Historically, development theories have recognized the significance of technology for development. The post World War II decades were treated with arguments that utilized protechnology thinking as a kind of missing link in the then development agenda. However, the rise of neo -classical school from the 1980's onwards has altered the technology-development landscape, by introducing untraditional sets of institutional relations-in particular, reduction of the state, expansion of markets and generally curtailing the civil society. Electronic governance has ascended the world stage from within the neo-classical order. The implications being that market systems define the rules of the game as far as e-Governance operations are concerned. Inevitably, the expansive power allocated to markets by the neo-classical order has generated different forms of regulation, aimed at addressing social polarization. The need for regulation has long been advocated for, by Keynesian and other renowned theorists.By interrogating these sorts of issues, this paper established that e-Governance negotiates poorly with social goals in particular forms of regimes. In details, the study found that market economies with high levels of e-Governance registers high inequality levels, while mixed or social democracies on medium levels of e-Governance record better trends of social equality. Many developing countries fall under market economies, not by choice, but largely due to dysfunctional bureaucracies. The argument being that when bureaucracies dysfunction, market systems naturally take charge.On the above account, the study proposed that e-Governance could operate far better in social terms, if it is compartmentalized. It also suggested that e-Governance target human development initiatives at earlier rather than late stages.
This volume took on the very complex, difficult, ever-changing, politically charged, and socio-economically disrupting issue of migration. “And development” is meaningful in the title of the work because it is principally about migration and the controversies that revolve around how some, mainly the African poor in South Africa, have responded to growing numbers of immigrants from Africa (and South Asia), including violence that has sometimes been described as xenophobic or afrophobic. This book wishes to see this issue through the development lens.
This article argues in favour of relationships as a measure of development. The study gathered primary data from the James 1:27 Trust, a non-governmental organisation providing socio-economic and psychological support to vulnerable households in Pretoria, South Africa. The data were gathered through a qualitative method by which three officials from the James 1:27 Trust and seven participants from three households targeted by the James 1:27 Trust were interviewed. The in-depth interviews were complemented by a focus group discussion, which combined the Trust officials and the households. A thematic content analysis was used to interpret and analyse the data. The study concluded that the nature and extent of relationships in the examined non-governmental organisation present an opportunity to understand and measure development differently from the way it is understood and measured in orthodox development. The participants used burdened words such as family, belonging, appreciation, value, bonding, paying attention, and honesty as proxies for measuring development. These findings provide insight into the meaning of relationships in development processes and outcomes. The article recommends that care relationships be moved from the shadows to the mainstream of development practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.