Notes from “Social Progress and Sustainable Development”
After reading chapters 1-3 slowly and carefully I have arrived at the temporary conclusion that sustainable development does need to be defined by myself first. As Thin mentions that international agencies have always used the term ‘sustainable development’ without clearing defining it, I too have been guilty of this act. However, Thin’s first three chapters did help me understand some very basic, but important principles about sustainable development and the importance to include ‘social progress’ when discussing sustainable development.
· Responsibility is important and this must be instilled in development practitioners and the persons who they are attempting to help.
· Assessment of performance is needed and the means and ends should be distinguished more carefully.
· Concern should be both on the current and future generations.
· Society should also be concerned about how their choices will affect persons of other parts of the globe.
· Institutions should also include the family. My question would be how does society then ensure that families are being nourished?
· Organizations should be built to be adaptable. How do we go about creating adaptable organizations?
· Social policy definitions should stop focusing on only the state and be expanded to the private sector and civil society.
I was confused, however, on Thin’s disagreement with civil society organizations and their focus on removing harm. Thin recommends that organizations should focus on ‘building societies’ in order to measure progress. I do agree with him on his statement because he helped me view measuring development work with a different perspective. But why not also focusing on the problems that still arise, should they be completely ignored? Or, is it that by measuring progress that we are able to identify how problems have been overcome?
1 comment:
Civil society is an important construct. I'm using the word construct in way Pamela Shoemaker, James Tankard, and Dominic Lasorsa define it in their book, How To Build Social Science Theories, (...an abstract generalization about reality. For example, civil society as construct can be a generalization about the state, the individual, community level organization, connections, interactions, etc.).
I suspect your confusion with Thin on civil society organizations will disappear after you refine your thinking to see how and where it matches Thin's 'theory' of sustainable development. That is, how do you and Thin become more specific in defining dimensions of civil society and deciding how to measure aspects of it?
For example, civil society can be viewed as types of organizations that are non-market and non-state. In another context, civil society might refer to particular types of relationships among organizations and among individuals (networks). In yet another context, civil society can refer to particular set skills and competencies (of self-regulation and goverance).
'Defining' terms (constructs, concepts, variables) is necessary part of process of building theory.
Remember, Shoemaker says '...a theory is simply one's understanding of how something works' -- a sustainable community. Pat Shields' offers similar sentiment when she and Hassan Tajalli say, '...theory is a tool..' in their article, "Theory: the missing link in successful student scholarship."
Post a Comment