Postmodern Görüşlerin Yoksulluk Yazınına Katkısı Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme

Öz

Yoksulluk, başta azgelişmiş ülkeler olmak üzere tüm ülkelerde önemli bir sorundur ve genellikle gelirle ilişkilendirilir. Bireyler, gelirleri belirli bir düzeyin altına düştüğünde yoksul kabul edilirler. Kalkınma, yoksullukla mücadele ve modernleşme gibi kavramlar zengin ve yoksul ülke ayrımına ve yoksul ülkelerin zengin ülkelerin yardımıyla gelişeceği varsayımına dayanmaktadır. Bu varsayıma göre kalkınma politikaları ile yoksulluk azaltılacak ve azgelişmiş ülkelerin hayat seviyeleri yükseltilecektir. Azgelişmiş ülkelerde, gelir artışlarının ve büyümenin hedeflenmesi, onları bu dönüşümleri yaşamış, modernleşmiş, sanayileşmiş ve kalkınmış zengin ülkelere bağımlı hale getirir. Kalkınma söyleminin özetlenen bu bölümünün teorik yapısı modernist görüşlerce şekillendirilir. Postmodern görüşler, 1980 sonrası dönemde özellikle sosyal bilimlerde eleştirel bir alan oluşturmuş ve söylem analizi yardımıyla kalkınma ve yoksulluk yazınını, birer söylem olarak değerlendirmiştir. Kalkınma ve yoksulluk gibi kavramlar postmodern bir mercekle deşifre edildiğinde, bu sorunların tanımlanmasında ve bu sorunlarla mücadelede önemli farklılıklar ortaya çıkar. Postmodern görüşlerde yoksulluk yazınında önemli yere sahip olan kıtlık, sınırsız istekler, sınırlı kaynaklar, ihtiyaçlar vb. kavramların kalkınma söylemince geliştirilen bilinçli birer kurgunun araçları olduğu vurgulanır. Bu çalışmada, postmodern görüşlerin yoksulluk yazınına yönelttikleri eleştiriler ele alınmakta ve bu durumun yoksulluk ve yoksullukla mücadele konularında ortaya koyduğu farklı bakış açıları irdelenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Modernite
• Postmodernite
• Yoksulluk Söylemi
• Kıtlık
• Yerel Topluluklar

An Assessment on the Contribution of Postmodern Views to Poverty Literature

Öz

Poverty is an important problem in all countries, especially in underdeveloped countries, and is generally associated with income. Individuals are considered poor when their income falls below a specified level. Concepts such as development, poverty alleviation and modernization are based on the distinction between rich and poor countries and the assumption that poor countries will develop with the support of rich countries. According to this assumption, poverty will be reduced with development policies and the living standards of underdeveloped countries will increase. In underdeveloped countries, targeting income increases and growth makes them dependent on the modernized, industrialized and developed rich countries that have experienced these transformations. The theoretical structure of this part of the development discourse, which is summarized, is shaped by modernist views. Postmodern views created a critical field especially in social sciences in the post-1980 period and evaluated development and poverty literature as discourses with the help of discourse analysis. When concepts such as development and poverty are deciphered through a postmodern lens, important differences emerge in defining and tackling these problems. In postmodern views, it is emphasized that the concepts such as scarcity, unlimited wants, limited resources and needs, which have an important place in the literature of poverty, are tools of conscious fiction developed by the development discourse. In this study, the criticisms of postmodern views on the literature of poverty are discussed and the different perspectives that this situation reveals on the issues of poverty and poverty alleviation are examined.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Modernity
• Postmodernity
• Poverty Discourse
• Famine
• Local Communities

Kaynakça

1. Chakrabarti A. & Cullenberg S. (2005). Poverty and Post-Developmentalism: Class and Ethical Dimensions of Poverty Eradication. University of California, Riverside, Economics Department, Working Paper.
2. Dini, A. & Lippit, V. (2009). Poverty, From Orthodox to Heterodox Approaches: A Methodological Comparison Survey. University of California, Riverside, Economics Department, Working Paper.
3. Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
4. Esgün, İ. U. (2021). Yoksulluğun Geneolojisini Düşünmek: Antropolojik-Politik Bir Tarih Okuması. ViraVerita E-Journal: Interdisciplinary Encounters, (14), 76-112.
5. Esteva, G. (2010). Development. W. Sachs (Ed.), The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power (1-23). London: Zed Books.
6. Fernandez, B. (2010). Poor Practices: Contestations Around 'Below Poverty Line' Status in India. Third World Quarterly, 31(3), 415-430.
7. Green, M. & Hulme, D. (2005). From Correlates and Characteristics to Causes: Thinking About Poverty From a Chronic Poverty Perspective. World Development, 33(6), 867-879.
8. Illich, I. (2010). Needs. W. Sachs (Ed.), The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power (95-110). London: Zed Books.

