Embracing degrowth and post-development will allow NGOs to engage with grassroots movements Sophia Munro In the coming decade, the world will face many new global development challenges which will require Australian development actors to explore new ideas and strategies in their work in order to continue to eradicate inequality and injustice. The world is now facing the issue of climate change, and the major global development challenge caused by climate change is, how can we continue to work for the improvement of human wellbeing, quality of life and access to basic needs in the poorest nations, when climate scientists are already warning us that we must drastically reduce our emissions in the near future to avoid a global ecological and humanitarian disaster? Many approaches have been discussed and applied in recent years to solve the problem of how to ensure continued rising quality of life while avoiding continued contribution to climate change, such as pursuing green growth, decoupling the economy from the environment through advances in technology and efficiency, clean energy, carbon offsetting, sustainable development, and many more. To fully answer this challenge however, I believe development practitioners need to engage with more complex questions such as how to define and measure human wellbeing, what are the best strategies to achieving it, and what will the ultimate impacts of the continued centrality of economic growth be for human well being on a global scale. To help explore these complex questions it will be very useful for development actors in the global North, such as Australian NGOs, to engage more fully and deeply with Southern grassroots social movements. The exchange of ideas and practices which would flow from this engagement has the potential to surface some answers to the above questions, and to contribute to building a strong global movement to bring about the necessary change to seriously act on climate change. Grassroots social movements are considered by many as powerful forces for social change, and as distinct from other actors in civil society such as NGOs in many important ways. Bendana i argues that the distinction has been primarily political, with social movements operating under an alternative political paradigm to other actors; social movements primarily direct their accountability towards their constituents, while NGOs often have strong obligations to their donors and governments, who play a role in shaping their political, ideology and financial frameworks. Additionally, NGOs' campaign strategies have often been narrow, selective and media driven, often ignoring the political and structural roots of a problem, especially when strategic interests are involved, while social movements focus their actions on creating structural change. The essential question Bendana asked when writing a decade ago was, would social movements reorient NGOs, or would social movements themselves become 'NGO-ised' in their politics? He further points out that,...there is no inherent contradiction if campaigns can take place in a way that contributes to a deeper understanding of politics, economic, and global dynamics. ii D'Alisa, Demaria and Cattaneoo iii, writing more recently, discuss similar ideas of the advantages of strategies employed by social movements, and the benefits which might come from partnerships between different types of actors with different strategies in efforts to create change.
These thinkers conceptualise these different strategies as 'civil' and 'uncivil' forms of activism, and explore the differing modes of action these forms encompass. Civil actors include NGOs and other CSOs, social enterprises, those who act as pressure groups, and those who collaborate with public authorities for marginal reforms. Uncivil actors include new grassroots social movements seeking radical reforms, and civil society actors and activists considered subversive by present authorities. Importantly, civil actors are seen working within the current social and political and hegemonic imaginary, while uncivil actors are considered as subversive to it. Echoing Bendana, D'Alisa et al. argue that the combination of different strategies for change can be a cause for transformation, as radical strategies can open up a space for alternative socio-economic politics. Civil actors such as NGOs can benefit from engaging with these alternative politics because a hesitance to enter such political terrain may hinder many actors from attaining real changes at a macro level. These discussions highlight an ongoing debate of how closely development NGOs should align themselves with more radical social movements in their efforts to create the change they want. In the future of Australian development activities, Australian NGOs will increase their capacity to create meaningful change at the systemic level if they engage more with these types of political spaces created by the actions of grassroots social movements, both here in Australia and in other countries in the global South. An example of the political differences between grassroots social movements and more conventional actors is the view held by many grassroots activists that the current growth-focused global economic model can have serious anti-democratic impacts. Kothari iv describes grassroots movements in the South reacting against these anti-democratic impacts in his discussions of the Dongria Kondh adivasis (Indigenous group) in the state of Odisha, India, where this community decided through collective action not to allow a multinational mining company to take over their lands. Kothari calls these types of actions Radical Ecological Democracy (RED), where alternative concepts of land ownership and notions of wellbeing can be seen, pointing to a different set of principles and values than the ones on which the currently dominant economic and political structures are based. v These alternative ways of achieving empowerment and wellbeing are based in the lived experiences of grassroots movements and initiatives, and represent an alternative politics: Decentralised, embedded political governance is one of REDs crucial elements. This goes well beyond the 'representative' democracy that countries such have India have adopted, towards more direct radical democracy. vi Engagement with these types of movements and initiatives will open up the space for Australian NGOs to be exposed to the actions, ideas and lived experiences of grassroots movements of the global south. To engage meaningfully with the thought and action of grassroots social movements, Australian development actors can use discourses such as degrowth and post-development as theoretical frameworks to help them better understand the alternative politics of some of these movements, and the reasons for their critiques of traditional development methods, both past and present. The concept of degrowth first appeared in 1972 in France, there known as De croissance. vii Since then, degrowth discourse has continued to developed in the global North, and focuses on ideas which are post-growth, post-materialist, post-economic, and post-capitalist. Degrowth focuses on the dangers of climate change and the shift away from a growth focused economy which is seen as ultimately unsustainable on a resource-finite planet. viii
Post-development is mostly associated with the South, and includes non-liberal, post/non-capitalist, and biocentric ideas. Post development theories see much of traditional forms of development as oppressive and exploitative, situating development fundamentally as a result of colonialist ideology, and a practice which enacts colonialism in the ways in which power and control are exercised over those who are deemed the subjects of development. ix Escobar x argues that development discourse has placed European culture and paths to modernisation and development as universally applicable development ideals; it is this element of development that many grassroots social movements in the south reject, and which is also rejected by degrowth discourse. The intersection of these discourses can be found in much of the thought and action of grassroots social movements, who reject forms of mainstream economic development both because it is exploitative and because it is causing environmental degradation, and who use conceptualisations of well being which do not depend only on the measurement of a country s GDP. These conceptions of wellbeing are influenced by Indigenous knowledge, alternative concepts of ownership, individuality, and community, and go against the idea that human wellbeing and development is about linear, unidirectional material and financial growth. xi This deconstructs traditional practices of development and creates space for new notions and worldviews which have often arisen...from traditionally marginalised groups...different from the dominant western ones as they emerge from non-capitalist communities. xii These worldviews, found in philosophies such as Buen Vivir in Latin America, Ecoswaraj or Radical Ecological Democracy (RED) in India, and Ubuntu in South Africa, Indigenous Australian knowledge, and in degrowth discourse, include conceptions such as holistic human wellbeing, equity and justice, governance based on direct participation, solidarity, dignity of work, and collective and reciprocal society while still respecting the individual. xiii Escobar concurs that the work of grassroots social movements has created space for new worldviews and concepts of wellbeing. Much post development theory and action emerged from the actions of southern social movements; social movements were seen as a way to open up the discursive space to other ways of describing those conditions [in certain regions of the world] less mediated by the premises of 'development.' xiv It is this space which holds so much potential for the engagement of Australian NGOs and development actors. Entering into discussions, debates, partnerships, knowledge sharing activities, and other similar practices have the potential to expose Australian development practitioners to a wealth of knowledge, theories, and practice concerning the ways in which actors in southern grassroots social movements around the world seek to create societal change and improve human wellbeing. Expanding notions of wellbeing so that they are not restricted to the economic holds the possibility of deepening the positive impacts of development work, making it more holistic, long lasting, and open to community participation in development practice. Furthermore, engaging with the politics of these movements and discourses will ensure development actors have a chance to discover true alternatives to some of the development practices of the past which have been critiqued as western-centric and exploitative in their models, or as ultimately contributing to climate change.
