Doctoral Degrees (Agricultural Economics)

Permanent URI for this collection

https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/514

Browse

Browsing Doctoral Degrees (Agricultural Economics) by browse.metadata.advisor "Kassier, W. E."

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Toepassings van stelselsdenke op ontwikkelingsteorie
    (Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 1991) Kleynhans, Theodorus Ernst; Kassier, W. E.; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of AgriSciences. Dept. of Agricultural Economics.
    ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Attempting to understand the development and welfare of mankind is a classic problem. The formulation of development theory since World War Two and of welfare economic theory since the beginning of the twentieth century has resulted in this · question receiving more formal theoretical attention. These theoretical approaches form part of the Newtonian-Cartesian scientific tradition and aim to explain development and welfare, or the lack thereof, in terms of cause-effect relationships. This analytical-reductionist method of explanation has its origins in the attempts by Newton and Descartes to explain physical phenomena. Eventually positivism used this approach to explain social phenomena. An essential characteristic of the analytical-reductionist scientific approach is the assumption that a given goal is an effect caused by manipulating some critical environm·ental factor. According to this approach the meaning of human development is seen as necessarily the same for both the development planner and the target group. The perception therefore exists that human development can be caused by the provision of credit, technical knowledge, infrastructure, a freer market and more political freedom. More rigorous control over public servants is regarded as a guarantee for more effective policy making. Similarly, strict top-down control within firms is also seen as a prerequisite for efficient development planning. Various welfare and development theories were investigated against this background in order to discover how each conceptualize human development. Neo-Classical, Pigouvian and New Welfare economics, public choice theory, modernization theory, Marxist, Neo-Marxist and dependency theory, the poverty approach, Institutional and N eo-Institutional economic theory, an ecologically conscious approach, psycho-analysis and neo-psycho-analysis, behaviorism and neo-behaviorism, organismic psychological theory, an anthropological approach and a Christian-humanitarian approach all came under scrutiny. Specific attention was given as to whether so-called essential aspects were emphasised. In order to analyse these various perspectives on human development a threefold classification of universal development dimensions was used, namely the aspirational, contextual and ability dimensions. The investigation shows that welfare and development theories which conceptualize the aspirational dimension in a narrow way, also conceptualize narrowly the context within which a person exists and develops, as well as narrowly defining what is seen as relevant abilities. For example, the modernization theory, which emphasises material aspirations and interprets man-resource relationships primarily as exploitative and interpersonal relation_ships as competitive. The human abilities which are seen as relevant are those abilities that enable one to utilize production and consumer goods technically, and to allocate them efficiently. Thus the only relevant question is that of how to implement efficiently a given goal, such as increasing one's standard of living. The goal itself is not challenged by consideration of other socio-cultural, ethical of aesthetic aspirations. An appropriate orientation within one's physical-social environment requires that a variety of aspirations should be considered rather than the mere examination of efficient ·ways and means of manipulating one's environment in search of a specific goal. Such orientation is emphasized by anthropological, Christian-humanitarian and ecological perspectives. As a result of the Cartesian analytical-reductionist scientific approach these perspectives became separated from other perspectives which emphasize manipulation abilities. But if harmful personal, social and ecological side-effects are to avoided, development planning should enhance both orientation and manipulation abilities. The social systems approach should be seen as complementary to the analyticalreductionist scientific approach. The social systems approach provides a common frame of reference whereby inappropriate assumptions regarding human behaviour can be clarified. This framework proves advantageous for transdisciplinary discourse because it provides common ground for effective developmental planning in both the private and public sectors. If the development of society is to be encouraged more effectively, an organization must also develop internally through a process of organizational redesign so that it becomes a learning organization. The social systems approach provides the conceptual foundation to facilitate such a redesign process and thus enables organizations to deal more effectively with complex development problems within a complex value-loaded Southern African context.