| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
094026
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Why is it that the World Bank has failed to effectively incorporate the impact of regionalisation within its economic development strategies and policy advice for borrowing countries? This is an interesting puzzle given the increasing importance that scholarly observers, policy practitioners and development agencies have attached to regionalism and regionalisation in recent years. In the fiscal years 1995-2005, the World Bank provided only US$1.7 billion in support for regional (or multi-country) operations across the globe-this is less than 1 percent of its project and other funding overall. In South-East Asia, while the Asian Development Bank has had a particularly strong engagement with regionalism, the World Bank has only recently started to come on board with regional analysis and programs. The article proposes that the gap is due to a combination of institutional and ideological factors, and explores this proposition through a study of the World Bank in Vietnam.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
134394
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The ‘Great Foreign Aid Debate’ raged in the 2000s yet there are few overviews of it. This paper builds on heuristic classifications of the debate not to simply classify it, but rather to explore how it is perhaps not as ‘great’ as claimed and, in fact, is contributing to a narrowing of thinking about development possibilities. The paper explores the debate through the books released in the 10 years from 2001 that made both an academic and a media impact. It analyses what gets discussed and why and, equally importantly, what does not get discussed. In terms of what is missing, the paper posits that ‘left’ has disappeared and the progressive critique and support for aid has been left to scholars like Jeffrey Sachs and Jonathan Glennie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
160829
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Despite offerings at most universities, development studies in Australia does not have a professional body nor an academic association to prescribe core skills and standards, or to facilitate discussions about curriculum requirements and core competencies of graduates. This article analyses postgraduate coursework programmes focused on international and/or community development at 10 universities in Australia. It examines the faculty or school in which the programme is located, the core competencies the programmes aim to instil in graduates and how each programme is framed. In particular, it examines which skills have been defined as core requirements in line with the new Australian Qualifications Framework. The research found that, across Australia, development studies alternatively focuses students on critical thinking and understanding the history of ‘development’ or on teaching the practical skills (such as project and finance management) needed as development workers. We argue that the discipline needs to think more about core competencies and engage more actively in attempts to decolonise development studies teaching.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
093256
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Routledge, 2010.
|
| Description |
xvii, 227p.
|
| Series |
Routeldge studies in Asia's Informations
|
| Standard Number |
9780415547437
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 054652 | 332.153209597/ENG 054652 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|