Name : Tanisha Mittal

Roll No.: 22/0349

Dept: Political Science

UNDERSTANDING DEVELOPMENT

CONTINUOUS ASSESSMENT

READING 1
Ludden, David. ‘Development Regimes in South Asia: History and the Governance
Conundrum’ Economic and Political Weekly, 2000, Vol. 40, No. 37. Pp. 4042–51.

This essay explores the concept of development as dynamic and multifaceted, encompassing
activities, conditions, events, and processes. In natural sciences, development is governed by
principles beyond human control, whereas in social sciences, it stems entirely from human
decisions. Economic development, in particular, is defined as a complex set of institutional
activities involving public and private assets aimed at enhancing the wealth and well-being of
entire populations. Institutions influencing development include families, communities, firms,
media, governments, and NGOs. Development is reflexive, involving interactions among
policies, institutions, outcomes, and analysis, and goes beyond specific policy goals or trends
by encompassing the definition of goals, prioritization, policy debates, and decision-maker
relationships.

Main Concepts of Development

Objective Truth in Development

The understanding of development at any given time is shaped by debates and selective
representations. Both mainstream and dissenting views gain empirical credibility through
data. Economic development policy debates are influenced by priorities such as national
wealth, autonomy, food security, equity, and social stability.

Economics vs. Economies

Economic theory studies abstract mechanisms and elements within “the economy,” while “an
economy” reflects specific political, social, and historical contexts. Applying economic
theory to development requires aligning abstract ideas with real-world conditions, extending
development beyond economics to include material and institutional contexts shaping
economies.

Development Regimes
A development regime is a configuration of institutional power and authority that directs the
development process, influencing wealth and well-being across populations. It includes state
apparatuses and institutions such as education, media, and technology. Power resides in both
physical and cultural instruments, forming a techno-regime with discursive elements.
Development regimes consist of reflective individuals whose influence shapes historical
development processes.

Historical Context of Development Regimes

Pre-modern South Asia

Ancient and medieval rulers invested in infrastructure like irrigation, roads, and cities to
boost productivity. However, these efforts often served ruling elites and were disrupted by
military and political conflicts.

Modern Economic Development

Emerging in the 19th century, modern development sought to increase wealth for entire
populations. Influenced by Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations (1776), this concept opposed
monopolies like the East India Company and advocated commerce benefiting the nation.

British Imperial Regime in South Asia

The first modern development regime in South Asia emerged under British rule after 1840,
subordinating regional economies to imperial globalization.

Imperial Business and Policy

By 1793, Britain debated the management of its Asiatic possessions. Two principles emerged:
the empire must be financially self-sustaining, and British businesses must benefit. The East
India Company’s monopoly ended in 1813, allowing private merchants access to India, and
English became the official language in 1833.

Economic Exploitation

British policies prioritized their own economic interests:

● Tariffs protected Lancashire industries, destroying Indian weavers.

● Indian opium funded British tea and porcelain imports.
● Indian labor was exported to British plantations post-slavery abolition.

Infrastructure Investments

From the mid-19th century, Britain invested in Indian infrastructure to reduce costs, increase
revenues, and facilitate private capital:

● Irrigation projects, led by engineers like Arthur Cotton, expanded crop production.
 ● Railways were developed under state control, guaranteeing returns for British
companies.
● Large irrigation projects, funded through government loans, boosted tax revenues by
1871.

Globalization and Modern Development

By 1880, a modern development regime influenced global markets for five decades. Key
ideas included:

● State-Led Development: Governments led infrastructure investments to boost private

investment and economic growth.
● Public Benefits: Projects like irrigation aimed to alleviate poverty and prevent famine.
● Scientific Progress: Advances in science and technology were seen as universal tools
for development.

Impacts of Imperial Globalization

Regional Integration

British investments linked regions across the Indian Ocean:

● Coffee and tea plantations thrived in Ceylon and Assam.

● Labor migration supported plantation economies in Ceylon, Malaya, and Africa.
● Chettiyar bankers financed agricultural expansion in Burma.