9. Jackson, C. (1997). Post Poverty, Gender and Development?. IDS Bulletin, 28(3), 145-155.
10. Kaçanoğlu, M. (2020a). Amartya Sen’in Kalkınma Anlayışı: Post-Kalkınma Yaklaşımları Özelinde Bir İrdeleme. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
11. Kaçanoğlu, M. (2020b). Kalkınma Yazınında Farklılıklara Vurgu: Post Kalkınma Yaklaşım(lar)ı. Politik Ekonomik Kuram, 4(1), 94-123.
12. Karakaş, M. (2006). Yeni Yoksulluk Bağlamında Sosyal Kimlik ve Tüketimde Eşitsizlik. Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), 1-16.
13. Latouche, S. (2010). Standard of Living. W. Sachs (Ed.), The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power (279-294). London: Zed Books.
14. Lummis, C. D. (2010). Equality. W Sachs (Ed.), The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power (38-54). London: Zed Books.
15. Matthews, S. (2008). The Role of the Privileged in Responding to Poverty: Perspectives Emerging From the Post-Development Debate. Third World Quarterly, 29(6), 1035-1049.
16. Misturelli, F. & Heffernan, C. (2008). What is Poverty? A Diachronic Exploration of the Discourse on Poverty From the 1970s to the 2000s. The European Journal of Development Research, 20(4), 666-684.
17. Nandy, A. (2002). The Beautiful, Expanding Future of Poverty: Popular Economics as a Psychological Defense. International Studies Review, 4(2), 107-121.
18. Nustad, K. D. (2001). Development: The Devil We Know?. Third World Quarterly, 22(4), 479-489.
19. Procacci, G. (1991). Social Economy and the Government of Poverty. G. Burchell (Ed.), The Foucault Effect (151-168). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Rahnema, M. (2010a). Participation. W. Sachs (Ed.), The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power (127-144). London: Zed Books.
21. Rahnema, M. (2010b). Poverty. W. Sachs (Ed.), The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power (174-194). London: Zed Books.
22. Rist, G. (2008). The History of Development from Western Origins to Global Faith. London: Zed Books.
23. Sachs, W. (1992). Poor not Different. E. Paul & N. Manfred (Ed.), Real Life Econmics: Understanding Wealth Creation (161-165). London: Routledge.
24. Sahlins, M. (1998). The Original Affluent Society. M. Rahnema & V. Bawtree (Ed.), The Post-Development Reader (3-21). London: Zed Books.
25. Shaffer, P. (2012). Post-Development and Poverty: An Assessment. Third World Quarterly, 33(10), 1767-1782.
26. Shiva, V. (1988). Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India. London: Zed Books.
27. Shiva, V. (2010). Resources. W Sachs (Ed.), The Development Dictionary: A Guide to Knowledge as Power (228-242). London: Zed Books.
28. Tucker, B., Huff, A., Tsiazonera, T. J., Hajasoa, P. & Nagnisaha, C. (2011). When the Wealthy are Poor: Poverty Explanations and Local Perspectives in Southwestern Madagascar. American Anthropologist, 113(2), 291-305.
29. Yapa, L. (1996). What Causes Poverty?: A Postmodern View. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 86(4), 707-728.
30. Yapa, L. (1998). The Poverty Discourse and The Poor in Sri Lanka. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 23(1), 95-115.
31. Yapa, L. (2002). How The Discipline Of Geography Exacerbates Poverty in the Third World. Futures, 34(1), 33-46.
32. Yapa, L., Wisner, B. & Luce, H. R. (1995). Building a Case Against Economic Development. GeoJournal, 35(2), 105-118.
33. Ziai, A. (2015). Debate Post-Development: Premature Burials and Haunting Ghosts. Development and Change, 46(4), 833-854.
34. Ziai, A. (2009). Development: Projects, Power, and a Poststructuralist Perspective. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 34(2), 183-201.