“…In response to that inadequacy, Duffield argues, “development has historically provided a solution in the form of moral trusteeship” (, p. 61), tracing examples from late 19th‐century missionary projects to interwar British colonial policies of community development to post‐cold war humanitarian aid policies. Critical geographers of development have shown how that historical arc has important consequences, arguing that notions of inadequate “others”, trusteeship and the need for expert, external, interventions are implicitly and explicitly embedded in contemporary US and UK development policies and development geographies (Kothari, , ; Mercer et al, ; Mitchell, ; Power, ; Sidaway, , ). Calls for the decolonising of development geographies have led to interrogations of the imbrication of colonial imaginations, knowledges and practices with contemporary geopolitics and geoeconomics.…”