Labor and Capital Mobility

Between 1870 and 1914, globalization increased commodity, labor, and capital movement,
laying the foundation for today’s global economy.

Legacy of British Imperialism

By 1900, British policies shaped interconnected economies across South and Southeast Asia,
Africa, and beyond. These circuits were disrupted post-1945 but remain partially restored in
the modern era of globalization.

Spatial Specialization and National Development in South Asia

Regional Economic Specialization (Colonial Era)

South Asia under British rule experienced deliberate regional economic specialization, driven
by capital investment and labor mobility. Key commodities like cotton, tea, rice, jute, and
coal were linked to specific regions. Industrialization began in factory towns like Bombay,
Jamshedpur, and Calcutta.

Globalization and the Imperial Economy

South Asia’s economy became export-oriented under British rule, with raw materials
dominating exports while industrial machinery and consumer goods were imported.

Nationalist Critique of Imperial Policies

Nationalists like Dadabhai Naoroji criticized the drain of wealth due to British exploitation,
and movements like Swadeshi promoted Indian-made goods.

Transition to National Economies (1920s–1940s)

By 1920, British India achieved financial autonomy, paving the way for nationalist-led
development policies. Events like the Great Depression spurred a shift toward inward-looking
policies, with leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru advocating for socialist-inspired economic
structures.

Planned Development in Post-Colonial South Asia (1950s–1970s)

After independence, national planning focused on self-sufficiency, industrialization, and

redistribution. Governments initiated programs like Nehru’s Planning Commission and
nationalization of industries, but systemic inequalities and resource constraints persisted.

Global Trends and Challenges

Post-colonial South Asia mirrored global trends of reducing foreign investment while
focusing on national markets. However, planning efforts faced funding and infrastructural
challenges, especially in regions like Bangladesh.

Rise of NGOs and Decentralized Governance

Initially supplementary actors, NGOs have become primary agents of development, shifting
governance away from state-led planning toward market-driven initiatives. This has
fragmented governance, raising accountability concerns. Development governance today
involves competing interests and institutions, where financial capital wields significant
power, complicating oversight.

Conclusion

Development today is a mosaic of contradictions, involving governments, multinational

corporations, NGOs, and international financial institutions. While states remain central, their
authority has weakened, giving way to fragmented and often unequal governance. Persistent
challenges, such as regional inequalities and marginalization, highlight the need for inclusive,
locally sensitive approaches to development that address structural inequities and empower
marginalized populations.
Q- How has the transition from state-led development to a fragmented, market-driven
governance structure impacted the effectiveness and inclusivity of development
processes, particularly in post-colonial regions like South Asia?

READING 2
Chatterjee, Partha, 2008. ‘Democracy and Economic Transformation in India,’
Economic and Political Weekly, 2008, Vol. 48, No. 16. Pp. 53-62.

The socio-economic transformations in Indian peasant society under the influence of

globalization and postcolonial capitalist development have led to significant changes in class
dynamics, political structures, and the organization of informal sectors. This essay
synthesizes the intricate arguments and observations presented in the text, reflecting on the
evolution of peasant politics and informal economy against the backdrop of global and local
economic changes. The discussion is anchored in the broader framework of Indian modernity,
explored through the Subaltern Studies project initiated in 1982 under Ranajit Guha’s
leadership, and examines the persistent yet altered role of peasantry in the face of global
capitalist expansion.

Transformation of Peasant Society

The text identifies substantial shifts within traditional peasant communities, which persist
despite capitalist industrial growth, albeit under new conditions. Traditional dependency on
landlords has been supplanted by a reliance on state welfare services, voluntary urban
migration, and education-driven aspirations for upward mobility. These changes are
particularly significant for marginalized groups like Dalits, whose exposure to media and
education has redefined their desires for urban anonymity and better opportunities. The
transformation of peasant society highlights the coexistence of old structures and new
aspirations, influenced by state interventions and global economic forces.

