Search

An increasingly relevant layer of South–South cooperation (SSC) is the proliferation of interactions between regional organisations, in addition to bilateral cooperation. However, studies on interregionalism often exhibit a Eurocentric bias and a state-centric approach, as they frequently overlook non-state actors in their analyses. This article seeks to expand the conceptualisation of interregionalism into a global phenomenon that is interlinked with regionalism in a reciprocal manner, and that is driven by the mutual impact between different stratifications of interregionalism, involving state as well as non-state actors. Using empirical examples from Latin America, Africa, the Arab World and Europe, the article finds that formal cooperation between regional organisations has a more substantial impact on regionalism, particularly in asymmetric settings. Meanwhile, the emergence of interregional civil society cooperation remains closely tied to the existence of state-driven interregionalism whether as a sponsor or a common adversary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of modernity and its association with the West and secularism is being challenged with the rise of religious movements in the age of globalisation. This provides a fertile ground for alternative modernities, disconnected from the West and secularism, to surface. This paper provides a theoretical explanation for the emergence of alternative modernities by drawing on insights from epistemic injustice and recognition theory, through an analysis of Turkish media outlets. Turkey serves as an illustrative case to examine the emergence of alternative modernities due to its long-standing tradition of incorporating Western modernity and its complex liminal identity between the boundaries of the East and the West. This paper argues that the period from 2005 to 2020 presented a window of opportunity for an alternative modernities paradigm to engage in epistemic struggles for recognition, supported by the ideological context of the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi or AKP) government. This period paved the way for questioning the superiority and uniqueness of Western modernity. However, it also indicates the birth of a new form of epistemic injustice as counter-narratives defending the superiority of Islamic civilisation emerged, seeking to establish epistemic hegemony for Islam and its association with modernity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract This paper investigates why social sciences and humanities disciplines in Pakistani public institutions of higher education continue to remain Eurocentric. The study traces the history of Punjab University, the first university in the region, which is now in Pakistan, from its inception in the late nineteenth century to its present-day continuation through the years of independence. The paper identifies three factors that have contributed to the hegemony of Euro-American knowledge in Pakistan: the recruitment logic of the university education as opposed to knowledge creation, institutionalisation of an exclusivist curriculum, and a bureaucratic-authoritarian state that remained continually insecure and dependent on Western powers. Furthermore, this study identifies four underlying objectives of a colonial university that have led post-­independence university into its neo-colonial phase in which most subjects continue to remain heavily Euro-American-centric. The study also points out three factors that hint at some faint traces of discontent that are appearing and which might develop further into decolonisation of the Pakistani University. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract With the emergence of the modern social sciences in the nineteenth century came recognition of the problem of knowledge imperialism both in the imperial centres and in the colonised world, understood to be inseparably tied up with the dominant orientation in knowledge production, Eurocentrism. This orientation is still held to dominate the various disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. While there is much consensus over this characterisation of the problem, the assumption that the central ideological problem in knowledge production is that of Eurocentrism is not sound. There are several other hegemonic orientations that affect knowledge production in the Third World, many of which predate the colonial period by centuries and have little to do with the colonial experience. These include androcentrism, traditionalism, culturalism, ethnonationalism and sectarianism. If this is true, then the task of decolonising knowledge is far from sufficient. For this reason, scholars in the Malay world speak of the need to generate autonomous knowledge – that is, knowledge that is autonomous from not only Eurocentric but also other hegemonic orientations. This article discusses the dominant hegemonic orientation in knowledge production in our times and the response to these in terms of the idea of autonomous knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the tension between development practice and postcolonial and decolonial theories. The postcolonial and decolonial critiques of development primarily criticise the Eurocentrism of the development discourse, which prevents so-called 'subalterns' from living politically self-determined lives. To evaluate both development policy and its post/decolonial critiques, the paper conducts a qualitative content analysis of song lyrics from the rap music of São Paulo, Brazil, comparing the political demands present in the lyrics with the most important aspects of development policy. São Paulo rap is chosen as it represents an organic politico-cultural movement from