In his article, Gilbert Rist offers
a less optimistic and more realistic view of what development entails, defining
it as “the general transformation and destruction of the natural environment
and of social relations in order to increase the production of commodities.”
The word “development” has been used for over 60 years, however it remains vaguely
defined and ambiguous.
This alternative view of the
negative affects of “development” is exactly what I´ve been studying throughout
my semester here in Ecuador. The program name, MSID, stands for Minnesota
Studies of International Development. Hence, we have been analyzing the “development”
of Ecuador through research and field visits.
I am currently interning for six
weeks in the indigenous community of San Clemente. From a western eye, this
community may seem “underdeveloped” because many of them live in small houses,
have no internet access, and harvest their own food. My time here has changed
my perspective on “development” however. Instead of going in to the “developed”
city forty minutes away to buy their food at the grocery store, they pick it
themselves from their own land and trade with their neighbours. There is no
middleman, no waste produced from transportation, and the source is known and
reliable.
My family doesn't have a car or a television
or a dishwasher. However, they have acres of land with quinoa, potatoes, peas,
beans, corn, and more which are all organically farmed. They know how to create
fertilizer from animal and food waste, understand the importance of crop
rotation, and single-handily constructed their own two-story house. When I got
sunburned from helping in the fields last weekend, instead of going in to town
to buy aloe, my host mom just picked me an aloe plant from her garden. She
knows the properties of different medicinal plants and herbs that she grows—plants
for stomach aches, head aches, altitude sickness, sore throats, and achy bones.
Helping prepare dinner with freshly harvested ingredients. |
If “development” is the
destruction of the environment and the transformation of land into a commodity,
then the opposite of “development” is occurring in San Clemente. They are living
in harmony with the land and with each other.
Of course, the community still struggles in
ways that people in the city might not. The community school where I work has
three teachers for eight grade levels and lacks a computer lab and other
important educational resources. The education level in San Clemente, although
it has improved immensely since the last generation, is still lower than that
of other more affluent communities. While “development” may not be the best word
to describe it, I do believe there are certain factors that are needed to
increase the well being of a community, education and health care being two of
the most important. What education and health care entail, however, are
different depending on the community. In San Clemente, it may be seem useful to
learn about farming techniques rather than literature. And
natural medicinal techniques are preferred to Western medicines for curing mild
illnesses.
Therefore, no matter how you look at “development” or growth or
prosperity, it always depends on the community you are analyzing. There is not
one single path to well being. And sometimes, the community itself knows what is best for its people.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.