Rethinking Development in Social Sciences: on the Threshold of an Ethical Turn

I.S. Semenenko

doi:10.17976/jpps/2021.02.03

Rethinking Development in Social Sciences:
on the Threshold of an Ethical Turn

Semenenko I.S.,

Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO), Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia, isemenenko@mail.ru

elibrary_id: 251670 | ORCID: 0000-0003-2529-9283 |

DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2021.02.03

Rubric: Theme of the Issue: New Times – New Challenges

For citation:

Semenenko I.S. Rethinking Development in Social Sciences: on the Threshold of an Ethical Turn. – Polis. Political Studies. 2021. No. 2. P. 25-45. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.02.03

Abstract

The shift to a new technological paradigm, alongside deep changes in mass perceptions and in cultural norms in societies confronting challenges to their security, is triggering radical social and political transformations. Researchers in the social sciences face a difficult dilemma: to use terms and categories that belong to a social time that is over, or to try and turn this page over to assess the ontological meanings of the transformations we are experiencing at a pace and in a space that are beyond our current vision. This latter choice would imply rethinking the meanings of development, politics of development, and political development, along with further categories used to describe social change such as nationalism, divided societies, or identity politics (to name but a few). The author proposes reconsidering development when seen as a primarily economic benchmark and instead to regard related policies as applicable to any society regardless of its economic and political standing. Political agency is considered to be the key to understanding political development and its dimensions. The state as a complex system of institutionalized social relations and political networks is at the heart of these changes: in times of crisis, the need to reevaluate its agency as a key crisis regulator becomes an important challenge both for political science and for policymakers. Trust, responsibility, and social solidarity are key values defining the feedback between society and the state: the author asserts their relevance in promoting a consistent development policy at the community level. Identity is a key resource for promoting development and for advancing these values both in elite and in mass social groups. The research draws upon a variety of sources related to the study of development politics in political research, including those produced by issue-related research groups and reproduced in survey data bases, and on the reflection of these topics in political discourse. “The New Zealand Project” is taken as an example of recourse to identity as a resource for development: the formation of a consistent development policy agenda is centered here on an inclusive national identity and on social issues important for a society sharing egalitarian visions and seeking to overcome deep social cleavages. The study of identity in a development context and the importance of value-based policy choices calls for an ethical turn in the social sciences and for a paradigm shift towards responsible development in policymaking.

Keywords

development, political development, development policy/politics, identity politics, trust, the individual, state, divided societies, cleavages, social studies, terms/categories in political analysis, ethical turn, development discourses, responsible development.

Full Text

References

Acemoglu D., Johnson S., Robinson J.A. 2001. The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation. – The American Economic Review. Vol. 91. No. 5. P. 1369-1401. URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2677930 (accessed 19.11.2020).

Aghajanian A., Allouche J. 2016. Development Studies – Past, Present and Future. – Institute of Development Studies (IDS) Bulletin. Vol. 47. No. 2. P. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.128

Apter D.E. 1965. The Politics of Modernization. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 481 р.

Apter D.E. 1987. Rethinking Development: Modernization, Dependency, and Postmodern Politics. Beverly Hills; Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 328 р.

Barker F. 2012. Story: New Zealand identity. – Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. URL: http://www.TeAra.govt.nz/en/new-zealand-identity (accessed 12.01.2021).

Brewer J.D. 2013. The Public Value of the Social Sciences: An Interpretative Essay. London: Bloomsbury Academic. 240 p.

Bruce G. 2014. Our New Society. – New Zealand Geographic. No. 126. March-April. URL: https://www.nzgeo.com/stories/our-new-society/ (accessed 12.01.2021).

Castells M. 2010. The Power of Identity. (The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Vol. 2. 2nd ed.). London: Wiley – Blackwell. 584 p.

Eisenstadt S.N. 1966. Modernization: Protest, and Change. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 166 p.

Etzioni A. 2002. The Good Society. – Seattle Journal for Social Justice. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 83-96. URL: https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/sjsj/vol1/iss1/7 (accessed 12.01.2021).

Fukuyama F. 1995. Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free Press. 457 p.

Galbraith J.K. 1996. The Good Society: The Humane Agenda. Boston-N.Y.: Houghton Mifflin Co. 152 p.