Primitive Accumulation of Capital

The process of postcolonial capitalist development in India is analyzed through Kalyan

Sanyal’s framework, critiquing the traditional narratives of linear transitions from feudalism
to capitalism. Instead, the Indian model reveals a dual process: the dispossession of peasants
(primitive accumulation) and simultaneous state-led efforts to mitigate its adverse effects
through welfare programs, microcredit initiatives, and poverty alleviation schemes. This
duality reflects the complexities of integrating dispossessed populations into the capitalist
economy while addressing their immediate livelihood needs, creating a unique dynamic in
postcolonial development.

The Role of the State

The role of the state in rural life has evolved significantly since colonial times. Unlike the
repressive approaches of the past, the state now plays an active role in providing essential
services and mediating the effects of capitalist growth. Policies emphasizing resettlement,
rehabilitation, and support for small-scale producers align with global norms of poverty
management. The state’s involvement also highlights the fragmentation of peasant politics, as
benefit-seekers are often divided into competing groups, reducing the possibility of unified
opposition. This nuanced engagement reflects a shift from exploitation-based conflicts to
competition over resource distribution.

Global Influence and Poverty Management

Global ideas around poverty management, such as the Grameen Bank’s microcredit model,
have shaped state strategies in India. These approaches blend capitalist growth with
mechanisms to mitigate its disruptive effects, illustrating the interplay between global norms
and local realities. The spread of such models has further influenced state policies, balancing
the pressures of economic liberalization with the demands for social welfare, particularly in
rural areas.

Political and Class Dynamics in Postcolonial India

The Indian state, historically characterized as a coalition of dominant classes (industrial

capitalists, rural elites, and bureaucratic-managerial elites), has undergone substantial
changes since the 1990s. Scholars have used Gramsci’s concept of “passive revolution” to
describe the Indian model, where class domination occurs through compromises and conflicts
mediated by the state. This framework facilitated a transition toward an undefined modernity,
marked by relative state autonomy and a multi-party political system.

Post-1990s Transformations

The liberalization of the Indian economy in the 1990s brought significant changes:

1. Economic Shifts: The dismantling of the license regime opened the economy to
foreign capital and goods, diversifying the capitalist class. Indian capitalists adapted
to global competition, particularly in sectors like IT and manufacturing.
2. Political Changes: State governments increasingly aligned with corporate interests,
redefining state autonomy. The middle classes embraced corporate efficiency while
viewing the state apparatus as corrupt, reinforcing the ideological hegemony of
corporate capital.

Civil Society and Political Society

The article delineates two distinct political domains:

1. Civil Society: Dominated by urban middle classes, this domain aligns with normative
capitalist democracy, where corporate capital enjoys moral-political leadership.
 2. Political Society: Representing the rural and urban poor, this domain operates outside
formal legal frameworks. Relationships with the state are negotiated and contingent,
reflecting the precarious nature of entitlements.

Organization of the Informal Sector

The informal sector, while lacking corporate structures, demonstrates a high degree of
organization to navigate markets and governmental regulations. Leadership often emerges
from politically affiliated figures, reflecting the sector’s intertwining with political activities.
Urban informal organizations, such as street vendors and private transport operators, have
developed stable structures to sustain livelihoods through collective bargaining and
governmental support. However, rural informal sectors, facing market pressures and limited
organization, rely more heavily on direct state intervention.

Changing Peasant Culture and Politics

The decline of agriculture and the rise of non-agricultural employment signify a cultural and
economic shift in rural society. Younger generations, particularly those educated, are
abandoning traditional peasant livelihoods for urban opportunities, signaling the erosion of
peasant culture. Peasants now engage with government agencies for welfare and
development, reflecting a new form of politics characterized by competition among
benefit-seekers and the strategic use of violence and media to secure state attention.

Corporate vs. Non-Corporate Capital

The duality between corporate and non-corporate capital underscores the stratified nature of
India’s economy. While corporate capital dominates urban civil society, rural populations
operate within non-corporate frameworks tied to political society. Informal sector
organizations prioritize survival over profitability, contrasting with the profit-driven motives
of corporate entities. This dichotomy highlights the marginalization of the informal sector
amidst the growing dominance of corporate interests.