Degrowth is beginning to enter into professional development discourse in many countries, including in the global North. In a blog post entitled Partners in the fight against Poverty and Inequality: the Relevance of Degrowth for Development, xv Katherine Trebeck, senior researcher for Oxfam Great Britain, argues for bringing degrowth from the periphery of development conversations to the centre. As she says, degrowth and development are two sides of the same coin, because the root causes of many development challenges can be found in the economic models used in the global North, and degrowth looks at creating systemic change in these models, similar to the focus of grassroots social movements which also focus on the systemic causes of problems they face. Engaging with such discourses as development actors will be a complex undertaking; it is essential to acknowledge the difficulties of 'selling' degrowth to communities who may not even be able to meet basic needs, or to those who firmly believe that growth is the answer to ending global poverty (or as Trebeck says, those who believe that if we make the pie bigger, everyone can have a bigger slice). xvixvii Trebeck offers possible solutions to these valid critiques by pointing out that degrowth is aimed at the global north, in countries which have already done their 'fair share' of polluting during their industrial development. Furthermore, rethinking ways to run an economy by exploring degrowth can give developing countries the chance to adopt economic models which are cleaner and more efficient from the beginning; there is no reason why other countries need to repeat the past mistakes of the global North. Kothari xviii argues that in discussing degrowth it is useful to frame it not as a discourse which asks people to be happy with less, but which asks us to redefine how we measure human well being, and to explore alternative pathways of getting there which do not centre on economic growth. Social movements are at the forefront of exploring many ideas found in post-development and degrowth theories. These theories can work as a site for engagement between the North and the South, between 'civil' and 'uncivil' actors and between Australian development actors and the rest of the global development community. Australian NGOs and other development actors must work to successfully engage with and gain an understanding of the alternative forms of activity and scholarship which are taking place in both the North and the South. This will involve creating and nurturing contact zones xix between North and South, between conventional actors and radical, and engaging in meaningful dialogue within these spaces. This kind of work may become increasingly important in the future of the development sector as it becomes increasingly important to build alliances, strong bridges of solidarity, and for reciprocal knowledge sharing between the South and the North in the fight to end inequality and halt the progress of climate change. This sort of engagement will enable the search for alternatives in a deeper sense, aiming to break away from the cultural and ideological bases of development, bringing forth other imaginings, goals and practices. xx The discourses of degrowth and post development, and the language found within them, should not scare us away. There is great benefit for Australian NGOs and actors in development to be found in exploring the alternative ideas and options that these discourses, and the practices of Southern grassroots social movements, bring to light. Sophia Munro Master of International Development Graduate with Distinction, RMIT, 2015 Volunteer Project Officer, Yayasan Usaha Mulia, Jakarta, Indonesia sophia.munro1990@gmail.com
i Bendana, A 2006, NGOs and Social Movements: A North/South Divide? Civil Society and Social Movements Programme Paper Number 22, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. ii Ibid, 8. iii D'Alisa G, Demaria F & Cattaneo C 2013, Civil and Uncivil Actors for a Degrowth Society, Journal of Civil Society, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 212-24. iv Kothari, A 2016 Beyond development and growth : The search for alternatives in India towards a sustainable and equitable world, in Green Growth, Political Ideology, Political Economy and the Alternatives, edited by G Dale, M V Mathai, & J P D Oliveira, Zed Books, London, p. 212-231. v Ibid, 214 vi Ibid, 215. vii D'Alisa G, Demaria F & Cattaneo C 2013. viii Ibid. ix Escobar, A 1995, Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World, Princeton University Press, Princeton. x Ibid xi Acosta, A, Demaria, F & Kothari, A 2014, p. 366 Buen Vivir, Degrowth and Ecological, Swaraj: Alternatives to sustainable development and the Green Economy, in Development, Vol. 57, No. 3 4. xii Ibid, p. 366. xiii Ibid xiv Escobar, A 2015, Degrowth, post-development, and transition: a preliminary conversation, Sustainability Science, Vol. 10, 451-462. xv Trebeck, K 28 November 2016, Partners in the Fight against Poverty and Inequality: The Relevance of Degrowth for Development (Blog Post). Retrieved from http://www.degrowth.de/en/2016/11/partners-in-the-fightagainst-poverty-and-inequality-the-relevance-of-degrowth-for-development/ xvi Trebeck 2016 xvii Kothari, A, August 2016, Towards Alliances of alternatives to development, Panel presented at The 5 th International Degrowth Conference, Budapest, 30 August-3 September 2016, Budapest, Hungary. Live streamed at http://budapest.degrowth.org. xviii Kothari 2016 xix Santos, B S 2005, The Future of the World Social Forum: The Work of translation, Development, Vol. 48, No. 2, 15-22. xx Escobar 2015, p. 456.