Misrecognitions and missed opportunities: post‐structuralism and the practice of development

Abstract

Over the past 20 years post‐structuralist scholars have produced critiques of the field of development. In some circles it is now quite broadly accepted that this approach is futile and that we ought to move into a ‘post‐discourse’ era. By way of counterpoint, this paper argues that such exchanges are based on misrecognitions whose acceptance forecloses possibilities that both critics and their detractors would welcome. The paper is broken into two sections. The first engages problems ascribed to post‐structuralist critiques that seem to have been particularly successful in discouraging further engagement. The second explores three aspects of a single moment of post‐structuralist thought that have been obscured by current debate. Engaging these aspects, while bringing difficulties of its own, may secure conditions necessary for the emergence of the sorts of partnerships often claimed as necessary both by developers and by their post‐structuralist critics.