Broader Implications

India’s democracy links civil society and political society through redistributive policies
aimed at reversing the effects of primitive accumulation. However, the hegemony of
corporate capital among urban middle classes has fostered resentment toward populist
measures benefiting rural areas. The survival of peasant society depends on integrating
non-agricultural activities and adapting to urban influences, necessitating innovative political
strategies to balance corporate growth with the livelihood needs of marginalized populations.

Conclusion
The essay underscores the complex interplay between globalization, state intervention, and
the evolving dynamics of class and capital in India. The coexistence of dispossession and
welfare, coupled with the duality of corporate and non-corporate capital, defines the political
and economic order of contemporary India. As peasant society and the informal sector
navigate these changes, the future of Indian democracy hinges on reconciling corporate
growth with inclusive policies that address the needs of the marginalized.

Q- How does the coexistence of dispossession and welfare in contemporary India shape
the political and economic roles of the peasantry and the informal sector in the context
of postcolonial capitalist development and globalization?

READING 3
Mosse, David. Caste and Development: Contemporary Perspectives on a Structure of
Discrimination and Advantage. World Development, 2018, Volume 110. Pp. 423-433

The issue of caste is often overlooked in global policy frameworks aimed at addressing
inequality, poverty, and discrimination. While the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 10.2
outlines a global agenda to eliminate discrimination based on factors such as age, sex,
disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, or economic status, caste is notably absent from
this framework. Over 260 million people worldwide, particularly South Asians and their
diasporas, face discrimination based on caste, and human rights organizations argue that caste
should be included in global progress indicators due to its significant role in perpetuating
social exclusion and poverty. Despite this, caste remains excluded from international
negotiations, such as the SDGs. This raises important questions: should caste be considered a
major driver of poverty and inequality? How does caste continue to affect opportunities
today, and why is it often overlooked in comparison to other forms of discrimination, like
gender, race, or religion? These questions are particularly relevant in the Indian context,
where caste remains a significant determinant of social and economic outcomes.

In India, caste is a critical driver of inequality, particularly in economic terms. The country’s
capital wealth, including land, finance, and buildings, is concentrated among the upper castes,
while lower castes predominantly engage in low-wage labor. This disparity extends to
income, access to prestigious occupations, and returns on education or capital assets, with
inequality increasing as one moves down the caste hierarchy. Research by Deshpande (2017),
using a Caste Development Index, suggests that caste-based inequality remains largely
unchanged by wealth or economic growth in various Indian states. Despite India’s economic
growth, caste remains one of the most important determinants of life opportunities,
perpetuating significant disparities in wealth and access to resources.
Historically, Indian social policy did not view caste as a structural cause of inequality but as
an issue related to culture, religion, and historical disadvantage. After independence, the
Indian government largely avoided using caste as an explanation for poverty and inequality.
However, the Indian Constitution recognized historical disadvantage and provided special
protection and benefits to certain castes, including Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Other
Backward Classes (OBCs). These benefits, such as quotas in public sector jobs and higher
education, were aimed at addressing historical wrongs but also sparked political mobilization
around caste-based entitlements. Although these affirmative action policies were a step
toward redressing inequality, they framed caste as a social disability rather than as a
fundamental cause of economic inequality in the market-driven economy. The Constitution’s
affirmative action provisions have been limited to specific communities, excluding others
who also experience caste-based discrimination, such as Dalit Muslims and Christians.

The politics of caste have become increasingly prominent in India, especially with the
extension of reservations to OBCs. This move has led to political debates, protests from
upper castes, and the formation of caste-based political parties. Caste has become a
significant element of political competition, particularly in rural areas, where caste-based
parties have found electoral success. However, the political focus on caste has diverted
attention from the deeper, structural role caste plays in the economy. For example, in states
like Bihar, political power shifted toward lower castes under the leadership of OBC leaders
like Lalu Prasad Yadav, but these political gains did not lead to significant improvements in
socio-economic conditions. This disconnect between caste politics and economic
development underscores the limitations of affirmative action policies in addressing broader
economic inequalities, especially in the context of neoliberal reforms since 1991.

