Territorial development. A new approach to development processes for the economies of the developing countries
| Autor | Bernard Pecqueur |
| Cargo | Professor do Institut de Géographie Alpine, Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble - França |
| Páginas | 8-32 |
http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/1807-1384.2013v10n2p8
Esta obra foi licenciada com uma Licença Creative Commons - Atribuição 3.0 Não
Adaptada.
TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT. A NEW APPROACH TO DEVELOPMENT
PROCESSES FOR THE ECONOMIES OF THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
1
Bernard Pecqueur2
Abstract
This article seeks to show how the elements of a (flexible and adaptable) model of
territorial development, whose roots are anchored in the analysis of coordination
among pre-capitalist actors, can take on a more concrete form in developing
economies. Our hypothesis is that the application of this model functions as a
resurgence of pre-capitalist production relations, revalidated by local practices and
renewed by territorial dynamics. Is such a return to pre-capitalist ways possible and
realistic despite the obstacles and, if so, under what conditions? These are the
questions this paper seeks to address, by the way of a specifically economic analysis
focused on the dynamics of productive systems. On the first part, we review the
fundamental principles of a model of territorial development based on a local system
of actors, which assumes that the territory is “constructed” and is founded, according
to our approach, on the principle of specification. On the second part, we assess the
feasibility of this model in developing economies, remembering that we are starting
from practices that are already old; practices involving risks and that assume certain
conditions of implementation.
Keywords: Territorial development. Territorial resource. Territorial economy.
Localised agri-food systems. Developing countries.
Introduction
In response to recent changes in the international economy, territorial
development is emerging as a possible solution for not only the industrialised
economies, but also the economies of the developing countries. In the context of
globalization, liberal solutions rooted solely in the macroeconomic sphere do not, on
their own, appear to provide innovative responses to the development needs. Stiglitz
(2006) has clearly demonstrated in this regard the obstinacy of the major
international organisations (IMF and World Bank) in refusing to recognise the
relevance of the local scale as an effective level for implementing development
1 Este artigo foi apresentado oralmente no VI Congresso Internacional Sistemas Agroalimentares
Localizados - os SIAL face às oportunidades e aos desafios do novo contexto global em maio de
2013, na cidade de Florianópolis, SC, Brasil.
2 Professor do Institut de Géographie Alpine, Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble, França. E-mail:
bernard.pecqueur@ujf-grenoble.fr
9
R. Inter. Interdisc. INTERthesis, Florianópolis, v.10, n.2, p. 8-32, Jul./Dez. 2013
processes.
3 Discourse on solely the macroeconomic dimension of development
continues to dominate discussion among university researchers and the main
sponsoring organisations alike. Recent moves by French-speaking African state
towards administrative and political decentralisation are, however, evidence of a new
interest in addressing questions on the local scale.
On the early years of the crisis of the 1970s, measures were taken in
response to the rural exodus and, more generally, to the damage resulting from the
relocation of economic activities following the acceleration of globalization. In France,
these initiatives were able to take the form of a “pays” movement that acknowledges
the existence and dynamic of spaces created by local stakeholders. In the same
period, Italian economists rediscovered territorialized forms of production: the
industrial districts4 that depend on cooperative relations between actors that concern
not only the market but also reciprocity. The latter gives new impetus to the
gift/counter-gift relationship identified by anthropologists following the work of Marcel
Mauss, particularly in African rural societies, and whose role, even in industrial
societies, is becoming better understood.
These new perspectives on territorialized development are based on a few
hypotheses defended by the contemporary thinkers on development. Sen (1999) put
forward the idea that development cannot result from behavioural mechanics and
that Benthamian utilitarianism is simplistic. Economics is a moral science, meaning
that ethics is an integral part of coordination between actors. For Sen, the cultural
specificity of actors is a necessary constant and the search for fairness a must.
Krugman (1995) paid tribute to the “developmentalist” economists such as F. Perroux
and A. Hirschman, while stressing the need to rediscover the role of geography in
development issues. In this he is furthering the work of A. Marshall and his notion of
externalities, particularly local, which he defines as follows: “The idea that clustering
of producers in a particular location yields advantages, and that these advantages in
turn explain such clustering, is an old one […].” Twenty-five years ago, A. Hirschman
had already formulated one of the fundamental principles of territorial development:
3 They will note however in the report of the World Bank 2009, an enlargement of the analyse in
concepts and in developments of the New Geographical Economy which favours the notions of
“density, distance and division (i.e. territorial’ mosaics of various kinds)” (See Scott, 2009).
4 See Courlet (2001) for a discussion on the phenomenon of districts and its consequences for
development. For a global review of literature on the subject (See Becattini; Bellandi; Da Propris,
2009).
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO