This is a non-formal paper written for a development class; we were asked to create our own theory of development. I strongly believe that these are they kinds of shifts necessary to be able to address climate change in the long run. Enjoy! z.
Caron’s Theory of Development
In a society of supposed social and technological advances, people often lack the ability to clearly communicate with one another. This common problem usually stems from the varying interpretations and definitions of words themselves. In the field of International Development particularly, the most inefficient aspect is the inconsistency of the meaning of ‘development’. The definitions most used are based on economic factors. In Caron’s Theory of Development, development is defined as someone or something that has experienced advancements towards an ideal state of social equity, economic balance, and environmental stability. There are many ideas, concepts and theories surrounding development, even in the context of Caron’s definition, which aims to narrow the scope of development. The primary basis of Caron’s Theory of Development is the progression towards an equitable distribution of resources.
Some might argue that Caron’s definition closer fits the mold of “Sustainable Development”. However, in Caron’s Theory of Development, sustainability and development are synonymous in every case, on the basis that development without sustainability is eventual degradation. It is important to note that all three aspects, social, economic and environmental, are all taken into account, as true development recognizes the interrelationships between these realms and understands that they must advance together or not at all. Most importantly, Caron emphasizes the key issue of equitable consumption. She says simply that if someone is consuming more than their share of resources, than that person or group should be required to take a step back and aim for a sustainable level of consumption, which Caron refers to as ‘actual development’. This concept replaces what she calls our present ‘perceived development’.
We have seen countries seemingly advance but actually remain stuck in a repetitive circle. For example, Canada has advanced exceptionally in terms of human rights, yet has also regressed in the stability of its forest ecosystem. The United States has become an economic leader on the global scale yet also has a death toll of 2.6 million people each year due to obesity, according to a recent study at Harvard University. On the face of it, (all other things being equal on the assumption that obesity is caused by eating too much food), this is comparable to Kenya, which has 2.5 million people close to starvation because of regional droughts, according to Reuters press. When you have a country experiencing 2.6 million deaths from over-consumption, and another experiencing 2.5 million potential deaths from under-consumption, there is a clear problem in both of these situations. Of course, the sources of the problem are completely different and the situation in the US is easier addressed than that in Kenya; however, the idea that relatively controllable over-consumption is easier solved than uncontrollable under-consumption, makes us ask ourselves how developed the perceived developed countries really are. Are they moving towards a healthy place? Are we truly evolved? Not exactly.
Regarding these last examples, academics might reference the United States as being “over-developed” and to Kenya as being “under-developed.” However, Caron’s definition of development abolishes these past concepts, for there is no set end-point of development nor is there any line between what is considered developed or underdeveloped. Development, as defined above, is a static and ever-changing practice. As we reach our idealized and “perfect” states of social equity, economic balance, and environmental stability, we will only set new standards to become better than what we have achieved thus far. Therefore, everything is in a continual state of development – and all is “developing”. So how do we fuel our journey of development? How do we get to this utopian vision of a perfect world?
Caron’s theory runs parallel to Cox’s Theory of Development in the belief that education is the primary catalyst towards the ideal state of development (Cox, 2006). Cox measures development essentially based on education and Caron’s theory extends this concept to utilize education as the primary building block for the ability for a person, group or region to move towards development, because people who understand the basis on which they are developing are able to recognize the connections they personally have with the world around them, especially in relation to consumption. With education it is possible to make recommendations whose benefits will extend beyond the window of the specific problem itself.
Caron’s Theory of Development also touches on the essence of globalization. Caron views the present era of globalization as being fueled primarily by economic power and western media. She argues that, in order to realize the potential of globalization, the spread of knowledge must be culturally and regionally balanced. If this direction is not taken, then the pressure to live and operate in the same ways that the western and economically powered countries do will increase. In this scenario, which we have already begun to experience, is only leading us down paths of environmental, social, and economic degradation.
A lack of sustainability knowledge helps no one in the end. Part of the problem, according to Caron, is that we are not thinking about “the end” enough, or where we are going on this path of development. Often westernized countries are thinking very-much in the short-term, but fail to address the short-term issues that will also help decrease the intensity of long-term issues. One example is the concern of global warming, or climate change. The United States currently has 8% of the world’s population yet contributes to 25% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, and simultaneously represents an idealized way of living; however, Caron emphasizes that, if we were all to “develop” on those terms, we would degrade both our own health and that of the planet that sustains us.
