Introduction
Since the independence period, Africa is in the quest for development. From west Africa, through central to east Africa, leaders come and go, promising their people development, especially those living in deprivation such as rural people. Actually, much attention is given to what rural development promises to bring to people who are considered poor and in need of development, but no similar attention is given to the meaning and essence of these development agendas in rural areas. This essay discusses the different meanings attached to the concept of rural development and their implication. The essay will begin with a discussion on the concept of rural and its conflictual meanings. Following will be a discussion on different meanings of rural development, and the essay will end with a discussion about how power shapes the meanings and practices of rural development.
What is rural and rural development?
Firstly, rural area means different things to different people. We can argue that there is not a clearcut definition of what a rural area is, because it is, according to Ndlovu (2017:1) a product of social construction, whereby every society looks at, and defines it according to its own perspective. In other words, each people can consciously or unconsciously select amongst the many features that go into the making of a society and its organisational structure to define what is rural area for them. As result, what people in Europe or Asia believe to be a rural area may not be considered as such in Africa. in fact, the word “rural” by itself means nothing to many Africans, as Plaatjie (2020:9) correctly stresses that the idea of “rural” does not exist in African philosophy, and it does not have linguistic equivalents in the bantu languages of South Africa, in particular. By saying this, we reiterate that the concept “rural” and whatever it relates to are but products of social construction, which other people may not find necessary to conceive or utilise.
Having said that, we still need to attempt and give an answer to the question of what a rural area is, maybe it will be constructive to rephrase the question so that it becomes, “what can be considered a rural area in African perspective in comparison to what it is in European perspective?”. By acknowledging spatial differences already established in Africa, we can make use of Chigbu’s (2013:814) definition of rural area as “land-spaces with culturally defined identity; situated within a place statutorily recognised as non-urban; and occupied by settlers predominantly depending on primary sources of labour for their livelihood”. Further, he (Chigbu 2013:815) provides an analysis of rural areas that shed light on various features that can help to identify, and even conceptualise a rural area, features such as cultural homogeneity, traditional lifestyle, lower population, less infrastructural conveniences among others. However, the way in which people intend to interpret the presence or the absence of these features dictates how they view and define a rural area and how it must be dealt with, which introduces us to another meaning (Eurocentric conception) of a rural area. The above description of a rural area as a natural setting characterized by its own cultural homogeneity, traditional lifestyle and others, is according to Eurocentric view a state of backwardness, deprivation and suffering in desperate need of European intervention (Plaatjie 2020:9). In this regard, rural area and urban area are the opposite of one another, and both represent values or cultures that are incompatible to each other and cannot cohabitate side by side, such as wealth versus poverty, development versus underdevelopment, modernisation versus backwardness. This is according to Plaatjie (2020:4), a Euro-American-centrism dualistic perception of the world, that requires that one thing must be the opposite of another, hence European culture is the opposite of, and superior to non-European cultures. Clearly, the concept of rural is open to many interpretations, according to what people choose to observe and what they indent to do with their observations; maybe it is only the rural people who can give a proper understanding of what they think about their own space and identity.
Rural development
Secondly, linked to the definition of rural area is the practice of rural development. As already stated above, the meaning that people assign to a concept such as that of rural area also determines their approach and goals toward the study and practice of development in relation to rural areas. Chigbu (2013:818) stresses that “in most SSA countries, development is tantamount to modernisation (or an escape from rurality) at the rural level”. This consideration of development represents a Eurocentric negationist view of rural areas with people and cultures being represented by them; it also emphasises that rural development must above all be a Europeanisation of the rural areas and people. Mostly, these views are built upon, and reinforced by the migration of the people from rural to urban areas, with statistics now showing that 54% of global population resided in urban areas in 2014, and the number is estimated to reach 66 percent by 2050 (Chigbu 2015:1067). When these statistics are being presented, the picture painted is that of a world that is improving (by means of urbanisation) in taking many people out of poverty and backwardness (which is represented by rural areas) into urban spaces where they have the opportunity of becoming modern people in the image of European. Moreover, Ndlovu (2017:4) argues that rural development is a concept that always implies a linear process through which some people are ahead in terms of development, with others lagging in their quest to catchup with those developed. This Eurocentric observation attempts to depict economic and infrastructural differences between Europe and, for example Africa as a natural process resulting from the rational ability of European thinking, and the African inability to use the same rationality. In reality, this assumption undermines the role colonialism has played in keeping most of non-European spaces behind in terms of their own development.
Furthermore, in contrast to the above controversial Eurocentric explanation of rural development, the other perspective (mostly spearheaded by Africans) about rural development is not of rural to urban migration; physically or culturally. In other words, rural development in the African view does not imply urbanising the rural (Plaatjie 2020:9), it is rather a development process that preserves the rural features of space and people. Chigbu (2013:812) had the following question to ask, “do rural communities want development that erases their very heritage or identity?”. This question challenges development practices that attempt to turn villages into urban areas, and finally turn Africans into little French, little British or little Portuguese, by destroying the very fabric of their own identity, so much that rural people will look at their spaces as wealthless (even if they contain enormous natural resources), and look at themselves as incapable of anything, and migrate to urban areas where they expect to meet their dreams. For example, every year, there are Africans dying in the Mediterranean water, trying to flee Africa to join Europe, which is developed, so that they can catch up with development. This is the rural development that is being criticised by the antagonistic voices of Eurocentric development. For instance, Chigbu (2013:818) speaks about rurality as a choice, where he cites communities around the world who are deciding to reverse their urban identities to become rural. In this case, rural development can be considered as a unique agenda of developing rural areas, not into something else, but into themselves, while being also the centres of sustainability in economy, healthcare, education and other positive changes.
Power and meaning
Finally, the meanings of rural development are not natural or static, they change with time, space and ideology. Ndlovu (2020:1) argues that the meanings of rural development are always subject to social construction by human beings who are engaged in the process of meaning-making. The key word in the above argument is “meaning-making”, from which we can also argue that the meanings people ascribe to things or phenomenon determine the nature of their interactions with those phenomena and their expectations. Precisely, every meaning given to the concept of rural development underlies a particular agenda of those making the meanings, hence power plays an important role in the process of meaning-making, and therefore in setting the agenda. For instance, Ndlovu (2020:1) stresses that the state of inequality in the world renders some voices more dominant than others, thus the hegemonic views of the dominant groups provide a widely accepted meaning of the concept and practice. From this, it can be said that whatever rural development means today serves a particular interest of the dominant group. For example, when development means modernisation or Europeanisation, it intends to make Africans or non-Europeans consumers of European products, as they are longing to emulate Eurocentric development. At the end, it is Europe that benefits and maintains its power. Furthermore, the meaning of rural development is not static, as the power sustaining it can always shift from time to time, and the less powerful voices can always rise and resist the meanings imposed on them (Ndlovu 2020:2). For example, the rural development as modernisation was once accepted as the right path to betterment, but today with the world power shifting from Europe to other parts of the world, the meaning of development is also being challenged as it can be observed in this essay through various and opposing perspectives on rural development.
Conclusion
In nutshell, this essay discussed different meanings and interpretations of rural development. The essay started with an explanation of the concept “rural” and its different meanings. After, the concept of rural development was discussed, and it was argued that rural development is a product of social construction, which depends on the meanings people attach to rural areas. Finally, the essay ended with a discussion on the role power plays in adopting and changing the meaning of rural development, it was demonstrated that, it is the dominant group in the society who assign meaning to concept that others use.