qpr-1-2013-foreword.pdf | Page 146

146 Connor F.J. Leckey stereotype has come to categorise that which is not western, resulting in a much too simplified account of the Global South. Such a practice negates the complexities of individual regions and thus makes assumptions on universal strategies for development. Postcolonial theorists would argue that a universal strategy of development simply couldn’t exist, due to key fundamental differences between ‘developing’ nations. Another important criticism concerning development theory is in fact brought to light by a prominent development theorist. In his Five Stages of Growth (1998) W. W. Rostow noted that any account of the West’s historical development overlooked details concerning any favourable contribution from the trans-Atlantic slave trade or colonial conquests. The introduction of these factors to western growth helps to delegitimise the traditional development theorist’s argument that western development sprang naturally from enlightenment principles. As these dynamics are obviously not replicable, postcolonial theorists would argue that this proves that development from an empirical western model is not just unethical, but also impossible in the present international environment. Just as the discourse surrounding development is most often aimed at subjugating native populations to the perceived superiority of western institutional culture, postcolonialists would argue that development practices are likewise extremely western/Eurocentric with indigenous knowledge failing to be utilised. Local people and their valuable technical and environmental knowledge can be overlooked and excluded from set development agenda-setting processes. Postcolonial theorists argue that this frequently leads to inappropriate or even irrelevant development efforts (Sharp and Briggs 2004). One reason, postcolonial theorists argue, for the subjugation of indigenous knowledge in development practice is the nature of communication in western scientific knowledge and the concept of the ‘expert’. Spivak (1988) argues that subalterns are unable to communicate development