Beyond the Fences: A Rationale for Cohesive Development | Sanjoy De, Atanu Sengupta

BOOK REVIEW

Birth of an Alternative Development Paradigm: Unfolding of Transformative Mode of Production
by Sunil Ray

Germinal Publications Pvt. Ltd. (Publisher of frontier weekly)
2024. 250 INR.

Development is the buzzword of today. Everybody speaks of it as if it is the only religion and pursuit of the modern day. In his populist book Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, Yuval Noah Harari (2015) argued that the ability of man to combine in a large group is achieved through a network of storytelling and making others to believe that the story is true. In the current era, this story is built on development and its aura. Development will uplift everybody just like Noah’s Ark. Dr Sunil Ray has been able to debunk the common story with a more variegated discourse.

Mainstream development, which vehemently targets growth, entails exploitation, particularly of labour and natural resources. Unbridled pursuits of production escalation, inevitably leads to unsustainable practices, denial of basic rights, inequality and displacement of local communities. It breeds human distress in the forms of impoverishment, inequality and decontrol over resources. In other words, development, de facto, has antagonistic effects on society at large.

In contrast, the alternative radical development seeks to challenge the conventional development paradigm. It tries to dislodge the existing power structure with an alternative distribution of power. It comes in the form of proletariat (Marxist), agriculture and other backward communities (populist), females (feminist) and other such groups. Alternative radical development approach however, often becomes mechanistic and extortionist in nature. Also, it is encountered with strong challenges to prevail over the deep-rooted power structure. In contrast, there is another line of development, christened as ‘cohesive development’, which focuses on a holistic approach to stave off civilisation crisis. The brilliantly written book – Birth of an Alternative Development Paradigm: Unfolding of Transformative Mode of Production by the eminent scholar Prof Sunil Ray offers us tread through this humanistic development path.

Prof. Ray has attempted to concretise the idea of cohesive development through the instances of several episodes of anti-systemic resistance that took place both at the national and global levels. Intrinsically, all these resistances have been antithetical to the coercive capitalist system. In India, in the 1990s, the National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM) protested against globalisation and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Narmada Bachao Andolan opposed the setting up of large dams across the Narmada River out of the concerns of the problems of the rehabilitation of the displaced people, violation of human rights and damage to the environment. Ray also examined the Zapatista movement in the state of Chiapas, Mexico which erupted in the aftermath of the enforcement of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Taking cues from such social movements, Prof Ray tries to unfold the traces of mass mobilisation by the native people and understand the path of building an alternative power structure. Putting these experiences together, he has outlined an alternative paradigm to design a better world for the downtrodden.

Prof. Ray identifies some ‘fundamental tenets of the epistemological base of cohesive development’ (p. 33). All these tenets reinforce each other to ultimately bring in the socially desired development framework. One key ingredient is the reciprocal altruism which builds upon mutual trust and respect. It indicates a situation where individuals act for other’s benefits on the expectation of reciprocal act from the other in future. Another hallmark is the principle of sufficiency which denotes a ‘middle way’ to produce and consume, averting extremes. It emphasizes on what is actually needed. In other words, production and consumption activities should be need based instead of being driven by greed or capitalist exploitation.

The book gives us various issues and principles on which the cohesive development may be based. Nonetheless, the operation of inclusive development is highly localised. In fact, it is the localisation other than an outright generalisation that is the keystone of cohesive development. Thus, to make this idea visible, it is necessary to consider some specific cases where cohesive development may be in its operable status. One such example was the Bhoodan movement led by Vinoba Bhave in independent India. Mahatma Gandhi was against the usurpation of the land from the landlords and distributing it to the landless. First, it causes violence. Secondly it causes a strong opposition from the landlords who may take various ways to avert the process. The actual land reforms in India, even in the so-called successful West Bengal and Kerala, support this view. This results into corruption and unholy alliance between the officials, landlords and political parties that dooms the future of the village. In his plea, Vinoba Bhave stresses the voluntary transforming of the land by the landlords. The landlords should act as the trustees of the properties with all its benefits. However, as a trustee they should allow others to fruitfully use it, especially those who has a need and obligation. The movement could not be very successful because of the strong opposition from both the right and the left. This movement is a pointer to what the trusteeship revolution of land could have brought to India.

Another issue is the environmental problem. Even after admitting that the ecological problems might somehow be related to inequality, poverty and massive mal-use of resources by the rich, it is a problem that affects all. As Marx and Engels stated in the Communist Manifesto, this can ultimately lead to the mutual destruction of both the classes (Sengupta & De, 2025). Thus, many modern sociologists view the problem as one of a coalitional game rather than a non-cooperative and sometimes zero-sum game. In the era of global environmental degradation, environmental policies require the trust of everybody – rich and poor, tribal and non-tribal, man and woman and so on. In this respect, cohesive development would be a good way to solve the problem.

Traditionally, co-operative game theory was neglected and much maligned in the mainstream economy (Ray, 2017). The co-operative game clearly points out the possibility of co-operation among various parties to solve a particular problem. We take a simple example from literature. Suppose Peter has Rs 10 and his friend Susan has Rs 8 in their purse, but the cost of the ice-cream is Rs 12. Even though Peter has a larger amount of money, he cannot buy the ice cream himself. The only way of having the ice-cream is to collude with the ‘poor’ Susan and mark the amount Rs 18 to buy the ice-cream. Unfortunately, the co-operative game is silent about the solution. Susan having zero ice-cream and Peter all the ice-cream is also a possible solution. The valuation mechanism and the principle of justice has to be invoked to move to a more equitable solution. Co-operative game says that even market and production are actually the act of co-operation. In market, the sellers and buyers must have to come to an agreement about the good that they wanted to sell and buy. In production, the capitalist has to co-operate with the labourers for production. The problem lies in the distribution of the amount that is attained after co-operation. Just like the ice-cream game, there can be many solutions - some egalitarian, some extremely unequal, some may be marginalist. It is necessary for the economies thus to focus on the result of the outcome, rather than to treat the outcome itself as non-co-operative. In a sense, the discussion of co-operative game comes very close to the concept of cohesive development that Prof Ray advocates.

The new cohesive development framework, which is evidently different from the older system is rooted in the praxis of solidarity between humans, as well as between humans and nature. This alternative cohesive development paradigm substitutes the ‘methodological individualism’ of capitalism by ‘reciprocal altruism’. This paves the way to the development process. It focuses on all-rround, and long-lasting growth where all and sundry are treated alike with due respect and self-esteem. This type of development with dignity is no utopia. In the words of Amit Bhaduri (2005)– “It obscures both the extreme poverty of the slaves as well as the vulgar richness of the slave owner.”

(Review Authors: Dr Sanjoy De, Assistant Professor Department of Economics, Shyampur Siddheswari Mahavidyalaya, (Affiliated to the University of Calcutta) Email : sanjoyde2000[at]gmail.com; Dr Atanu Sengupta, Professor, Department of Economics, University of Burdwan Email : sengupta_atanu[at]yahoo.com)

References

Bhaduri, Amit (2005): Development with Dignity: A Case for Full Employment. New Delhi: National Book Trust.

Harari, Y. N. (2015): Sapiens: A brief history of humankind. HarperCollins. 

Ray, Debraj (2007): A Game Theoretic Perspective on Coalition Formation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sengupta, Atanu and Sanjoy De (2025): “Institutionalised Nobel A Journey from Lewis to AJR,” Economic & Political Weekly, Vol 60, No 5.