Global Development, Converging Divergence and Development Studies: A Rejoinder
Material type: ArticlePublication details: Wiley, 2019.Description: Vol.50, Issue 2,2019:(495-510 p.)Online resources: In: Development and changeSummary: This rejoinder addresses key cross‐cutting issues in the contributions to this Forum Debate, most notably the contesting of the empirical basis for the converging divergence thesis, the causes that underlie the trends identified, and the implications for development studies and practice. We maintain our argument for a ‘converging divergence’ referring to a direction of change from approximately 1990–2015, which includes but goes beyond income and takes account of growing inequality within many countries. Moreover, we argue that the case for reframing international development as global development, as briefly outlined in the original article, goes beyond empirical data to underlying causal processes of globalized capitalism and global climate change. We hope that this Forum Debate significantly enriches the discussion about 21st century global development and helps weaken the intellectual appeal of the binary logic that has underpinned the concept and practice of international development.Item type | Current library | Collection | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode | Item holds | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
E-Journal | Library, SPAB | Reference Collection | v. 50 ( 1-6) / Jan-Dec 2019 | Available |
This rejoinder addresses key cross‐cutting issues in the contributions to this Forum Debate, most notably the contesting of the empirical basis for the converging divergence thesis, the causes that underlie the trends identified, and the implications for development studies and practice. We maintain our argument for a ‘converging divergence’ referring to a direction of change from approximately 1990–2015, which includes but goes beyond income and takes account of growing inequality within many countries. Moreover, we argue that the case for reframing international development as global development, as briefly outlined in the original article, goes beyond empirical data to underlying causal processes of globalized capitalism and global climate change. We hope that this Forum Debate significantly enriches the discussion about 21st century global development and helps weaken the intellectual appeal of the binary logic that has underpinned the concept and practice of international development.
There are no comments on this title.