Uncategorized
International Development Lens
The Lens of Disability Development can be interpreted in multiple ways, and the unseen stories shared here represent just one dimension of this perspective. These narratives challenge conventional understandings of progress, inclusion, and agency, particularly within the framework of disability studies. However, the very notion of “development” itself is often constructed through a Western, if not explicitly Eurocentric, lens—one shaped by historical contexts, colonial legacies, and dominant economic paradigms that prioritize market-driven growth, institutional governance, and standardized policy interventions.
Institutional Frameworks and the Limits of Western Development Models
Taking Douglas North’s perspective on development, he emphasizes the role of institutions—both formal (laws, regulations) and informal (social norms, cultural beliefs)—in shaping economic and social progress. North’s analysis suggests that development is an evolutionary process, where institutions reduce uncertainty, create incentives, and guide the trajectory of societies. However, applying this framework to disability development raises critical questions:
- Whose institutions dictate what “development” looks like for persons with disabilities? Many international development policies assume a universal trajectory of progress, yet disability rights and accessibility vary significantly across cultures and economic systems.
- How do informal norms—such as societal perceptions of disability—interact with formal policies to either enable or hinder inclusion? While legal frameworks may enforce accessibility rights, social stigmas often persist, limiting real-world implementation.
- Can a development model rooted in Western economics thoughtfully capture the lived realities of people with disabilities in diverse cultural and socio-economic contexts? A model focused on GDP growth and institutional efficiency may overlook community-led, indigenous, or localized approaches to disability inclusion.
These questions highlight the need for a more inclusive, intersectional, and globally nuanced approach to development—one that transcends Western-centric assumptions and recognizes the agency of disabled individuals in shaping their own futures.
Western Agency and Congitive Dissoance
The assumption that Western nations—such as Canada, the United States, and much of Europe—have an inherent sense of civic leadership, governance, and humanitarian responsibility, while non-Western societies lack such capacities, leads to a distorted perception of global development. This perspective has roots in colonial ideology, where Western nations positioned themselves as “civilizing forces,” tasked with modernizing the so-called “developing world.”
Historians and politicians often reference the saying that “the Sun never sets on the British Empire” to underscore the vast reach and influence of Western colonial power. However, this legacy continues to shape international development today—through foreign aid, economic interventions, and policy frameworks that often prioritize Western models of governance over indigenous, communal, or non-Western systems.
For individuals who have emigrated from the Global South to Western nations, this creates a cognitive dissonance—a tension between the idealized narrative of Western progress and the lived reality of systemic inequalities, racial biases, and policy failures. While Western nations may champion disability rights and social inclusion rhetorically, the practical challenges—such as inaccessible healthcare, employment discrimination, and social exclusion—highlight the gap between policy and lived experience.
Thus, re-examining the international development lens requires moving beyond the idea that Western nations are the sole arbiters of progress. Instead, a pluralistic approach—one that values local knowledge systems, lived experiences, and non-Western traditions of social welfare—must be at the forefront of rethinking disability development and international development as a whole.
