Search results
Brazil has traditionally had a somewhat ambiguous view of its position in the Global South. Brazilian diplomatic discourse has episodically adopted a ‘country of the South’ rhetoric, but outside the flag of convenience role the idea of Brazil as a ‘Southern’ or developing country has never sat particularly well with the traditional national elite. Instead, the guiding logic within the Brazilian foreign policy establishment has historically been that the country’s natural affinity is with Western Europe and North America, not the Spanish-speaking republics of
development of human rights and bioethics’ ( 2017 : 59), for the reason that is was unanimously accepted in 2005 by the international community of 191 member states (Rheeder, 2017 : 59). This chapter is situated in the global south, and written from the South African context. The UDBHR is also explicitly aimed at developing countries such as South Africa, stating: The aims of this Declaration are … to promote equitable access to medical, scientific and technological developments as well as the greatest
economic growth and development have not exactly followed the familiar lines of industrialisation, de-industrialisation, and suburbanisation as in the case of Europe and North America. In the Global South, for instance, the rural and the agrarian do not represent a spatially or temporally distant past, or a faraway hinterland that is waiting to be encroached upon or assimilated. 7
-democratic settlement ( Streeck, 2017 ). Over the last two or three decades, driven by the neoliberalism of the conservative counter-revolution, this social protection has largely evaporated. Insurance- and company-based social protection has historically been limited or absent in the global South. Late-modern precarity begins here first ( Munck, 2013 ). Encouraged by the imposition of structural adjustment, the South’s informal economies began to rapidly expand from the end the 1970s, absorbing the surplus population thrown off as public-sector employment
US, the EU and other Western donor governments has at least generally come with certain stipulations about human rights and relative autonomy for international relief NGOs in the field. The Chinese have no such agenda, and governments in the Global South have come to understand this perfectly. In short, there is no need to apply to Washington or Brussels when making the same application to Beijing comes at a considerably lower cost in terms of what has to be conceded vis-à-vis humanitarian access, let alone human rights guarantees. The advent
This book provides a powerful diagnosis of why the global governance of science struggles in the face of emerging powers. In the field of the life sciences, China and India are both seen as emerging ‘dragons’ and as ‘elephants’. Both countries have formidable resources and are boldly determined to have their presence felt. Yet even when transnational regulatory pledges are made, there often remains an ‘elephant in the room’. Would these scientific ‘dragons’ really abide by the agreed rules? The book provides an essential insight into the logic of science governance in the two countries through unpacking critical events in the first two decades of the twenty-first century. This includes controversies on gene research, stem cell experimental therapies, GM crops, vaccines, the CRISPR technologies and the COVID pandemic. It argues that the ‘subversiveness’ assumed in China’s and India’s rise reflects many of the challenges that are shared by scientific communities worldwide. Previously marginalised actors, both from the Global South and Global North, contest conventional thinking of how science and scientists should be governed. As science outgrows traditional colonies of expertise and authority, good governance necessarily needs to be ‘de-colonised’ to acquire the capacity to think from and with others. By highlighting epistemic injustice within contemporary science, the book extends theories of decolonisation. This book is indispensable for scientists, policy makers and science communicators who are working with or in China and India, and for anyone interested in science-society relations in a global age.
Introduction The promotion of female entrepreneurship in the global South has animated a great deal of feminist research on the World Bank, public-private partnerships and celebrity-endorsed initiatives. Hingeing on a ‘business case for gender equality’, it recasts the ‘Third World Woman’ ( Mohanty, 1984 ) as agentic and endlessly enterprising ( Wilson, 2011 ; Altan-Olcay, 2016 ; Roberts and Zulfiqar, 2019 ). Recent scholarship, however
between the work that many humanitarians expect for themselves compared to that which they are prepared to offer refugees. Be it employees in Geneva or staff working directly with refugees in the so-called Global South, humanitarians expect decent salaries and steady contracts; hopefully they also expect this work to be stimulating and offer opportunities for upwards professional mobility. However, these and other components of decent work are rarely available to refugees entering
‘Program for Youth Initiative’ was created to promote field assignments and exchanges, and a scheme of ‘education of Canadians of school age’ started in earnest, under the advice of a new National Advisory Committee on Development Education ( CIDA, 1988–89 : 2; 1989–90 : 53). Many factors explain the addition of Development Education in CIDA during four decades of growth ( Meehan, 2019 ; Morrison, 1998 ). For those in charge of Canada’s official programs of development with countries of the Global South, school programming represented one important means to garner
‘impact’ and ‘capacity building’ in conflict research from often unidirectional conceptualisations (i.e. skills and knowledge flowing from the ‘Global North’ to the ‘Global South’), to a more complex picture of mutual learning and knowledge exchange. While our key objective, as situated within a wider international research project, was to create a locally relevant ‘creative research output’, I suggest that a significant ‘impact’ made through our collaboration was in the