Giddens A. 2000. The Third Way and its Critics. Cambridge: Polity. 200 p.

Granelli F. 2019. Trust, Politics, and Revolution: A European History. London: I.B. Tauris. 336 p.

Handbook of Trust Research. 2006. Ed. by R. Bachmann, A. Zaheer. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 448 p.

Harris M. 2017. The New Zealand Project. Wellington, N.Z.: Bridget Williams Books. 507 p.

Helbling M., Reeskens T., Wright M. 2016. The Mobilisation of Identities: a Study on the Relationship between Elite Rhetoric and Public Opinion on National Identity in Developed Democracies. – Nations and Nationalism. Vol. 22. No. 2. P. 744-767. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12235

Hosking G. 2014. Trust: A History. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. 224 p. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198712381.001.0001

Inglehart R. 2001. Modernization, Sociological Theories of. – International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan. P. 9965-9971. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/01921-5

Littlewood D. 2017. We’re All Equal Here, Mate: Egalitarianism in Aotearoa New Zeland. – Turangawaewae. Identity and Belonging in Aotearoa New Zealand. Ed. by T. Cain, E. Kahu, R. Shaw. Auckland NZ: Massey University Press. P. 213-230.

Luhmann N. 1979. Trust and Power. Chichester UK: John Wiley & Sons. 228 p.

Mason L. 2018. Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 192 p.

New Zealand Identities: Departures and Destinations. 2005. Ed. by J.H. Liu, T. McCreanor, T. McIntosh, T. Teaiwa. Wellington, N.Z.: Victoria University Press. 304 p.

OECD Guidelines on Measuring Trust. 2017. – OECDiLibrary. Paris: OECD publ. URL: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/oecd-guidelines-on-measuring-trust_9789264278219-en;jsessionid=CH7etZPgxrevXhEivaeCbT9U.ip-10-240-5-138 (accessed 12.01.2021).

O’Neill O. 2002. A Question of Trust: The BBC Reith Lectures 2002. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 100 p.

Putnam R.D., Leonardi R., Nanetti R.Y. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 280 p. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt7s8r7

Rashbrooke M. 2019. Inequality and Poverty: A Summary of the 2019 Household Incomes in New Zealand Report. – The Good Society. 11.12. URL: http://www.goodsociety.nz/inequality-and-poverty-asummary-of-the-2019-household-incomes-in-new-zealand-report/ (accessed 14.01.2021).

Social Dimensions of Moral Responsibility. Ed. by K. Hutchinson, C. Mackenzie, M. Oshana. 2018. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 344 p.

Sztompka P. 1998. Trust, Distrust and Two Paradoxes of Democracy. – European Journal of Social Theory. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/136843198001001003

Sztompka P. 1999. Trust: A Sociological Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 214 p.

Sumner A. 2007. What Are the Ethics of Development Studies? – Institute of Development Studies (IDS) Bulletin. Vol. 38. No. 2. P. 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1759-5436.2007.tb00352.x

Tamir Y. 2020. Why Nationalism? Because Nothing Else Works. – Nations and Nationalism. Vol. 26. No. 3. P. 538-543. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12619

Tilly Ch., Tarrow S. 2015. Contentious Politics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 288 p.

The Oxford Handbook of the Politics of Development. Ed. by C. Lancaster, N. van de Walle. 2018. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. 733 p. https://doi.org/0.1093/oxfordhb/9780199845156.001.0001

Thompson D.F. 2004. Restoring Responsibility. Ethics in Government, Business, and Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 360 p.

Thorbecke Е. 2007. The Evolution of the Development Doctrine, 1950-2000. – Advancing Development: Core Themes in Global Economics. Ed. by G. Mavrotas, A. Shorrocks. Tokyo: United Nations University; Palgrave MacMillan. Р. 3-36.

Trust in Government, Policy Effectiveness and the Governance Agenda. 2013. – Government at a Glance. OECD Report. Paris OECD Pub. Р. 19-38. https://doi.org/10.1787/gov_glance-2013-en

Turangawaewae. Identity and Belonging in Aotearoa New Zealand. 2017. Ed. by T. Kain, E. Cahu, R. Shaw. Auckland NZ: Massey University Press. 288 p.

