influential when it comes to shaping and analysing development research. The free market, growthism and social democracy are the three political and economic systems that promote this process either negatively or positively. This idea enlightens people that all countries have the right to choose their own development goals and paths. Each country has its own development autonomy, immanence, creativity, individuality and self-contentedness. With such a theoretical consciousness, people will do better in understanding the world and studying development issues.

Reference List

Conceição, P. (2019) Human development report 2019 – beyond income, beyond averages, beyond today: inequalities in human development in the 21st century. Web.

Conceição, P. (2020) Human development report 2020 – the next frontier: human development and the Anthropocene. Web.

Daly, H. (2019) Growthism: its ecological, economic and ethical limits. Web.

Douglas, R. (2008) ‘Growthism and the green backlash’, The Political Quarterly, 78, pp. 547-555.

Ergazakis, K., Metaxiotis, K. and Askounis, D. (2013) ‘Knowledge-based development research: a comprehensive literature review 2000–2010’, Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 11, pp. 78–91.

Fix, B. (2019) Why free market ideology is a double lie. Web.

Heath, Y. and Gifford, R. (2006) ‘Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: the case of belief in global climate change’, Environment and Behaviour, 38(1), pp. 48–71.

Joshi, D. and O’Dell, R. (2013) ‘Global governance and development ideology: the United Nations and the World Bank on the left-right spectrum’, Global Governance, 19(2), pp. 249-275.

Kardos, P., et al. (2016) ‘The effect of the belief in free market ideology on redressing corporate injustice’, European Journal of Social Psychology, 46(6), pp. 672-686.

Kastning, T. (2013) Basics on social democracy. Web.

Masters, J. and Chatzky, A. (2019) The World Bank group’s role in global development. Web.

Steffek, J. and Holthaus, L. (2018) ‘The social-democratic roots of global governance: Welfare internationalism from the 19th century to the United Nations’, European Journal of International Relations, 24(1), pp. 106–129.

van den Akker, J. (1999) ‘Principles and methods of development research’, in van den Akker J. et al. (eds.) Design approaches and tools in education and training. Berlin: Springer.

World Bank. (2019) World development report 2019: the changing nature of work. Web.

World Bank. (2020) World Development report 2020: trading for development in the age of global value chains. Web.