In Pursuit of Development

One of the dominant explanations for elusive development in many parts of the world is the negative role played by corruption in the development process. And many national and local governments as well as international aid agencies have spent considerable time and resources trying to come up with plans to combat the corruption menace. But anti-corruption policy has often been difficult to implement and many well-intentioned efforts have had limited impact. Despite the challenges associated with researching the phenomenon, corruption has attracted considerable academic interest over the years. And one of the leading thinkers on anti-corruption, governance and economic development is my guest this week. Mushtaq Khan is a professor of economics at SOAS, University of London where he directs the Anti-Corruption Research Consortium (ACE).Mushtaq Khan and Anti-Corruption Research Consortium on TwitterDan Banik and In Pursuit of Development on Twitter Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com

Since its inception in the international development discourse in the late 1980s, sustainable development has often been celebrated for its rhetorical appeal to political correctness. But is it a useful tool for global development?The idea of “sustainable development” has not only acquired new layers of meaning over the years but has in many ways witnessed a rejuvenation since 2015 following the adoption by world leaders of the 2030 Agenda and its accompanying 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).The SDGs – grouped under overarching themes of people, planet, dignity, prosperity, justice and partnership – have been widely praised for a strong articulation of an environmental dimension, in addition to breaking new ground with global goals on inequality, economic growth, energy, and peace. Despite being imperfect and highly ambitious, the SDGs are the result of a comprehensive participatory process, unparalleled in the history of global development. Indeed, while its predecessor – the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) – focused exclusively on low-income countries, the SDGs encompass a much broader agenda that applies to all countries. By closely linking “sustainability” with “development” through the principles of “universality”, “integration” and “leave no one behind”, the 2030 Agenda has been much celebrated in activist, business and policy circles as a means to stimulate a radical shift in world affairs. But the SDGs have also been criticized for their unrealistic ambitions and lack of focus. The world was already off-track in achieving many of the SDGs before Covid struck. And now there are major concerns over the extent to which these ambitious global goals can be achieved in the next 9 years. Frank Biermann is a professor of Global Sustainability Governance at Utrecht University’s Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development. Frank is a leading scholar of global institutions and organizations in the sustainability domain. In addition to being a prolific writer, he pioneered the ‘earth system’ governance paradigm in 2005 and was the founder and first chair (2008-2018) of the Earth System Governance Project, a leading global transdisciplinary research network of sustainability scholars.Frank Biermann's recent publicationsFrank Biermann on TwitterDan Banik and In Pursuit of Development on Twitter  Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com

International public finance, that is required to address global challenges in the decades to come, is woefully inadequate. And rather than aid, which offers an obsolete approach, we should be talking about joint investments – or as my guest this week puts it, Global Public Investment (GPI).In his recent book, The Future of Aid: Global Public Investment, Jonathan Glennie urges us to move away from the patronizing and outdated aid narrative. For starters, he points to the ambitious SDGs and the need for more money to achieve these goals in the years ahead. Domestic resources, he argues, is insufficient to address the challenges the world currently faces and will face in the years ahead. What we must do, he argues, is to turn around the donor-recipient relationship and encourage even the poorest countries to contribute 0.7 % of their GNI to international development. This would in turn require a transformational governance structure where everyone sits around the table – a structure that mitigates the fact that some countries have more money and contribute more than others.Jonathan Glennie is a writer and campaigner on human rights, international cooperation, sustainable development and poverty. Jonathan Glennie on TwitterDan Banik and In Pursuit of Development on Twitter Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com

I was recently made aware of the fact that 10 wealthy countries have monopolized 75% of all vaccinations delivered worldwide. This has led the United Nations to sharply criticize the world’s wealthy countries for hogging Covid vaccines. In light of growing vaccine nationalism, many voices have for long been calling for global sharing of vaccines. But it turns out 130 countries have not received a single dose of a Covid vaccine. Thus, we are at a critical moment when vaccine equity appears to be the biggest moral test before the global community.Indeed, numerous recent opinion pieces in the media have highlighted how vaccine nationalism – driven by power and competition between states aimed at protecting the national interest – has several negative consequences for low-income countries. A few days ago, Kenya petitioned the UN Security Council to urge wealthy countries not to hoard surplus Covid-19 vaccine supplies, adding its voice to calls for global production to be shared more equally.Without equal access to vaccines, public-health experts have warned that the pandemic could continue to live on residually for years on end, resulting in more deaths and further economic collapse. When the virus remains endemic somewhere, it will continue to pose a threat everywhere.But there are also some promising initiatives currently underway. One of these is the COVAX Initiative – the drive to ensure that vaccines reach low-income countries – which the World Health Organization and countries like Norway have been promoting as the fastest way to end the pandemic. But how effective has it been thus far? And are countries being generous in allocating resources to this Initiative?To discuss vaccine nationalism, the merits of the COVAX Initiative and vaccine diplomacy being carried out by China and India, I am joined by Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée, who is working on a PhD in political science and is based at the Centre for Development and the Environment at the University of Oslo. Over the years, he has worked extensively on global health governance and global cooperation to manage dangerous disease outbreaks such as Ebola. He has been particularly active in the media of late in pointing out the dangers of vaccine nationalism.Antoine de Bengy Puyvallée on TwitterDan Banik and In Pursuit of Development on Twitter Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com

