Journal•ISSN: 0961-4524
Development in Practice
Taylor & Francis
About: Development in Practice is an academic journal published by Taylor & Francis. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Civil society & Population. It has an ISSN identifier of 0961-4524. Over the lifetime, 2281 publications have been published receiving 40559 citations.
Topics: Civil society, Population, Poverty, Empowerment, Politics
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: Linda Tuhiwai Smith Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples Zed Books, London, 2012, 2nd ed., ISBN 978 1 8481 3950 3, 256 pp as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Linda Tuhiwai Smith Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples Zed Books, London, 2012, 2nd ed., ISBN 978 1 8481 3950 3, 256 pp. When the first edition of this book appeared in 199...
1,985 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors see participation as a dynamic process, and understand that its own form and function can become a focus for struggle, and that participation may take place for a whole range of unfree reasons.
Abstract: Participation must be seen as political. There are always tensions underlying issues such as who is involved, how, and on whose terms. While participation has the potential to challenge patterns of dominance, it may also be the means through which existing power relations are entrenched and reproduced. The arenas in which people perceive their interests and judge whether they can express them are not neutral. Participation may take place for a whole range of unfree reasons. It is important to see participation as a dynamic process, and to understand that its own form and function can become a focus for struggle.
924 citations
TL;DR: In this article, asset-based community development (ABCD) is presented as an alternative to needs-based approaches to development, and four major elements of ABCD are examined in light of the current literature on relevant research and practice.
Abstract: In this paper, Asset-based Community Development (ABCD) is presented as an alternative to needs-based approaches to development. Following an overview of the principles and practice of ABCD, four major elements of ABCD are examined in light of the current literature on relevant research and practice. This involves exploring the theory and practice of appreciative inquiry; the concept of social capital as an asset for community development; the theory of community economic development; and lessons learned from the links between participatory development, citizenship, and civil society. The paper outlines how ABCD both reflects and integrates trends in these areas, and stands to benefit from the insights generated from this work.
662 citations
TL;DR: The authors The language of development is subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth. (Friedrich Nietzche) Words make worlds.
Abstract: All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth. (Friedrich Nietzche) Words make worlds. The language of development...
422 citations
TL;DR: The concept of transparency and accountability can be unpacked in terms of two distinct variants: transparency can be either "clear" or "opaque" as discussed by the authors, while accountability is either "soft" or 'hard".
Abstract: The concepts of transparency and accountability are closely linked: transparency is supposed to generate accountability. This article questions this widely held assumption. Transparency mobilises the power of shame, yet the shameless may not be vulnerable to public exposure. Truth often fails to lead to justice. After exploring different definitions and dimensions of the two ideas, the more relevant question turns out to be: what kinds of transparency lead to what kinds of accountability, and under what conditions? The article concludes by proposing that the concept can be unpacked in terms of two distinct variants. Transparency can be either ‘clear’ or ‘opaque’, while accountability can be either ‘soft’ or ‘hard’.
413 citations