the peripheries of one of the largest metropolises in the so-called Global South. The paper concludes that, in terms of basic needs, the will of the 'subalterns' is not significantly different from what development practice offers. Beyond that, it also concludes that both development policy and postcolonialism overlook the problem of the political construction of inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The debate triggered by recent publications and research justifying colonialism demands an intellectual engagement with the histories of colonialism, and their impact on postcolonial trajectories of development, peace and conflict. The argument that colonialism inspired development in societies that embraced its modernity project, enlightened governance and efficient administration – which in turn inspired national consciousness embedded in anti-colonial struggles – has been extensively critiqued. However, less attention has been paid to colonialism’s enduring everyday impact and visible continuities. We argue that the present political moment defined by right-wing, conservative and insular nationalisms and racisms – particularly in Western polities – requires deeper critique. It demands an intensive re-engagement with colonialism’s legacies, the politics of race and racism and the postcolonial (un)making of ‘selfhood’ and ‘nation-statehood’ evidenced in many parts of the world. This collection revisits the impact of colonialism on the postcolonial politics and decolonial developments in Africa; its focus is to reinvestigate the endurance and efficacy of the power relations devised and propagated by the European colonial projects and their continued presence in African states and societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academics in high-income countries are increasingly launching development studies programmes through online distance learning to engage practitioner-students in low-income countries. Are such initiatives providing opportunities to critically tackle social injustice, or merely ‘mirroring’ relations of global inequality and re-entrenching imperial practices? Building on recent scholarship addressing efforts to ‘decolonise development studies’ and the complex power dynamics they encounter, we reflect on this question by analysing experiences of faculty and students in a United Kingdom-based online development studies programme, focusing particularly on perspectives of development practitioner-students working from Africa. We discuss barriers to social inclusivity – including the politics of language – that shaped participation dynamics in the programme as well as debates regarding critical development course content, rethinking possibilities for bridging counter-hegemonic development scholarship with practice-oriented approaches in a range of social contexts. Our analysis unpacks key tensions in addressing intertwined institutional and pedagogic dilemmas for an agenda towards decolonising online development studies, positioning decolonisation as a necessarily unsettling and contested process that calls for greater self-reflexivity. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

How do we ‘decolonise’ the field of International Relations? The aim to decolonise has become a widely discussed and mentioned subject across the social sciences and humanities. The article aims to discuss what 'decolonisation' might mean in the context of the field of International Relations. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A common consequence of the fragmented supply practices of multinational corporations are unfair and exploitative working conditions in the global South. Many corporations face this, and the resulting reputational damage, by installing voluntary codes of conduct in their supplier factories, leading to a vast range of implementation practices by the factory managers. Despite this effort, the literature shows that the positive impact of these codes on labour conditions in such factories remains insufficient. This article argues that this insufficiency is rooted in the exclusiveness and eurocentrism of codes of conduct and elaborates on why corporations tend to prefer influencing certain labour conditions over others. It concludes by briefly discussing multi-stakeholder organisations as a possible solution to these predicaments, and points the way to further research on the topic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The term ‘precariat’—a precarious proletariat—has achieved considerable prominence in recent years and is probably now ripe for critical deconstruction. It also needs to be situated in terms of a genealogy that includes the marginality debates of the 1960s, the later informal sector problematic and the ‘social exclusion’ optic that became dominant in the 1980s. I will argue that the concept is highly questionable both as an adequate sociology of work in the North and insofar as it elides the experience of the South in an openly Eurocentric manner. In terms of political discourse I think we should avoid the language of ‘dangerous class’, as deployed by Guy Standing to situate workers politically in the policy world as though frightening the ruling classes was a strategy for transformation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This essay critically examines the nature and scope of postcolonial interdisciplinarity. Although postcolonial studies claims to operate on, and forge in, an interdisplinary approach, its intentions are largely interdiscursive. In spite of the vague and elusive claims evident in the catalogue of introductory texts on postcolonial theory, neither postcolonial theorists nor its exponents have adequately established the disciplinary bounds or their methodological fusion(s) specific to, and required for, interdisciplinarity. Drawing from the disciplinary foundations of literature, history and philosophy, this essay demonstrates that postcolonial theory has developed an implicit oppositional critique to eurocentrism. This oppositional critique, while discursive in intention and formulaic in application, is subsequently borrowed by a host of social science disciplines-anthropology, geography and development studies- as a proxy methodology that protects against the perils of eurocentric longings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The three worlds configuration was a product of Eurocentric mappings of the world to deal with the postcolonial situation that emerged after World War II. Mortgaging Third World futures to either capitalism or socialism, which was a premise of this mapping, also pointed to a future dominated by alternatives of European origin. The situation I describe as 'global modernity' refers to a post-Eurocentric modernity that has scrambled notions of space and time inherited from modernity. It is a product of modernity, and of the struggles that the idea of three worlds sought to capture, but those struggles have led to unanticipated reconfigurations globally, including the reconfiguration of capitalism that has globalised following the fall of the Second World (the world of socialisms). This article discusses some of the problems attendant upon this situation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The idea of the Third World, which is usually traced to the late 1940s or early 1950s, was increasingly used to try and generate unity and support among an emergent group of nation-states whose governments were reluctant to take sides in the Cold War. These leaders and governments sought to displace the 'East-West' conflict with the 'North-South' conflict. The rise of Third Worldism in the 1950s and 1960s was closely connected to a range of national liberation projects and specific forms of regionalism in the erstwhile colonies of Asia and Africa, as well as the former mandates and new nationstates of the Middle East, and the 'older' nation-states of Latin America. Exponents of Third Worldism in this period linked it to national liberation and various forms of Pan-Asianism, Pan-Arabism, Pan-Africanism and PanAmericanism. The weakening or demise of the first generation of Third Worldist regimes in the 1960s and 1970s coincided with or was followed by the emergence of a second generation of Third Worldist regimes that articulated a more radical, explicitly socialist, vision. A moderate form of Third Worldism also became significant at the United Nations in the 1970s: it was centred on the call for a New International Economic Order (NIEO). By the 1980s, however, Third Worldism had entered into a period of dramatic decline. With the end of the Cold War, some movements, governments and commentators have sought to reorient and revitalise the idea of a Third World, while others have argued that it has lost its relevance. This introductory article provides a critical overview of the history of Third Worldism, while clarifying both its constraints and its appeal. As a world-historical movement, Third Worldism (in both its first and second generation modalities) emerged out of the activities and ideas of anti-colonial nationalists and their efforts to mesh highly romanticised interpretations of pre-colonial traditions and cultures with the utopianism embodied by Marxism and socialism specifically, and 'Western' visions of modernisation and development more generally. Apart from the problems associated with combining these different strands, Third Worldism also went into decline because of the contradictions inherent in the process of decolonisation and in the new international politico-economic order, in the context of the changing character, and eventual end, of the global political economy of the Cold War. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dependency theory, which has always been regarded as the foremost 'revolutionary' alternative to the hegemonic ideology of Eurocentrism best expressed by modernisation theory, is equally Eurocentric and has been so from the beginning. The postmodernist perspective, where the notion of 'development' itself is questioned and its desirability is contested, certainly poses a greater challenge. The rise and decline of dependency theory may be interpreted in terms of the rise and decline of the early post-WWII optimism about the developmental prospects of the newly established Third World. With the failure of national development and the rise of globalism, dependency theory too has declined and ceased to be persuasive. By citing the Turkish literature on development from the 1930s and the 1980s and 1990s, this paper attempts to demonstrate that the rise of the notion of 'authenticity' as a critique of Eurocentrism is as universal a phenomenon today as was the rise of 'dependency' ideas half a century earlier. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on problems stemming from the common shortcomings between the economic development frameworks of neoliberalism and modernization theory. An analysis of the modernization and neoliberal development frameworks reveals a number of common problems, including those associated with universalistic models, Eurocentrism and ideological biases. From the older modernization approach to the more recent neoliberal framework, an ongoing tension has existed in mainstream development studies between the wish to formulate universally valid principles and formal models, on the one hand, and the need to understand the diversity of actual development experiences among different countries, on the other.