Localisation and Locally Led Development in the Post-consensus Era: Transformation, Stagnation, or Annihilation?

IF 2.6 3区 社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
European Journal of Development Research Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-05 DOI:10.1057/s41287-025-00734-4
Susan P Murphy, Maeve McGandy
{"title":"Localisation and Locally Led Development in the Post-consensus Era: Transformation, Stagnation, or Annihilation?","authors":"Susan P Murphy, Maeve McGandy","doi":"10.1057/s41287-025-00734-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As the polycrisis of global ecological, political, economic and societal breakdown interacts and unfolds across sites and scales, the need to reform and reorient the international development cooperation regime is urgent. Locally led development (LLD) emerged as a panacea for development ineffectiveness across successive policy paradigms from the Washington Consensus to the Wall Street Consensus. Why such a scalar reorientation is gaining renewed traction, whether this signals a substantive shift towards transformative change in how development is conceptualised and practiced, and how this will influence the development paradigm, remains underexplored. To address these questions, this paper critically analyses the policies and practices of thirty-two institutional donors to assess the extent to which localisation and LLD are recognised and operationalised, enabled and constrained in practice. We offer insights on the current conjuncture and the potentialities within LLD to catalyse disruptive rather than destructive forces and transform development in a post-consensus era.</p>","PeriodicalId":47650,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Development Research","volume":"38 2","pages":"191-215"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13076224/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Development Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-025-00734-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As the polycrisis of global ecological, political, economic and societal breakdown interacts and unfolds across sites and scales, the need to reform and reorient the international development cooperation regime is urgent. Locally led development (LLD) emerged as a panacea for development ineffectiveness across successive policy paradigms from the Washington Consensus to the Wall Street Consensus. Why such a scalar reorientation is gaining renewed traction, whether this signals a substantive shift towards transformative change in how development is conceptualised and practiced, and how this will influence the development paradigm, remains underexplored. To address these questions, this paper critically analyses the policies and practices of thirty-two institutional donors to assess the extent to which localisation and LLD are recognised and operationalised, enabled and constrained in practice. We offer insights on the current conjuncture and the potentialities within LLD to catalyse disruptive rather than destructive forces and transform development in a post-consensus era.

后共识时代的地方化与地方主导发展:转型、停滞还是毁灭?
随着全球生态、政治、经济和社会崩溃的多重危机在不同领域和规模上相互作用和展开,改革和重新定位国际发展合作机制的必要性迫在眉睫。从“华盛顿共识”到“华尔街共识”的一系列政策范式中,地方主导的发展(LLD)成为解决发展无效问题的灵丹妙药。为什么这种标量的重新定位获得了新的动力,这是否标志着向发展的概念和实践方式的转型转变的实质性转变,以及这将如何影响发展范式,这些问题仍未得到充分探讨。为了解决这些问题,本文批判性地分析了32个机构捐助者的政策和实践,以评估本地化和LLD在实践中得到认可和实施、启用和限制的程度。我们对当前的形势和LLD内部的潜力提出了见解,以催化颠覆性而非破坏性力量,并在后共识时代改变发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Development Research (EJDR) redefines and modernises what international development is, recognising the many schools of thought on what human development constitutes. It encourages debate between competing approaches to understanding global development and international social development. The journal is multidisciplinary and welcomes papers that are rooted in any mixture of fields including (but not limited to): development studies, international studies, social policy, sociology, politics, economics, anthropology, education, sustainability, business and management. EJDR explicitly links with development studies, being hosted by European Association of Development Institutes (EADI) and its various initiatives. As a double-blind peer-reviewed academic journal, we particularly welcome submissions that improve our conceptual understanding of international development processes, or submissions that propose policy and developmental tools by analysing empirical evidence, whether qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods or anecdotal (data use in the journal ranges broadly from narratives and transcripts, through ethnographic and mixed data, to quantitative and survey data). The research methods used in the journal''s articles make explicit the importance of empirical data and the critical interpretation of findings. Authors can use a mixture of theory and data analysis to expand the possibilities for global development. Submissions must be well-grounded in theory and must also indicate how their findings are relevant to development practitioners in the field and/or policy makers. The journal encourages papers which embody the highest quality standards, and which use an innovative approach. We urge authors who contemplate submitting their work to the EJDR to respond to research already published in this journal, as well as complementary journals and books. We take special efforts to include global voices, and notably voices from the global South. Queries about potential submissions to EJDR can be directed to the Editors. EJDR understands development to be an ongoing process that affects all communities, societies, states and regions: We therefore do not have a geographical bias, but wherever possible prospective authors should seek to highlight how their study has relevance to researchers and practitioners studying development in different environments. Although many of the papers we publish examine the challenges for developing countries, we recognize that there are important lessons to be derived from the experiences of regions in the developed world. The EJDR is print-published 6 times a year, in a mix of regular and special theme issues; accepted papers are published on an ongoing basis online. We accept submissions in English and French.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书