Conversations Between Development Studies and International Studies

By Andy Sumner

At a set of recent meetings, the question of the dialogue between Development Studies (DS) and International Studies (IS) has been the topic of focus.

First, in Warsaw at the Global International Studies Association (aka WISC) conference, then in Osaka at the Asian Political and International Studies Association conference, and recently, at the EADI directors meetings in Krakow at the Polish International Studies Association’s conference.

Here I explore the nature of DS in the mid-2020s, its intersections with IS, and potential areas for a conversation between both.

DS and IS have shared many interactions over the years, yet the full potential of their dialogue remains underexplored. With the contemporary challenges of an emergent global geopolitics, now is a good time to think about how DS and IS might better engage with one another.

At the outset, it is worth saying that IS is not only international relations (IR). It is a much broader church than IR, which itself is also cross-disciplinary. The two often get conflated but are distinct. IR tends to be about relations between states, mostly about political power, but also economic and human rights. While IR has expanded to embrace non-state centric approaches and concepts, and to engage with international political economy and international law among other areas, it doesn’t really go as far as IS in embracing comparative politics, regional and cultural studies, domestic governance agendas, and indeed Development Studies, international trade, and international business. So, one of the main problems facing IS is the hegemony of IR, perceived and real. This is potentially analogous to how orthodox Economics is perceived within DS.

The Evolution of Development Studies

Whether the origin story of DS is seen in colonial studies; in the 1930s/1940s development economics of Global South scholars; in neo-colonialism post-WWII or in the Bandung conference consolidation of anti-imperialist sentiments depends on the school of thought taken. What is clear is that Development Studies was, in its origins, as much a southern-led field as it was northern-led. A lot of the dynamic theorisation was coming from the south, especially the more critical theorising.

Across the world there are now at least 132 universities with QS-ranked programs of Development Studies across 32 countries offering post-graduate teaching (and many more that are not labelled, or ranked in this list). Of the 32 countries that have any DS postgraduate programmes, half are in the Global South, in Asia, Latin America and Africa.

As a result, DS is a diverse, highly contested field, containing multiple schools of thought. This diversity reflects very different interpretations of ‘development,’ and whether the scope of DS is the global South within a global hierarchy or if or how the Global North is part of the study of DS too.

Dialogue Between Development Studies and International Studies

DS and IS share several characteristics, particularly in their cross-disciplinary nature and a significant focus on the Global South. Both fields bring together insights from economics, sociology, political science, and other social science disciplines.

Often, they are both normative in orientation, not only analysing but also critiquing and proposing changes in the ‘real world’. So how could DS and IS could pursue deepened dialogue?

First, in discussing approaches to cross-disciplinarity: Both DS and IS are inherently cross-disciplinary, yet the practical integration of disciplines remains challenging. DS’s ambition to blend perspectives across social sciences (and beyond) mirrors IS’s own struggles with integrating multiple disciplinary insights into cohesive analyses. Thus, DS and IS could foster more robust cross-disciplinary approaches, better equipping each field to analyse complex, multi-scalar issues like climate change, migration, and poverty for example. Such cross or even inter-disciplinary dialogue could help DS refine its theorising and methods.

Second, in discussion on pluralising or decolonising knowledge. There is a shared interest in decolonizing knowledge and its production. DS has much focus on reflecting on this area. And IS and IR do too, following Amitav Acharya’s seminal works on ‘global IR’. In fact the two debates resonate clearly with similar issues and questions arising. Both fields critique Western-only theorising and worldviews and seek to amplify perspectives from the Global South. As a multipolar world is establishing itself, this is an area that DS and IS can push further, thereby enriching both fields.

Conclusions: A dynamic conversation

A dialogue between Development Studies and International Studies holds significant promise for advancing both fields. By incorporating insights from IS, strengthening cross-disciplinary methodologies, and collaborating to decolonize knowledge production, DS can enhance its relevance and analytical rigour. In the mid-2020s, with an increasingly fraught and multi-polar world strained by poly-crises, DS and IS can transcend traditional academic boundaries between the two areas of enquiry through a conversation.

Andy Sumner is Professor of International Development at King’s College, London, and President of EADI.

Image: Pixel-mixer under a free licence on Pixabay