Within international relations theory and foreign policy circles, there is considerable interest in understanding China’s rise to power. In an exciting new book, my guest argues that China’s various types of encounters with countries in the Global South are very different from the behaviour and investment strategies of the US and European countries. In Shaping the future of power: Knowledge Production and network-building in China-Africa Relations, Lina Benabdallah explores the integrated roles of social relations, knowledge production and power in China’s foreign relations. She argues that it is simply not enough to look at the amount of loans, aid and foreign direct investments originating from China. While these material factors are important, we mustn’t ignore the investments made in people-to-people relations and human resource development in China-Africa relations. Indeed, relations and relationality are central to China’s foreign policy and diplomatic conduct. In the book, Lina examines how China deploys social capital and relational productive power on the African continent through knowledge production via human resource development and professionalization programs. Chinese investments in human resource development, she argues, expand Beijing’s network of connections with military officers, civil servants, journalists and regular citizens. They also act as spaces for expert knowledge production, and norm diffusion.Lina Benabdallah is an assistant professor of politics and international affairs at Wake Forest University in the United States. We discussed how China brands its model of development in Africa, the broad categories of knowledge production and network building activities, and whether African countries have much say in how these relations are conducted.Lina Benabdallah on TwitterDan Banik and In Pursuit of Development on Twitter Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com

As Covid vaccines become available, health officials, policymakers, philanthropic organizations and people like you and me are being confronted with numerous ethical challenges and moral dilemmas. Who should get the vaccines first and how long should others wait? What about the inequality of access to vaccines between countries?Some of us may agree that rich countries have a moral responsibility to subsidize vaccination programs around the world. But how best can this be achieved? And what types of principles such as fairness, equity, effectiveness and reciprocity should we apply?To discuss these issues, I am joined by Aksel Braanen Sterri, a Norwegian political scientist and philosopher who has recently argued that Norway should donate all its vaccines to low-income countries, and that Norway should be at the back of the vaccine queue rather than being in front. He also claims that helping these more needy countries ought to be viewed as an investment in our common future rather than an act of charity. Aksel recently completed a PhD in philosophy and teaches applied ethics at the University of Oslo. In addition to being a postdoctoral fellow, he writes a column in an influential Norwegian daily and is a regular contributor to the Norwegian public debate on a wide range of social and political issues.We discussed the role of philosophers in addressing current global challenges, the various proposals currently doing the rounds on how best the world can distribute Covid vaccines, why Norway and other rich countries ought to subsidise or donate vaccines to more needy countries and groups and what constitutes vaccine justice.Aksel Braanen Sterri on TwitterDan Banik and In Pursuit of Development on TwitterPhoto of Aksel Braanen Sterri by Matthis Kleeb Solheim Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com

One of the many ways in which India has expanded its influence in global affairs relates to pharmaceutical products. The Indian pharmaceutical sector has enthusiastically highlighted its ability to develop Triple A technology (affordable, available, adaptable). By encouraging research hubs and offering a steady supply of affordable drugs to many countries, including the United States, India has rapidly moved from being a pharmacy for low-income countries to becoming the “pharmacy of the world”. The country’s rapidly growing economy has been a major beneficiary of the astonishing rise of the domestic pharmaceutical industry. In becoming a powerhouse on low-cost generic drugs, India contributes actively to meeting global demands for vaccines, Over the Counter (OTC) medicines and patented drugs.An important factor that has contributed to enhancing the reputation and profitability of Indian pharmaceutical companies abroad has been the government’s tough policy on patents, which has enabled Indian firms to manufacture generic versions of drugs that are much more expensive in countries where they were originally developed. But Indian companies also face numerous challenges in the export market. There is a growing demand to reduce costs even further. And several countries in Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia are trying to protect and promote their domestic industries by introducing new regulations that make Indian imports more expensive. There are also concerns that India has become increasingly dependent on imports from China for so-called “active pharmaceutical ingredients” required for making both advanced and essential medicines.To discuss India’s huge and thriving pharmaceutical industry and the country’s ability to supply affordable vaccines and generic drugs to low-income countries, I am joined by Rory Horner. He is a Senior Lecturer in Globalisation and Political Economy in the Global Development Institute at the University of Manchester. We began by discussing the role and impact of the pharmaceutical industry in global development. Resources:"The world needs pharmaceuticals from China and India to beat coronavirus" (The Conversation, 2020)"India is key for global access to a COVID-19 vaccine – here’s why" (The Conversation, 2020)"The segmented globalisation practices within India’s pharmaceutical industry" (blog, 2017)"Pharmaceuticals and the Global South: a healthy challenge for development theory?" (blog, 2016)"Indian Company Offers to Supply AIDS Drugs at Low Cost in Africa" (New York Times, 2001)Rory Horner on TwitterDan Banik and In Pursuit of Development on Twitter Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com