Figure 1: (Not shown here.) Caron’s Development Balance outlines the place of actual versus perceived progress on the road to development.
Caron’s Development Balance signifies the need for a change of direction to be taken by various parts of the world in order to come together at a state of development, synonymous with sustainability. (For clarity, actual developing countries may be at various stages of development within the diagram and may be anywhere within the circular periphery of the stage of actual development.)
Caron’s Theory of Development is ultimately based on what many people would value as their highest priorities. Caron pictures development as a type of progress, one that moves humanity towards a higher state of wellbeing. Wellbeing can swell from many things – ultimately working towards how we can be the most healthy and happy, which depends on the people around us, the state of the environment we live in, and the systems in place that affect our lives. Development is not simply measured by technological advances or political structures, which is seemingly the way that development is often interpreted today. Yet this view greatly overlooks the value of the environment and community relationships. Development, according to Caron, is a constant battle of advancing two-steps while regressing one – yet while always keeping the vision of climbing together, towards the common goal of all reaching the top (or as close to the top as possible) while all remaining in one piece.
Citations
Cox, Katie. (May 2006). Personal interview with Katie Cox, 4th year student in
International Development Studies and English at Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS.
FYI:
None of these facts are cited – the point of the paper was to be written simply based on the thoughts in your mind. Thus, in instances of comparison and reference to obesity, deforestation, human rights, etc., they are meant in a very abstract sense – simply to stir thoughts, not to make a factual statement.
Dear Zoe
Please find time to read through this communication (see below) that I recently I received from Alan Ereira, BBC film producer and Director of the Tairona Trust, a British charity which speaks in support of the Kogi, Wiwa and Arhuaco peoples of the Sierra Nevada in present day Colombia. They are, I believe, the last surviving pre-Columbian civilisation in Central America, and are unique in many ways. Please contact the Tairona Trust for further information.
Your theory of development seems to sit quite comfortably with the Kogi’s philosophy, in my humble opinion.
and….apologies if I have wrongly assumed that you are unaware of the situation of the Tairona peoples.
Yours respectfully, Stewart Burns
Email from Alan Ereira:
“The good news is that the land purchase we have been making with the French charity Tchendukua has gone through, and Kogi have moved on to the newly acquired land and built homes there, including a ceremonial house. The land is now being nourished. Even better, it seems that since the paramilitaries accepted pacification, it is much safer to move around in the Sierra.
On the other hand, the attached document indicates that with peace comes money and development, and that indigenous rights are being illegally swept aside by at least one large corporation.
We must ensure that they know the eyes of the world are on them.
The only BRISA SA I know if is based in Portugal, http://www.brisa.pt/BRISA/vEN/Investidores
The Colomian Embassy in the UK is at 3 Hans Crescent, London, SW1X 0LN – 020 7589 9177 Fax: 020 7581 1529
and in the US at 2118 Leroy Place, NW 20008, Washington DC – (202) 387-8338
Fax: (202) 232-8643
Web Site: http://www.colombiaemb.org
Alan
_______________
Alan Ereira
Tairona Heritage Trust
90 Summerlee Avenue
London N2 9QH
UK
http://www.taironatrust.org”
PUBLIC DECLARATION BY THE MAMOS AND INDIGENOUS AUTHORITIES OF THE GONAWINDUA TAYRONA ORGANIZATION IN THE SIERRA NEVADA DE SANTA MARTA, COLOMBIA.
We are the traditional authorities –Mamas- of the indigenous communities and of the leaders of indigenous communities and the Reservations of the Kogí, Wiwa, Arhuaco ethnic groups: the originary peoples of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta. We wish to inform and denounce to the national and international public communities the actions that are being committed in our ancestral territory and against our people, sacred sites and mother nature.
