DAC is dead? Implications for teaching development studies

This paper argues that the Western paradigm of foreign aid promoted by the Development Assistance Committee is rapidly losing relevance in development studies and its related academic teaching programmes. The longstanding Southern‐led approaches to aid and development are now coming to the fore. Chi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Asia Pacific viewpoint 2018-08, Vol.59 (2), p.226-234
1. Verfasser: Kilby, Patrick
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 234
container_issue 2
container_start_page 226
container_title Asia Pacific viewpoint
container_volume 59
creator Kilby, Patrick
description This paper argues that the Western paradigm of foreign aid promoted by the Development Assistance Committee is rapidly losing relevance in development studies and its related academic teaching programmes. The longstanding Southern‐led approaches to aid and development are now coming to the fore. China's Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence (finalised at Bandung in 1955) and the Eight Principles for Economic Aid and Technical Assistance to Other Countries (1964) are increasingly emphasised as points of difference to Western aid. It is the rise of the South that has challenged the dominant development paradigm(s) over the past 50 years. The discipline of development studies has been slow to address these challenges in how it trains future development practitioners. I will argue that development studies programmes in Australian universities have a focus on Western foreign aid: either questioning its hegemonic nature as a tool for neo‐liberal or neo‐colonial development on the one hand; or questioning aid effectiveness and how well it addresses contemporary challenges. This paper explores the challenges in examining South–South cooperation and a different development paradigm in producing relevant development studies curricula and pedagogies.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/apv.12188
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2085268730</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2085268730</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3548-c08d091f0b93d5a9530507c5d25bc1b85ca99bf1e0e440bad809c87a73b51e353</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kD1PwzAQhi0EEqUw8A8sMTGkPcd27LCgqnxVqgQDsFqO44CrNAl2UtR_jyEMLNxyJ92j95UehM4JzEicue52M5ISKQ_QhLBMJJIKehhvmkEiGM-O0UkIGwDgTMoJurpZLLELuLS6vMarbVc7o3vXNgFXrce91ebdNW_xv7N1221t0-PQD6Wz4RQdVboO9ux3T9HL3e3z8iFZP96vlot1YmjsSAzIEnJSQZHTkuucU-AgDC9TXhhSSG50nhcVsWAZg0KXEnIjhRa04MRSTqfoYsztfPsx2NCrTTv4JlaqFCRPMykoROpypIxvQ_C2Up13W-33ioD6VqOiGvWjJrJ4ZK1pGxf-kCxPBRNERGQ-Ip-utvv_s9Ti6XUM_QJf0m4S</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2085268730</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>DAC is dead? Implications for teaching development studies</title><source>Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Kilby, Patrick</creator><creatorcontrib>Kilby, Patrick</creatorcontrib><description>This paper argues that the Western paradigm of foreign aid promoted by the Development Assistance Committee is rapidly losing relevance in development studies and its related academic teaching programmes. The longstanding Southern‐led approaches to aid and development are now coming to the fore. China's Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence (finalised at Bandung in 1955) and the Eight Principles for Economic Aid and Technical Assistance to Other Countries (1964) are increasingly emphasised as points of difference to Western aid. It is the rise of the South that has challenged the dominant development paradigm(s) over the past 50 years. The discipline of development studies has been slow to address these challenges in how it trains future development practitioners. I will argue that development studies programmes in Australian universities have a focus on Western foreign aid: either questioning its hegemonic nature as a tool for neo‐liberal or neo‐colonial development on the one hand; or questioning aid effectiveness and how well it addresses contemporary challenges. This paper explores the challenges in examining South–South cooperation and a different development paradigm in producing relevant development studies curricula and pedagogies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1360-7456</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-8373</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/apv.12188</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Melbourne: John Wiley &amp; Sons Australia, Ltd</publisher><subject>Academic disciplines ; Coexistence ; Colleges &amp; universities ; Cooperation ; Curricula ; Development aid ; Development programs ; Development studies ; development studies curricula ; development studies pedagogies ; Effectiveness ; Foreign aid ; Hegemony ; International cooperation ; Neocolonialism ; Peaceful coexistence ; South–South cooperation ; Teaching ; Technical assistance</subject><ispartof>Asia Pacific viewpoint, 2018-08, Vol.59 (2), p.226-234</ispartof><rights>2018 Victoria University of Wellington and John Wiley &amp; Sons Australia, Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3548-c08d091f0b93d5a9530507c5d25bc1b85ca99bf1e0e440bad809c87a73b51e353</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3548-c08d091f0b93d5a9530507c5d25bc1b85ca99bf1e0e440bad809c87a73b51e353</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2850-4473</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fapv.12188$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fapv.12188$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27866,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kilby, Patrick</creatorcontrib><title>DAC is dead? Implications for teaching development studies</title><title>Asia Pacific viewpoint</title><description>This paper argues that the Western paradigm of foreign aid promoted by the Development Assistance Committee is rapidly losing relevance in development studies and its related academic teaching programmes. The longstanding Southern‐led approaches to aid and development are now coming to the fore. China's Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence (finalised at Bandung in 1955) and the Eight Principles for Economic Aid and Technical Assistance to Other Countries (1964) are increasingly emphasised as points of difference to Western aid. It is the rise of the South that has challenged the dominant development paradigm(s) over the past 50 years. The discipline of development studies has been slow to address these challenges in how it trains future development practitioners. I will argue that development studies programmes in Australian universities have a focus on Western foreign aid: either questioning its hegemonic nature as a tool for neo‐liberal or neo‐colonial development on the one hand; or questioning aid effectiveness and how well it addresses contemporary challenges. This paper explores the challenges in examining South–South cooperation and a different development paradigm in producing relevant development studies curricula and pedagogies.