Glocal Development for Sustainable Social Change
- Brief created: 2023
- For development
Glocal Development contests hegemonic Development Communication models, combines Glocal Engagement Dimensions (intellect, morality, emotion, and action) with Principles of Glocal Engagement (adaptation of Klyukanov’s intercultural communication principles); and proposes respectful partnerships, negotiation of values, knowledges, perspectives, and worldviews among local and global communities.
Brief made by
Brief based on:
Chapter in an Edited Book (2020) ↗
My research on glocalization and glocal development is a contesting framework; it seeks to challenge, oppose and disrupt the hegemonic western viewpoint. Rather than being apologetic or staying silent, non-western communities should become more vocal in protesting the hegemony of western worldviews. Development communication models espoused Western worldviews of the developing world legitimating an ongoing transfer and application of Western ideals, with little room for the non-western world to share developing world perspectives based on their lived experience. It is necessary to contest the dominant development communication paradigms which regard the developing world as “in need of fixing or revitalisation”, treating developing community enhancement and progress as a ‘reconstruction project’ among first world superpowers.
Key findings
From a critical review of the old development communication models and critical analysis of their impact on developing world communities, it was found that development communication perspectives led to further impoverishment of developing world communities through the bonded development agendas of the IMF and the World Bank.
It became necessary to seek alternate models to development communication.
Therefore, glocal development which provides a framework for local and global communities to engage in mutually beneficial community empowerment has been identified as an equitable framework. "Glocal Development (GD) refers to the simultaneous development of both local and global communities as a partnership in human endeavor rather than as an economic venture where one partner is subordinate to the other" (Patel, 2020). Furthermore, "GD builds glocal communities based on equity, inclusivity, and diversity principles and subscribes to the “third culture” (Lee, 2003) building perspective in which “cultural wealth” (Patel) is the “transactional currency” (Patel, 2020) thereby providing opportunities for developing and developed countries to partner together to achieve the UNESCO 2030 SDGs. "Glocal Development is an equalizer of sorts as it attempts to remove the divisional references among the communities from the three worlds …" (Patel, 2012)
Communities in the developing world, such as in the Asian Pacific region, appear to incorporate various components of the glocal development paradigm .
The Asian-Pacific higher education community are working together in partnership, constantly sharing information, knowledge and action change agendas. For example, in the field of international higher education, the Asian Pacific region have taken steps through APUCEN (Asia-Pacific University Community Engagement Network) to advance collaborative engagement and partnerships through mutual exchange of learning and teaching perspectives.
Presenting glocal development as an alternative to internationalization and to development communication is a challenge because it has not reached 'critical mass'.
In my thirty year engagement with western higher education institutions, it appears that there is a reluctance to accept glocal development as a mutually beneficial collaborative future-oriented, sustainable paradigm. This is disconcerting because over fifty years after development communication models were thrust upon developing world communities, alternate frameworks remain less visible in the glocal development discourse although developing world communities are perhaps more inclined toward embracing glocal development.
Proposed action
Policymakers and practitioners must apply a solutions-based context to these forum discussions
Instead of working in isolation within their own governments and teams, policymakers and practitioners need to adopt the glocal development partnership model and collaborate, negotiate, exchange worldviews and lived experience among developing world communities
Helpful resources
Evidence: Vijay Prasad on the “colonial mindset of the West” [Access resource]
Background: GWU-Grameen Bank & Trust Partnership Link [Access resource]
Comments
You must log in to ask a question
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Ramya Zwaal for preparation assistance
We would like to extend a special thank you to Ramya Zwaal, for their invaluable contribution in assisting the preparation of this research summary.
Are you a researcher looking to make a real-world impact? Join Acume and transform your research into a practical summary.
Already have an account? Log in
Discover more
Sponsored links
Glocal Development for Sustainable Social Change
Cite this brief: Patel, Fay. 'Glocal Development for Sustainable Social Change'. Acume. https://www.acume.org/r/glocal-development-for-sustainable-social-change/
Brief created by: Dr Fay Patel | Year brief made: 2023
Original research:
- Patel, F., Glocal Development for Sustainable Social Change In Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2014-3_77. – https://www.springerprofessional.de/en/glocal-development-for-sustainable-social-change/18062588
Research brief:
Glocal Development contests hegemonic Development Communication models, combines Glocal Engagement Dimensions (intellect, morality, emotion, and action) with Principles of Glocal Engagement (adaptation of Klyukanov’s intercultural communication principles); and proposes respectful partnerships, negotiation of values, knowledges, perspectives, and worldviews among local and global communities.
My research on glocalization and glocal development is a contesting framework; it seeks to challenge, oppose and disrupt the hegemonic western viewpoint. Rather than being apologetic or staying silent, non-western communities should become more vocal in protesting the hegemony of western worldviews. Development communication models espoused Western worldviews of the developing world legitimating an ongoing transfer and application of Western ideals, with little room for the non-western world to share developing world perspectives based on their lived experience. It is necessary to contest the dominant development communication paradigms which regard the developing world as “in need of fixing or revitalisation”, treating developing community enhancement and progress as a ‘reconstruction project’ among first world superpowers.
Findings:
From a critical review of the old development communication models and critical analysis of their impact on developing world communities, it was found that development communication perspectives led to further impoverishment of developing world communities through the bonded development agendas of the IMF and the World Bank.
It became necessary to seek alternate models to development communication.
Therefore, glocal development which provides a framework for local and global communities to engage in mutually beneficial community empowerment has been identified as an equitable framework. “Glocal Development (GD) refers to the simultaneous development of both local and global communities as a partnership in human endeavor rather than as an economic venture where one partner is subordinate to the other” (Patel, 2020). Furthermore, “GD builds glocal communities based on equity, inclusivity, and diversity principles and subscribes to the “third culture” (Lee, 2003) building perspective in which “cultural wealth” (Patel) is the “transactional currency” (Patel, 2020) thereby providing opportunities for developing and developed countries to partner together to achieve the UNESCO 2030 SDGs. “Glocal Development is an equalizer of sorts as it attempts to remove the divisional references among the communities from the three worlds …” (Patel, 2012)
Communities in the developing world, such as in the Asian Pacific region, appear to incorporate various components of the glocal development paradigm .
The Asian-Pacific higher education community are working together in partnership, constantly sharing information, knowledge and action change agendas. For example, in the field of international higher education, the Asian Pacific region have taken steps through APUCEN (Asia-Pacific University Community Engagement Network) to advance collaborative engagement and partnerships through mutual exchange of learning and teaching perspectives.
Presenting glocal development as an alternative to internationalization and to development communication is a challenge because it has not reached ‘critical mass’.
In my thirty year engagement with western higher education institutions, it appears that there is a reluctance to accept glocal development as a mutually beneficial collaborative future-oriented, sustainable paradigm. This is disconcerting because over fifty years after development communication models were thrust upon developing world communities, alternate frameworks remain less visible in the glocal development discourse although developing world communities are perhaps more inclined toward embracing glocal development.
Advice:
Policymakers and practitioners must apply a solutions-based context to these forum discussions
- They must identify what the key challenges are, how they are going to meet the challenges and resolve the issues, and who the key players are at national and community levels. Agency must come from community leaders, education leaders, and government leaders, however they have to come together to action change and to speak from the heart as one humanity.
Instead of working in isolation within their own governments and teams, policymakers and practitioners need to adopt the glocal development partnership model and collaborate, negotiate, exchange worldviews and lived experience among developing world communities
- Rather than host annual conferences, they should come together frequently as an “action for change forum” which enhances glocal development through visible and tangible actioned change outcomes.
