“Poor brain development” in the global South? Challenging the science of early childhood interventions

Abstract

Global Early Childhood Development (ECD)-an applied field with the aim to improve the "brain structure and function" of future generations in the global South-has moved to the center of international development. Global ECD rests heavily on evidence claims about widespread cognitive, social, and emotional deficits in the global South and the benefits of changing parenting practices in order to optimize early childhood development. We challenge these claims on the grounds that the leading ECD literature excludes research from anthropology, cultural psychology, and related fields that could provide crucial insights about childrearing and children's development in the targeted communities. We encourage anthropologists and other scholars with ethnographic expertise on childhood to critically engage with global ECD. To facilitate such an endeavor, this article sketches the history, scientific claims, and interventions of global ECD, points out the critical potential of ethnographic research, and suggests strategies to make ethnography more relevant. KEYWORDS early childhood development, parenting interventions, international development, applied researchFrench translation of the abstract Le développement cérébral est-il déficient dans les pays du Sud ? Contester la scientificité des interventions précoses chez l'enfantThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Promoting global ECD top‐down and bottom‐up

“…I tend to agree with Scheidecker and colleagues’ (2023) central arguments against global ECD and its programmatic manifestation in the Nurturing Care Framework (NCF). They argue, with ethnographic scientific evidence that: (1) childcare ought not to be linked to poverty, (2) the child has multiple social partners who fulfil different needs, and (3) the prescriptions of a certain type of responsive caregiving based on a particular cultural family model are at odds with diverse forms of responsive caregiving in a variety of contexts.…”

“…This commentary seeks to complement Scheidecker and colleagues’ (2023) arguments emphasizing the role played by academics and practitioners from the majority world who, knowingly or unknowingly, participate in the perpetuation of global ECD. Global ECD is promoted both top‐down and bottom‐up.…”

“…Global ECD is promoted both top-down and bottom-up. While Scheidecker et al (2023) emphasize the flow of influence from researchers and funding bodies, I provide reasons why participants in the targeted communities might also advocate approaches that reproduce systematic bias. The call for more ethnographic scientific evidence will benefit significantly from academics and practitioners from the majority world themselves more extensively and explicitly resisting the imposition of mainstream perspectives on child development and family models and practices.…”

“…The primary purpose seems to be to export one form of family model, parenting practices, and perspective on child development to the rest of the world through agencies such as World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the World Bank Group (WBG), and LEGO Foundation. Thus, Gabriel Scheidecker et al (2023) are justified in characterizing these efforts at global ECD as attempts to improve brain functioning of children in the majority world to break the vicious cycle of poverty. In this framework, poverty is seen as intergenerational, involving at least three generations: children, parents, and grandparents.…”

“…Thus, Gabriel Scheidecker et al. (2023) are justified in characterizing these efforts at global ECD as attempts to improve brain functioning of children in the majority world to break the vicious cycle of poverty. In this framework, poverty is seen as intergenerational, involving at least three generations: children, parents, and grandparents.…”