Scholarlink

<p>Rural development has a long history in international development practice, yet the conception of ‘rurality’ and its implications for what rural development <i>does</i> are rarely discussed in their own right. Based on a double-paired comparison of two North African (Morocco, Tunisia) and two Southern African (Botswana, Zambia) cases, this article investigates varying, context-specific meanings of ‘rural’ and their interaction with internationalised development policies. We show that while the focus on agriculture and social protection in international development cooperation represents a strong structuring force in the policy field, the targets of rural development – ‘rural areas’ or ‘rural populations’ – take on various meanings in national politics and people’s daily lives. These observations challenge the common expectation of comparability on which global development paradigms hinge. They further call for reconsidering the value of ‘rural’ areas in their own right, building on the meanings and visions that people attribute to them beyond their insertion into global capitalism.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

What’s ‘rural’ in rural development? Interrogating internationalised visions for the African countryside

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月14日

查看全文
  • Kressen Thyen,
  • Anna Wolkenhauer

摘要

Rural development has a long history in international development practice, yet the conception of ‘rurality’ and its implications for what rural development does are rarely discussed in their own right. Based on a double-paired comparison of two North African (Morocco, Tunisia) and two Southern African (Botswana, Zambia) cases, this article investigates varying, context-specific meanings of ‘rural’ and their interaction with internationalised development policies. We show that while the focus on agriculture and social protection in international development cooperation represents a strong structuring force in the policy field, the targets of rural development – ‘rural areas’ or ‘rural populations’ – take on various meanings in national politics and people’s daily lives. These observations challenge the common expectation of comparability on which global development paradigms hinge. They further call for reconsidering the value of ‘rural’ areas in their own right, building on the meanings and visions that people attribute to them beyond their insertion into global capitalism.