Uslaner E.M. 2002. The Moral Foundations of Trust. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 298 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614934

Van der Meer T.W.G., Zmerli S. 2017. The Deeply Rooted Concern with Political Trust. – Handbook of Political Trust. Ed. by S. Zmerli, T. van der Meer. Cheltenham UK-Northampton MA, USA: Edward Elgar. P. 1-15. URL: https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/gbp/handbook-on-political-trust-9781782545101.html (accessed 14.01.2021).

Vowles J., Coffe H. Curtin J. 2017. A Bark but no Bite. Inequality and the 2014 New Zealand General Election. Acton ACT: ANU Press. 361 p.

Bardin A., Sigachev M. 2019. Discourses of Development: Social and Humanitarian Aspects. – Analysis & Forecasting. Journal of IMEMO. No. 4. P. 24-41. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20542/afij-2019-4-24-41

Castells M. 2000. The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. (Russ. ed.: Castells M. Informatsionnaya ehpokha. ehkonomika, obshchestvo i kul’tura. Moscow: Izdatel’skii dom GU VSHEH. 608 p.)

Fedotova V.G. 2005. Khoroshee obshchestvo [The Good Society]. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya. 544 p. (In Russ.)

Gaman-Golutvina O.V. 2019. Overcoming Methodological Differences: The Debate about Knowledge Politics in an Age of Uncertainty. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 5. P. 19-42. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.05.03

Glukhova A.V. 2020. Political Conflicts in the Global Era (Theoretical Approach Implementation). – Political Science (RU). No. 3. P. 13-33. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31249/poln/2020.03.01

Gosudarstvo v politicheskoy nauke i sotsialnoy realnosti 21 veka [The State in Political Science: Transformations in a Twenty-First Century Social Context]. 2020. Ed. by I.S. Semenenko, V.V. Lapkin, V.I. Pantin. Moscow: Ves Mir. 386 p. (In Russ.)

Identichnost: Lichnost, obshchestvo, politika. Entsiklopedicheskoe izdanie [Identity: The Individual, Society, and Politics. An Encyclopedia]. 2017. Ed. by I. Semenenko. Moscow: Ves Mir. 992 p. (In Russ.)

Jessop B. 2019. The State: Past, Present, Future. (Russ. ed.: Jessop B. Gosudarstvo: proshloe, nastoyashchee i budushchee. Moscow: Delo RANEPA. 504 p.)

Lapkin V.V., Semenenko I.S. 2013. “Homo politicus” vs Challenges of “Infomodernity”. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 6. P. 64-81. (In Russ.)

Malinova O.Yu. 2017. Politika identichnosti kak bor’ba za smysly: problemy kontseptualizatsii [Identity Politics as a Struggle for Meanings: The challenge of conceptualization]. – Simvolicheskaya politika. Vol. 5. Politika identichnosti

[Symbolic Politics. No. 5. Identity Politics]. Ed. by O.Yu. Malinova. Moscow: INION RAS. P. 7-20. (In Russ.)

Mart’yanov V., Fishman L. 2021. Social Sciences and Global Turbulence: Rebooting the Mainstream. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 65, No. 1, P. 100-113. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-1-100-113

Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh. 2012. Uverennost’ v veshchakh nevidimykh. Poslednie besedy (2001-2002) [Confidence in things invisible. Recent conversations (2001-2002)]. Moscow: Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh Foundation; Nikea. 288 p. (In Russ.)

Miroshnichenko I.V., Morozova E.V. 2017. Network Public Policy: Outlines of Subject Field. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 2. P. 82-102. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.02.06

Morozova E.V., Miroshnichenko I.V., Ryabchenko N.A. 2016. The Frontier of Network Society. – World Economy and International Relations. Vol. 60. No. 2. P. 83-97. (In Russ.)

O chem mechtayut rossiyane (razmyshleniya sotsiologov). Analiticheskii doklad [What Russians Dream about (Sociological Reflections). Analytical Report]. 2012. Moscow: Institute of Sociology, RAS. 181 p. (In Russ.)

Pantin V.I. 2018. Political Development and Developmental Policy: Trends, Challenges, and Prospects. – Istoriya i sovremennost’ [History and Modernity]. No. 3. P. 32-50. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30884/iis/2018.03.02

Peregudov S.P., Semenenko I.S. 2008. Korporativnoe grazhdanstvo: kontseptsii, mirovaya praktika i rossiiskie realii. [Corporate Citizenship; Concepts, International Practices and Russian Realities]. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya. 448 p. (In Russ.)

