Development as Freedom

According to what has become the ‘conventional wisdom’ of economics, the most important function of economic policy is to safeguard the ‘right’ of a minority to accumulate profits at the highest rate possible (euphemistically referred to as ‘growth’). Development, we are told, is possible only if there is such growth. Only when this freedom is unrestricted will others in society benefit from any associated spin-offs (the trickle-down effect). All other freedoms are only achievable if such growth occurs. The purpose of ‘development’ is, therefore, to guarantee ‘growth’ so that ultimately other freedoms can, at some indeterminate time in the future, be enjoyed. State expenditure, according to this dogma, should be directed towards creating an enabling environment for ‘growth’, and not be ‘wasted’ on the provision of public services that, in any case, can ultimately be provided ‘more efficiently’ by private enterprise. These are the mantras that you will find woven through almost every report on economic development over the last 20 years – whether from the World Bank, IMF, WTO, or from bilateral development agencies in the North. This is the madness that, as Amartya Sen points out, makes socially useful members of society such as school-teachers and health workers feel more threatened by conservative economic policies than do army generals. It is the madness that led, as I have argued elsewhere, to social calamities such as the genocide in Rwanda.