Contradiction and change? NGOs, schools and the public faces of development

Abstract

This paper addresses the contradictions that increasingly shape the public faces of development. Focusing on examples of the communication of development by International Non-Governmental Organizations and UK schools, emphasis is placed on the social, political, economic and cultural dynamics that inform the public faces of development, and the tensions and dilemmas that these produce. The paper also highlights the need to look beyond the formal institutions and machineries of development to understand the contemporary production of development's public faces. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

‘Reading NGOs visually’—Implications of visual images for NGO management

“…While this study indicates the historical prevalence of mixed messages, there is also evidence to suggest growing ambivalences in current INGO appeals (Smith, 2004). More research is required on 'mixed' messages to sift overt and covert, 'negative' and 'positive' elements which respectively produce/reinforce and contest dominant discourses.…”

Understanding and Engaging with Development through International Volunteering

“…To challenge the moral order deep frame, development education needs to disrupt Eurocentric discourses and question the assumptions of modernism, so often taken as a premise in development policy (Hoff & Hickling‐Hudson, : 192). Development education should therefore avoid recourse to charity that ‘serves to mask the structural violence of contemporary global relations’ (Jefferess, : 32) and move away from moral certainties associated with the imperial ideology (Smith, : 746).…”

Critical distance: doing development education through international volunteering

“…The late twentieth century saw the emergence of unprecedented transnational civil society organising (Tarrow 2005) and an enlarged public profile for international development non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) in northern constituencies (Smith 2004). This merits critical examination of how various institutional actors reproduce and redefine acceptable ‘public faces of development’ (Smith and Yanacopulos 2004) to legitimate and sustain their activities.…”

“…This merits critical examination of how various institutional actors reproduce and redefine acceptable ‘public faces of development’ (Smith and Yanacopulos 2004) to legitimate and sustain their activities. Geographers have paid significant attention to representations of the South employed in product marketing, charity appeals, educational texts and subtexts (Castree 2001; Cohen 2001; Ruddick 2003; Smith 1999, 2004; Wright 2004), but less to development education as an actual practice and pedagogy. Informal educational spaces are particularly neglected, with existing research focusing on public policy, school curricula or classroom practice (e.g.…”