Bringing Economic and Political Power Back In: A Call for Re-Politicising Development Research
In the mainstream development debate during recent years, among others, there have been two influential camps opposing each other. The first one identifies the environmental context, the “natural” variable, as the ultimate cause that determines the socio-economic development trajectory of a society....
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-03-01
|
| Series: | Economies |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/11/3/93 |
| _version_ | 1797612252317089792 |
|---|---|
| author | Dimitrios Zikos Ulrich Wurzel |
| author_facet | Dimitrios Zikos Ulrich Wurzel |
| author_sort | Dimitrios Zikos |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In the mainstream development debate during recent years, among others, there have been two influential camps opposing each other. The first one identifies the environmental context, the “natural” variable, as the ultimate cause that determines the socio-economic development trajectory of a society. The second influential approach argues that “the social” variable (i.e., political institutions) and not “the natural” variable is the sphere in which to look for the main explanatory variables for developmental outcomes. In this paper, we argue that although each approach has its own merits, they equally fail to address hot issues in the realm of economic development. They give an incomplete cause-and-effect picture of the ongoing, complex and vital-for-development processes, and they are equally incapable of identifying plausible explanatory variables regarding developmental successes and failures. Our aim is not to discredit the valuable body of work on either of these approaches, but instead to spark a discussion that would enable more creative, inter- and multidisciplinary research into the missing causal links between the propositions of key authors representing the aforementioned approaches and the fallacies that need to be addressed. Our position is that this is the only path that can lead to a meaningful synthesis capable of paving the way for a breakthrough in development economics and sustainable development studies. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T06:39:38Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-2f8dc354bdfe47f9ac597f21485308ae |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2227-7099 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T06:39:38Z |
| publishDate | 2023-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Economies |
| spelling | doaj.art-2f8dc354bdfe47f9ac597f21485308ae2023-11-17T10:41:07ZengMDPI AGEconomies2227-70992023-03-011139310.3390/economies11030093Bringing Economic and Political Power Back In: A Call for Re-Politicising Development ResearchDimitrios Zikos0Ulrich Wurzel1Faculty of Economics and Law, HTW-Berlin University of Applied Sciences, Treskowallee 8, 10318 Berlin, GermanyFaculty of Economics and Law, HTW-Berlin University of Applied Sciences, Treskowallee 8, 10318 Berlin, GermanyIn the mainstream development debate during recent years, among others, there have been two influential camps opposing each other. The first one identifies the environmental context, the “natural” variable, as the ultimate cause that determines the socio-economic development trajectory of a society. The second influential approach argues that “the social” variable (i.e., political institutions) and not “the natural” variable is the sphere in which to look for the main explanatory variables for developmental outcomes. In this paper, we argue that although each approach has its own merits, they equally fail to address hot issues in the realm of economic development. They give an incomplete cause-and-effect picture of the ongoing, complex and vital-for-development processes, and they are equally incapable of identifying plausible explanatory variables regarding developmental successes and failures. Our aim is not to discredit the valuable body of work on either of these approaches, but instead to spark a discussion that would enable more creative, inter- and multidisciplinary research into the missing causal links between the propositions of key authors representing the aforementioned approaches and the fallacies that need to be addressed. Our position is that this is the only path that can lead to a meaningful synthesis capable of paving the way for a breakthrough in development economics and sustainable development studies.https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/11/3/93economic developmentpolitical institutionsenvironmental factors |
| spellingShingle | Dimitrios Zikos Ulrich Wurzel Bringing Economic and Political Power Back In: A Call for Re-Politicising Development Research Economies economic development political institutions environmental factors |
| title | Bringing Economic and Political Power Back In: A Call for Re-Politicising Development Research |
| title_full | Bringing Economic and Political Power Back In: A Call for Re-Politicising Development Research |
| title_fullStr | Bringing Economic and Political Power Back In: A Call for Re-Politicising Development Research |
| title_full_unstemmed | Bringing Economic and Political Power Back In: A Call for Re-Politicising Development Research |
| title_short | Bringing Economic and Political Power Back In: A Call for Re-Politicising Development Research |
| title_sort | bringing economic and political power back in a call for re politicising development research |
| topic | economic development political institutions environmental factors |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7099/11/3/93 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT dimitrioszikos bringingeconomicandpoliticalpowerbackinacallforrepoliticisingdevelopmentresearch AT ulrichwurzel bringingeconomicandpoliticalpowerbackinacallforrepoliticisingdevelopmentresearch |