This term paper presents two alternative development concepts originating from different cultural contexts and social positions, both aiming at generating another view on development including a conscious handling of the environment, social equality and a happy life in fullness. Conducting a comparative analysis of the two alternative development concepts – "Buen Vivir" (Ecuador) and "Gross National Happiness" (Bhutan) – the author tends to identify core aspects of both concepts and expound the countries’ strategies of implementation as well as their success and failures in doing so in order to eventually make a statement about the concepts’ potentials and limits.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Buen Vivir
2.1. Context of emergence
2.2. Content of Buen Vivir within the Ecuadorian Constitution
2.3. Planned implementation
2.4. Actual implementation: Yasuní-ITT-Initiative
3. Gross National Happiness
3.1. Context of emergence
3.2. Content and Measurement
3.3. Planned implementation
3.4. Actual implementation: Driglam Namzha
4. Comparison
4.1. Similarities
4.2. Differences
5. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines alternative development models by conducting a comparative analysis of Buen Vivir in Ecuador and Gross National Happiness in Bhutan, aiming to identify their core principles, implementation strategies, and inherent limitations within a globalized, capitalist-driven world.
- Critique of neoliberal economic growth paradigms and GDP-focused development.
- Exploration of holistic, post-development theories originating in the Global South.
- Comparative analysis of environmental protection, social equity, and cultural preservation.
- Case studies on the Yasuní-ITT-Initiative (Ecuador) and Driglam Namzha (Bhutan).
- Assessment of the potentials and challenges of integrating alternative paradigms into state policy.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1. Context of emergence
The term Buen Vivir emerged for the first time within the intellectual discourse in Latin America in line with a research project of the Instituto Latinoamericano de Investigaciones Sociales between 2000 and 2002. The indigenous anthropologist Carlos Viteri Gualinga showed that there is neither a word for development existing in indigenous languages nor an explicit perception of development within the communities in Amazonia, but rather a holistic view on objectives of human efforts (Villalba 2013: 1429). The latter are about searching for and creating material and spiritual conditions to construct and preserve Buen Vivir, which is defined as harmonious life (Viteri 2002: 2). The Spanish wording Buen Vivir used as the translation of the Quechua term Sumak Kawsay is inasmuch delusive as it is not possible to build an antipode to Sumak Kawsay in the sense of bad living. Buen Vivir rather is about harmony and perfection of the biotic community that permits living in fullness based on mutual respect and reciprocity (Yampara 2010: n.p.). To better understand this concept one should look at its ancestral, Andean roots in an animistic ontology (Fatheur 2011: 17; Schmid 2014: 15). Following a biocentric rather than an anthropocentric posture with a utilitarian view on nature, Andean communities belief in the interconnectedness and mutual dependency of all life and thereby recognize intrinsic values in environment (Gudynas 2011: 443). These ideas of Buen Vivir have been – along with great participation and commitment of citizens and indigenous organizations – incorporated in the new Ecuadorian Constitution. The latter was approved in 2008 within the framework of a political process of left progression as a reaction to dominating western capitalist principles of living better dismantling neo-liberal policies (Acosta 2009: 219; Walsh 2010: 15, 20).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the dominance of capitalist development paradigms and introduces the research aim of comparing Buen Vivir and Gross National Happiness as alternative concepts.
2. Buen Vivir: Explores the Andean origins and the institutionalization of Good Living in the Ecuadorian constitution as a biocentric, socialist alternative to neoliberalism.
3. Gross National Happiness: Analyzes the Bhutanese model, its Buddhist roots, the nine domains of measurement, and its implementation through state policy and traditional codes like Driglam Namzha.
4. Comparison: Juxtaposes both concepts regarding their shared critique of economic growth and their differing approaches to culture, state-level implementation, and social inclusivity.
5. Conclusion: Summarizes the findings, arguing that these models are "works in progress" that, while not universal, offer essential insights into sustainable and equitable development.
Keywords
Buen Vivir, Gross National Happiness, sustainable development, neoliberalism, Ecuador, Bhutan, Pachamama, Driglam Namzha, social equity, biocentric, post-development, environmental protection, indigenous rights, wellbeing, economic alternatives.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper evaluates two alternative development concepts—Buen Vivir (Ecuador) and Gross National Happiness (Bhutan)—to understand how they challenge traditional capitalist notions of development and material progress.
Which specific alternative development concepts are analyzed?
The study focuses on Buen Vivir, an Ecuadorian model rooted in Andean cosmology, and Gross National Happiness, a Bhutanese framework influenced by Mahayana Buddhist values.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to identify the core principles and implementation strategies of both concepts, evaluate their successes and failures, and assess their overall potential as viable alternatives to GDP-driven development.
What methodology does the author apply?
The author conducts a qualitative comparative analysis, evaluating governmental documents, official plans, and existing scholarly literature to contrast the two models.
What is covered in the main body of the paper?
The main body examines the origins, definitions, constitutional/legal frameworks, and empirical implementation of each concept, followed by a direct comparison of their similarities and differences.
How would you characterize this work?
It is a scholarly inquiry into post-development paradigms, defined by keywords such as biocentrism, social solidarity, cultural resilience, and holistic wellbeing.
What was the outcome of the Yasuní-ITT-Initiative?
The initiative, which aimed to protect the Yasuní National Park by leaving oil deposits underground, was declared unsuccessful in 2013 due to a lack of international financial support, forcing the government to proceed with extraction.
What is Driglam Namzha?
Driglam Namzha is a Bhutanese code of etiquette that defines expected behavior, language, and dress, acting as a pillar of GNH to preserve national identity and harmony, though it has been criticized for enforcing cultural homogenization.
- Quote paper
- Silvana Vialova (Author), 2018, Theory and practice of two alternative development concepts. Growth versus quality of life, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/913382