People living in areas prone to, or affected by, conflict tend to suffer from many types of deprivation. Some scholars argue that conflict is an important driver of severe food crises and famines, and that undernutrition worsens in situations of prolonged conflicts and in countries and regions with weak institutional capacity. In recent years, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, South Sudan and Ethiopia are just some of the examples that have been used in the literature to illustrate the close linkages between social and political unrest on the one hand and poverty and hunger on the other.But is there a clear-cut relationship between poverty and violent conflict? There appear to be numerous drivers of violence. These often include political, economic, social and envi­ronmental issues. While socio-eco­nomic inequalities can be a major cause of violence, other causes could include human rights abuses, perceived injustice, systemic corruption, and disagreements over the distribution of natural resources and who gets to benefit from such resources. To discuss some of these issues, I am joined by Patricia Justino who is a development economist and a leading expert on political violence and development. She is the co-founder and co-director of the Households in Conflict Network and is currently a Senior Research Fellow at UNU-WIDER and Professorial Fellow at the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) in Brighton, UK.We discussed the relationship between poverty and violent conflict, the work of the World Food Programme which received the Nobel Peace Prize last year, and the political economy of war zones. We also discussed how the state or armed groups behave in predatory or conciliatory ways towards local populations, how civilians respond to these strategies, and how reports on political violence are produced and disseminated on social media. Patricia Justino's publicationsFollow Patricia  Justino on TwitterFollow Dan Banik and In Pursuit of Development on Twitter Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com

Our guest this week is Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland, the former prime minister of Norway and former head of the World Health Organization. Gro has had an illustrious career in Norway and abroad. In addition to becoming the first female head of the Norwegian Labor party, she became the first female prime minister of Norway in February 1981. And during her second stint as Prime Minister in 1986, her cabinet made world news headlines when she appointed 8 female ministers in a cabinet of 18. In addition to being widely regarded as the most influential Norwegian politician of all time, Gro is also widely known for having chaired the World Commission on Environment and Development, popularly referred to as the Brundtland Commission. The Commission’s influential 1987 report, Our Common Future, popularized and defined the term “sustainable development”. She is also known for her work as Director General of the World Health Organization between 1998 and 2003, during which time she and the WHO coordinated a rapid worldwide response to stem outbreaks of SARS.We discussed the world response to Covid, multilateralism and the role of UN agencies such as the WHO and the current status of the sustainable development discourse. A full transcript of our conversation is available.Dan Banik on TwitterIn Pursuit of Development on Twitter  Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com

Welcome to season 2 of the show!Our first guest this season is Francis Fukuyama, one of the most influential political thinkers of our time and someone who has written extensively on international politics and issues of development. He is a senior fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies(FSI) and the director of the institute’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL),. This conversation was recorded in mid-December 2020 at the height of the controversies surrounding the US presidential election and President Trump’s refusal to acknowledge defeat. And while a new president will shortly be sworn in on the 20th of January, deep political divisions remain. It is therefore particularly useful and timely to revisit Fukuyama’s major two-volume work on the origins of political order and political decay. In these two fascinating books published in 2011 and 2014, he provides an account of how societies develop strong, impersonal, and accountable political institutions.We also discussed his first book, The End of History and the Last Man (1992) and his latest, Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment (2018).Francis Fukuyama on Twitter and InstagramDan Banik and In Pursuit of Development on Twitter Host:Dan Banik LinkedInX: @danbanik @GlobalDevPod Subscribe:Apple Spotify YouTubehttps://in-pursuit-of-development.simplecast.com