</description><subject>Academic disciplines</subject><subject>Coexistence</subject><subject>Colleges &amp; universities</subject><subject>Cooperation</subject><subject>Curricula</subject><subject>Development aid</subject><subject>Development programs</subject><subject>Development studies</subject><subject>development studies curricula</subject><subject>development studies pedagogies</subject><subject>Effectiveness</subject><subject>Foreign aid</subject><subject>Hegemony</subject><subject>International cooperation</subject><subject>Neocolonialism</subject><subject>Peaceful coexistence</subject><subject>South–South cooperation</subject><subject>Teaching</subject><subject>Technical assistance</subject><issn>1360-7456</issn><issn>1467-8373</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kD1PwzAQhi0EEqUw8A8sMTGkPcd27LCgqnxVqgQDsFqO44CrNAl2UtR_jyEMLNxyJ92j95UehM4JzEicue52M5ISKQ_QhLBMJJIKehhvmkEiGM-O0UkIGwDgTMoJurpZLLELuLS6vMarbVc7o3vXNgFXrce91ebdNW_xv7N1221t0-PQD6Wz4RQdVboO9ux3T9HL3e3z8iFZP96vlot1YmjsSAzIEnJSQZHTkuucU-AgDC9TXhhSSG50nhcVsWAZg0KXEnIjhRa04MRSTqfoYsztfPsx2NCrTTv4JlaqFCRPMykoROpypIxvQ_C2Up13W-33ioD6VqOiGvWjJrJ4ZK1pGxf-kCxPBRNERGQ-Ip-utvv_s9Ti6XUM_QJf0m4S</recordid><startdate>201808</startdate><enddate>201808</enddate><creator>Kilby, Patrick</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons Australia, Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>SOI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2850-4473</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201808</creationdate><title>DAC is dead? Implications for teaching development studies</title><author>Kilby, Patrick</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3548-c08d091f0b93d5a9530507c5d25bc1b85ca99bf1e0e440bad809c87a73b51e353</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Academic disciplines</topic><topic>Coexistence</topic><topic>Colleges &amp; universities</topic><topic>Cooperation</topic><topic>Curricula</topic><topic>Development aid</topic><topic>Development programs</topic><topic>Development studies</topic><topic>development studies curricula</topic><topic>development studies pedagogies</topic><topic>Effectiveness</topic><topic>Foreign aid</topic><topic>Hegemony</topic><topic>International cooperation</topic><topic>Neocolonialism</topic><topic>Peaceful coexistence</topic><topic>South–South cooperation</topic><topic>Teaching</topic><topic>Technical assistance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kilby, Patrick</creatorcontrib><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Asia Pacific viewpoint</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kilby, Patrick</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>DAC is dead? Implications for teaching development studies</atitle><jtitle>Asia Pacific viewpoint</jtitle><date>2018-08</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>59</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>226</spage><epage>234</epage><pages>226-234</pages><issn>1360-7456</issn><eissn>1467-8373</eissn><abstract>This paper argues that the Western paradigm of foreign aid promoted by the Development Assistance Committee is rapidly losing relevance in development studies and its related academic teaching programmes. The longstanding Southern‐led approaches to aid and development are now coming to the fore. China's Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence (finalised at Bandung in 1955) and the Eight Principles for Economic Aid and Technical Assistance to Other Countries (1964) are increasingly emphasised as points of difference to Western aid. It is the rise of the South that has challenged the dominant development paradigm(s) over the past 50 years. The discipline of development studies has been slow to address these challenges in how it trains future development practitioners. I will argue that development studies programmes in Australian universities have a focus on Western foreign aid: either questioning its hegemonic nature as a tool for neo‐liberal or neo‐colonial development on the one hand; or questioning aid effectiveness and how well it addresses contemporary challenges. This paper explores the challenges in examining South–South cooperation and a different development paradigm in producing relevant development studies curricula and pedagogies.</abstract><cop>Melbourne</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons Australia, Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/apv.12188</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2850-4473</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1360-7456
ispartof Asia Pacific viewpoint, 2018-08, Vol.59 (2), p.226-234
issn 1360-7456
1467-8373
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2085268730
source Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals; PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete
subjects Academic disciplines
Coexistence
Colleges & universities
Cooperation
Curricula
Development aid
Development programs
Development studies
development studies curricula
development studies pedagogies
Effectiveness
Foreign aid
Hegemony
International cooperation
Neocolonialism
Peaceful coexistence
South–South cooperation
Teaching
Technical assistance
title DAC is dead? Implications for teaching development studies
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T02%3A32%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=DAC%20is%20dead?%20Implications%20for%20teaching%20development%20studies&rft.jtitle=Asia%20Pacific%20viewpoint&rft.au=Kilby,%20Patrick&rft.date=2018-08&rft.volume=59&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=226&rft.epage=234&rft.pages=226-234&rft.issn=1360-7456&rft.eissn=1467-8373&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/apv.12188&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2085268730%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2085268730&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true