Since the 1990s, neoliberal economic reforms have transformed India’s economy, yet caste
has largely been excluded from development discussions. Caste is often viewed as an
outdated, cultural issue that is gradually disappearing in the face of modernization and
globalization. This perspective, especially among upper and middle classes, reflects the belief
that the market economy and meritocratic systems should have eliminated caste-based
inequalities. However, this view overlooks the fact that caste discrimination remains
embedded in the structures of the modern economy. While caste-based political mobilization
and civil society activism have gained momentum, Dalit activists are increasingly placing
caste on the human rights agenda. These activists challenge the continued role of caste in the
economy and the development process, demanding recognition of caste-based exclusion
beyond reservations.

Dalit activism, particularly since the 1990s, has brought caste issues to the forefront of
national politics. Political movements like the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and other
Dalit-focused groups have emphasized caste-based discrimination as a form of human rights
abuse, comparable to apartheid. Anti-caste civil society campaigns have highlighted the
exclusion and economic marginalization of Dalits, making caste an issue of both national and
international significance. The text suggests that caste remains a powerful force shaping
India’s economy and social structures. Despite the rise of market-led development and
political assertions of caste’s irrelevance, caste continues to influence economic opportunities
and outcomes, and addressing its role requires both political reform and a deeper
understanding of how caste shapes opportunities in India’s evolving economy.

The complex nature of the caste system is also explored, particularly its evolution over time.
Colonialism, especially British rule, played a significant role in shaping the caste system by
consolidating hierarchical structures, social separation, and occupational divisions. While the
British colonial administration’s role in “inventing” the caste system is debated, it is widely
acknowledged that their policies, such as caste categorization in censuses and the
consolidation of the Brahman priesthood and the “untouchable” category, had a profound
impact on the system. Field anthropologists in the 1950s and 60s contributed to solidifying
the idea of a ranked caste system, though this too was influenced by colonial constructs.

Scholars have developed various models of caste, emphasizing its multifaceted nature. Some
view caste as a system of social separation, graded status, and occupational specialization,
while others highlight its hereditary and economic dimensions. Caste also has a political
dimension, where caste groups function as systems of dominance and control at the local
level. Additionally, caste has an ideological component, with ideas of purity and impurity
playing a key role in the social hierarchy. Theories like Louis Dumont’s in Homo
Hierarchicus (1980), which focus on caste as a system based on purity and pollution, have
been critiqued for failing to account for the political and economic functions of caste. Instead,
anthropologists highlight the role of caste in power dynamics, particularly in agrarian
societies. As markets expanded, traditional caste-based occupations were undermined by
commercial alternatives, leading some castes to seek autonomy through market participation.

Dalits, in particular, have sought to escape the humiliation associated with caste-based labor.
Some Dalits have found new economic niches in the market, while others have experienced
changes in social status through economic mobility. However, caste-based discrimination
persists in various forms, including in public spaces, education, and workplaces. Dalit
political mobilization has been critical in challenging caste hierarchies. As Dalits gain
political power and self-respect, caste status is increasingly contested. However, caste
mobility, particularly through “sanskritization” (emulating upper-caste practices), has led to
the reproduction of class, caste, and gender divides, with Dalit women bearing the brunt of
caste-based oppression within families.

The text also suggests that caste is evolving from a hierarchical structure into one based on
identity and cultural difference. This “horizontalization” of caste allows caste groups to
mobilize politically and economically, but it does not eliminate the vertical divide between
Dalits and higher castes. Caste continues to create inequality, especially in terms of access to
higher education, employment, and business opportunities. Caste is increasingly being used
as a strategic resource to gain political and economic power, particularly in regional contexts.
While caste has become less visible in some public spheres, it remains hyper-visible in
instances of violent caste-based discrimination. Dalits who challenge the established social
order often face violent retaliation, including humiliation, sexual violence, and public
shaming.
Despite these challenges, state-led initiatives aimed at reducing caste-based discrimination,
such as affirmative action policies, public goods provision (education, healthcare, housing),
and employment schemes like the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA),
have improved Dalits’ economic conditions. However, caste-based discrimination continues
to persist in public service delivery, where Dalits often face segregation and mistreatment.

