Paper short abstract:

What forms of 'discipline' can help to decolonise development studies? I suggest and empirically test a deliberative approach that is prefigurative as well as critical. It also offers a critical realist perspective, combining complexity ontology, abduction and retroductive case-study validation.

Paper long abstract:

What would a fully ‘decolonized’ development studies look like? And what form of ‘discipline’ can avoid itself fostering colonial-style concentrations of knowledge and power? Development studies can flourish by being highly undisciplined or permissive, but at what opportunity cost to its contribution to social justice? This paper addresses these questions by defining development studies not as a static realm of research based on a settled body of knowledge, but as a research process that is both deliberative and unruly. Central to the identity of development studies, defined in this way, are the evolving values and principles governing participation in the development studies research community. The issue of discipline concerns how these are defined and governed. I contribute to this process by proposing five guiding principles for development studies: (1) plural conceptualisation of development; (2) methodological pragmatism; (3) commitment to fair and equitable research processes; (4) commitment to socially just research outcomes; and (5) cultivation of research autonomy. These are explored through analysis of three case studies of development research in Malawi - a context in which local ideas about development (as 'chitikuko') are deeply bound up with the idea of dependency. The case studies concern NGO brokerage, tobacco diversification and donor-government relations in the mainstreaming of social assistance. Rooted in complexity ontology and critical realist philosophy, the paper combines theoretical underlabouring with an abductive leap (in the form of the proposed principles) and their retroductive validation through case studies.