ABSTRACT
In the early 1990s, Ragnhild Lund (1993) argued for a place- and people-centred perspective in development theory. In doing so, she was one of the first geographers to recognize the devaluation of place in conventional development studies. Lund points out that guidelines for development during the latter half of the twentieth century were heavily focused on economic rather than social, cultural or ecological issues. Drawing from a range of theories from Marxism to liberalism, she notes that few of these perspectives focused on place as a dynamic factor in societal change. Rather, place was characterized as a relatively passive stage for social and political action and interaction. In a broad-ranging critique of ‘modernist’ Rostowian and Marxist perspectives, Lund argues against both the popular regionalizing systems theories based on Wallerstein and humanist perspectives that advocated endogenous self-reliance. The former tend towards purely economic solutions and the latter suggest a focus on local practices that are hugely valuable and tie in with perspectives that date back to Ernst Schumacher’s famous Small is Beautiful (1973), but are also easily conscripted into the service of neoliberal policies that foist way too much responsibility for economic advancement on to the shoulders of people who are least able to bear it. Instead, Lund favours an ‘alternative development’ that takes account of gender and is influenced by social movements focused on ecology, peace and women (see also Nederveen Pieterse 1998). In so doing, she recognizes:
… that women and men encounter a variety of external policies and interventions in a given place, and modify and adapt to external influences in accordance to norms, conventions and practices prevalent in the local society. Both internal and external factors are historically and geographically specific. Consequently, it is necessary to understand the relationship between gender and place to realize change. (Lund 1993: 197)
