The Evolution of and Current Debate in Development Thinking : What Defines Good Development?

When development economics emerged as an independent field in the post-1945 years, the answer to the question what the makings of development are was rather simple: Development equals GNP growth. On following current discussions in politics and business but also in much of academia, one suspects that after nearly six decades of development studies - with rich and varied outputs - we are back to square one: the achievement of economic growth as a development target is omnipresent and any other issue only seems to play a subordinate role.But what does that mean for the lives of the vast majority of the world‘s population who lives in underdeveloped economies? How much do per capita incomes or growth rates really say about the developmental state of a society? Not a whole lot, I argue in this paper. And while the alternative leaves many questions unanswered, I maintain that it is still preferable, as it provides a conceptual framework that can do what an income figure alone cannot. It can tell us whether the people in a developing country feel that their freedom to live the lives they want to live has increased. This paper is undertaking a historic review of growth theory, dependency theories, modernization theory and Washington consensus based development constructs before moving on to the current debate driven by the differences of development views between the post-Washington consensus and the capabilities approach