Politleksikon: Ponyatiya, fakty, vzaimosvyazi: na osnove nemetskogo spravochnika Shubert/Klein. Das Politlexicon [Politleksikon: Concepts, Facts, Relationships: Based on German Reference Book Shubert / Klein. Das Politlexicon]. 2013. Ed. by S.V. Patrushev, L.E. Filippova. Moscow: Rossiiskaya politicheskaya ehntsiklopediya. 783 p. (In Russ.)

Rashkovsky E.B. 2020. Pravo, istoriya, svoboda: k osmysleniyu istoricheskogo naslediya A.P. Lopukhina [Law, History, Freedom: to Understanding the Historical Heritage of A.P. Lopukhin]. – Bog. Chelovek. Konstitutsiya. Bibleiskaya filosofiya prava v istoricheskom nasledii A.P. Lopukhina (1852-1904) [The God. Man. Constitution. Biblical Philosophy of Law in the Historical Heritage of A.P. Lopukhin (1852-1904)]. Ed. by A.I. Ovchinnikov. Moscow: Prospekt. P. 203-214. (In Russ.)

Sadovaya E.S., Sautkina V.A., Zenkov A.R. 2019. Formirovanie novoi sotsial’noi real’nosti: tekhnologicheskie vyzovy [Formation of a New Social Reality: Technological Challenges]. Moscow: IMEMO RAS. 190 p. (In Russ.)

Semenenko I.S. 2012. “Homo politicus” Facing Alternative Political Developments: Rethinking the Individual Dimension of Politics. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 6. P. 9-26. (In Russ.)

Semenenko I.S. 2018. Nationalism, Separatism, and Democracy. New Patterns of National Identity in “Old” Europe. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 5. P. 70-87. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2018.05.07

Semenenko I.S. 2019. Horizons of Responsible Development: from Discourse to Governance. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 3. P. 7-26. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.03.02

Shumpeter J.A. 1982.Teoriya ehkonomicheskogo razvitiya [Theory of Economic Development]. Moscow: Progress. 455 p.

Smorgunov L.V. 2019. Institutionalization of Governability and the Problem of Veillance in the Space of Digital Communications. – South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences. Vol. 20. No. 3. P. 62-75. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-20-3-62-75

Solovjov A.I. 2018a. State and Society: New Facets of Historical Conflict. – South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences. Vol. 19. No. 4. P. 6-24. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-19-4-6-24

Solovyov A.I. 2018b. Crises and “Crisis”: How to Treat Cognitive Conflicts of Political Science? – Political Science (RU). No. 1. P. 105-121. (In Russ.)

Solovyov A.I. 2019. Political Agenda of the Government, or Why the State Needs the Society. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 4. P. 8-25. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.04.02

Sotsialnoye gosudarstvo v zerkale obshestvennyhkh transformatsiy [The Welfare State in the Mirror of Social Transformations]. 2020. Ed. by E.S. Sadovaya, I.P. Tsapenko, I.V. Grishin. Moscow: IMEMO RAS. 211 p. (In Russ.)

Weber M. 1990a. Osnovnye sotsiologicheskie ponyatiya. Motivy sotsial’nogo deistviya [Basic Concepts in Sociology. Types of Social Action]. – Weber M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya [Weber M. Selected Works]. Moscow: Progress. P. 628-630. (In Russ.)

Weber M. 1990b. Nauka kak prizvanie i kak professiya [Science as a Vocation]. – Weber M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya [Weber M. Selected Works]. Moscow: Progress. P. 707-735. (In Russ.)

Yurevich A.V. 2009. Nravstvennoe sostoyaniye sovremennogo rossiyskogo obshestva [Moral State of Contemporary Russian Society]. – Social Studies. No. 10. P. 70-79. (In Russ.)

Yurevich A.V. 2018. Empirical Estimates of Modern Russian Society’s Morals. – Yaroslavl Pedagogical Bulletin. No. 4. P. 168-179. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24411/1813-145X-2018-10111

Content No. 2, 2021