Long before the “younger sisters and brothers” arrived at the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, our Mamas and Authorities regularly come from the Sierra to visit the sacred site of JUKULWA where we perform the traditional ceremonies that are fundamental to maintain our culture.. However, for the first time in our history, on September 18th, the directors of the company BRISA S.A. denied our access to the sacred site and impeded the realization of the traditional ceremonies the Mamos require for the material and spiritual care of the health of our people, water, trees and animals. In addition and without authorization, the company constructed an artificial canal to drain the waters from nearby mangrove swamps, thus impeding our entry to the site, and placing at risk the water and natural life of that region in the Sierra Nevada. These acts were well documented by national and international correspondents, who also witnessed those irregularities at that site where the company BRISA S.A. is planning the construction of a multipurpose port
In light of these illegal and arbitrary acts, we clearly state to the “younger sisters and brothers” that we are not seeking confrontation nor dispute amongst brothers and that we have always rejected violent methods. However, here in our traditional territory we have now been confronted by the violation of sacred sites that are legally recognized by the Ministry of the Interior. Such improvised and unauthorized construction in public areas destroys the environment and fundamentally affects traditional laws at the territorial, collective and personal levels. This situation constitutes a serious violation of the fundamental rights for indigenous peoples as defined in the Colombian Constitution, and as stated in the Special Indigenous Forum and other international conventions.
For these reasons, the Territorial Council of Indigenous Governors of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta (CTC), entity that represents the indigenous organizations of the indigenous people of the Sierra, is petitioning for an immediate meeting of the competent Colombian public authorities. This meeting should take place with representatives of the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of the Environment and Territorial Development to fully account for the reasons why the government granted authorization to BRISA S.A for the construction of a multipurpose port. The process is contradictory given that in 1998, the national government denied the license for that project due to negative recommendations from environmental research institutions and the results of a “Prior Consultation” process. During that consultation process, and considering the serious environmental and the cultural consequences the project entails, the indigenous authorities rejected the construction of the port at that same site.
We also request the presence of the People’s Defender’s Office, as represented by their delegates for Ethnic and Environmental Affairs, and participation from the General Procurator’s Office of the Nation. We publicly affirm that the construction of the works for the Multi-purpose Port Brisa S.A. have initiated without celebrating a “Prior Consultation” nor concertation process with the legally designated representatives of our indigenous peoples. In addition, we request that the General Procurator’s Office investigate the procedures through which the environmental license was granted, to determine if it was performed in conformance with the law and to identify the irregular procedures would invalidate that license.
Finally, we would like to warn the national and international communities of the profound impact that this project will effect over heath, the conservation of natural water cycles, local fishing activities, and the traditional knowledge and culture of our indigenous communities. In light of these factors, we once again request that the Colombian government order the immediate suspension of the works now underway until the legally prescribed procedures that protect our fundamental rights as indigenous peoples and Colombians have been fully complied with.
As “Older sisters and brothers” we will continue to perform the traditional rites that our authorities have requested in order to impede the damage that the company BRISA S.A is causing. We will continue to show the “younger brother” he dangers and the grave consequences that the violation of our sacred sites and the destruction of nature hold for all of us. We cannot be in accordance with the types of “social development” that imply the destruction of natural resources and threaten the patrimony of future generations of indigenous people and of all Colombians.
Hi Zoe…this summer, I read the book on Ecological Footprint by Mathias Wackernagel. It was an eye-opening read, for me, as I am a physicist and I enjoyed the quantitative thrust of the book, to convert ecological impact to a common measure (productive land area). In that book, I recall, there was a discussion of the term “sustainable development”. I like your ideas, and I agree that communication is key, so word usage must be precise. It seems to me that “development” these days is synonymous with “growth”, and any attempt to redefine “development” in terms of achieving social, ecological, and economic equilibrium will encounter some difficulty. When I was a student (more years ago than I want to remember) there was a book “The Limits to Growth” that dealt with the consequences of unfettered economic expansion and consumption. When will we ever learn? People are behaving as if there were an infinite reservoir of resources, in which case the capitalist model would be fine; however, we are now sensing the finite limits of the earth and the finite limits of our resources. Some of us see the problem, but unfortunately, the majority of the world’s people don’t. To avoid catastrophe, there needs to be a (nonviolent) revolution in our thinking, a new paradigm.
Good luck with your mission..you are on the right track, I think.