Caste discrimination remains pervasive in the urban workforce, particularly in terms of

occupational ranking. Dalits, even in urban areas, often remain confined to manual,
low-status, and hazardous jobs, while upper castes dominate skilled positions. Dalit women,
in particular, face compounded caste and gender discrimination, limiting their job mobility.
Intergenerational mobility is fragile, and despite improvements in education, Dalits continue
to face caste-based barriers, especially in higher education and employment. Discrimination
in hiring practices is evident, particularly in the private sector, where caste biases persist.

Barriers to self-employment and business ventures also remain significant for Dalits, who
often face exclusion from business networks and access to capital. While Dalits have begun
to start businesses, many of these ventures are survival-driven and lack the resources to
thrive. Caste networks, while providing some support, also limit mobility by restricting
access to broader, more competitive opportunities in the liberalized economy.

Caste continues to be both a mechanism of discrimination and a social network that facilitates
accumulation. Caste serves as a fluid and adaptive system, influencing various aspects of life,
from identity and power dynamics to access to resources. Dalit women, in particular,
continue to face the intersection of caste and gender-based oppression, while caste networks
play a crucial role in shaping opportunities and outcomes, particularly in rural areas.

Despite affirmative action policies, caste-based disparities remain entrenched. The

persistence of caste in modern India reflects its flexibility and adaptability, and it continues to
shape individuals’ opportunities and experiences. Caste has evolved from a rigid system of
roles to one based on identity and cultural difference, and it remains a significant factor in
shaping access to opportunities and resources. Addressing caste inequality requires a deeper
understanding of its role

Q- How can global policy frameworks, such as the Sustainable Development Goals,
effectively integrate caste as a significant factor in addressing inequality, poverty, and
social exclusion, particularly in the context of India’s economic and social structures?

KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM THE COURSE

The sociology course “Understanding Development” provided a comprehensive exploration
of development through sociological perspectives, with a particular focus on post-colonial
India. The course introduced us to diverse processes of development, the theories that inform
them, and the real-world implications of these ideas. It encouraged us to critically assess
development as a social construct, shaped by historical contexts and power dynamics.

A key takeaway from the course is the understanding that development is not a neutral
concept but is influenced by cultural, political, and social factors. The first unit emphasizes
that development discourse is historically constructed and must be analyzed in terms of
power relations, rather than being a universal or one-size-fits-all solution. This allows us to
critically evaluate mainstream development models, recognizing their limitations and
contradictions.

It also introduced us to several key theoretical frameworks that shape development studies.
Modernization theory, with its focus on technological progress and economic growth, is
critiqued for its ethnocentric assumptions. Dependency theory challenges this, arguing that
underdevelopment results from exploitative relationships created during colonialism. The
World Systems Theory extends this idea, proposing that the global economic system
perpetuates inequality through a hierarchical structure of core and peripheral nations. The
course also integrated gender and ecological concerns into development theories,
highlighting the need to address inequalities in both social and environmental contexts.A
significant focus of the course is on post-colonial India, where we examined the complexities
of development in a country shaped by colonial legacies, social inequalities, and diverse
political movements. The course explored how development policies have often excluded
marginalized groups such as Dalits, Adivasis, and women, leading to uneven outcomes.
While India has achieved significant progress in areas such as economic growth and
infrastructure, social inequalities persist, particularly in rural and underdeveloped regions. It
also underscores the role of the Indian state and its developmental agenda, which has been
influenced by both domestic factors and global forces. It also emphasises the importance of
evaluating development practices in different local contexts. By studying specific case
studies, we assessed how developmental policies affect different groups and regions,
considering their social, economic, and environmental impact.

In conclusion, the course “Understanding Development” equipped us with the tools to

analyze development critically. By engaging with diverse theories and examining the
experiences of post-colonial India, we gained a nuanced understanding of the complexities
and contradictions of development. The course challenges students to reconsider traditional
development models and think about more inclusive, equitable, and sustainable alternatives.