Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Paul Gilbert
(University of Sussex)
Jessica Sklair (QMUL)
Emma Mawdsley (University of Cambridge)
Send message to Convenors
- Chairs:
-
Olivia Taylor
(University of Sussex)
Brendan Whitty (University of St Andrews)
- Discussants:
-
Sarah-Jane Phelan
(University of Sussex)
Jo-Anna Russon
- Format:
- Paper panel
- Stream:
- Methods - research, participation and practice
Short Abstract:
This panel invites contributions from early career and established scholars to explore new methods – from complex ‘follow the money’ approaches, to experimental or creative forms like fictionalization – in response to the growing role of powerful private sector actors in ‘Aidland’.
Long Abstract:
Research into the global development industry (‘Aidland’) has traditionally been dominated by a focus on particular organisations (e.g., NGOs, Bretton Woods organisations); and people (aidworkers, policy makers, etc.). The 21st Century has seen a dramatic increase in the role played by private, for-profit contractors in designing and implementing development projects (Roberts 2014; Sundberg 2014; Whitty et al. 2024). These firms include specialist development consultancies, climate change advisors (Keele 2019), education policy consultants (Ball 2009), security contractors (Nagaraj 2015) and multinational engineering conglomerates (Taylor and Gilbert, forthcoming). A second trend has been the growing focus on attracting private finance into ‘Development’, including through novel financialised tools and initiatives (e.g. Ebola bonds). These trends create opportunities, but more often challenges, for researchers: questions around ‘collaboration’; problems of (physical and information) access; negotiation around confidentiality and NDAs; and the need for particular forms of expertise (e.g. financial). Such challenges are not all new in development studies, but are intensified by the increasing role played by for-profit firms, alongside development finance institutions (Devex 2019), philanthropic foundations (Sklair and Gilbert 2022), and even asset managers like BlackRock (Gabor 2019). These challenges are further intensified by gendered and racialized precarious career pathways necessitating ‘patchwork’ research engagement (Günel et al. 2020). This panel invites contributions from early career and established scholars alike, to explore new methods – from complex ‘follow the money’ approaches (Hughes-McLure 2022), to experimental or creative forms like fictionalization – in response to the growing role of powerful private sector actors in ‘Aidland’.
Accepted papers:
Paper short abstract:
I discuss the use of the Right to Information Act to unpack the PPP model of a prominent corporate-funded transnational education intervention – the Teach for India programme, operating in under-resourced and under-served public schools across eight cities in the country.
Paper long abstract:
The developmental thrust of the Indian state post-liberalisation of the economy has shifted considerably over the past four decades (Gupta & Sivaramakrishnan, 2011; Sharma & Gupta 2006). Increasingly, private actors and corporate organisations are being called upon to direct reforms through Public Private Partnerships (PPP) in sectors such as education, health and urban governance (Subramanian, 2022; Ball, 2016; Ghertner, 2011; Banerjee-Guha, 2009). In this paper, I discuss the challenges of tracing the functioning of a prominent corporate supported transnational education intervention – the Teach for India (TFI) programme that operates in under-resourced and under-served public schools across eight cities in the country (Subramanian, 2019). Through the use of the Right to Information Act, a significant legislation that allows Indian citizens to access information on institutions and organisations under public authority, I piece together the ambiguous legalities and accountabilities of private sector driven reforms in public education.
The first part of the discussion interrogates my position and experience of filing applications and engaging with the state bureaucracy to access documents and correspondence on the TFI programme that is not available in the public domain. While private interventions such as TFI are lauded for their philanthropic vision, there is little concern for what these engagements mean for the subjects of the reform – the children of marginalised and working-class families’ studying in the under-resourced public-school system. I explore the dilemmas of piecing together the multiple tiers of policy discourses and their contradicting meanings to comprehend the politics of PPP-driven reforms in practice.
Paper short abstract:
This study explores how a state-owned enterprise in Houhai Village, China, extends state capitalism into local development, blending state control with market-driven imperatives and reshaping the power and politics within community.
Paper long abstract:
Globally, private sector actors - particularly businesses - are increasingly recognised as the driving forces behind development. However, this study shifts the focus to local state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in China. In the Chinese context, SOEs are not merely economic entities; they function as political instruments, extending state power into market-driven development while integrating characteristics of both the public and private sectors. This study examines the case of Houhai Village, a rapidly developing coastal tourist destination, to explore how a municipal SOE, established in 2023, exerts control over local development. It investigates how state capitalism, operating through SOEs, reshapes local power structures and developmental trajectories. As an extension of the local government, this SOE enjoys privileged access to operational licenses and resources, fundamentally altering local political and economic dynamics. At the same time, performance evaluations and financial imperatives necessitate adherence to market-driven logics, creating tensions between state control and commercial objectives. Drawing on an 11-month ethnographic study - including four months of participatory action research within the SOE - this research provides new insights into how state capitalism works in a micro context. By embedding itself in governance under the guise of development, the SOE not only restructures local economies but also redefines community agency, revealing the intricate interplay between state power and market forces in shaping contemporary development.