Our world is becoming closer and instantlyconnected, the humankind have more power and control over things than everbefore. More people are becoming richer and having more than enough food toeat, access to education, health care and are involved and included in society,at the same time others are becoming poorer, oppressed and struggling for survival.They are marginalized and rapped in poverty which makes the world utterlyunequal.
By the 50s-60s there was a vision for a better world but theindicators of well-being improve in some and declined in others; with lowerincomes, fewer children in school, worsening services in health and lowerexpectations of life. ‘Development meansstanding against this inequality and injustice to allow freedom’ (Sen, 1999). And whereas puttingthe last first is the easier half, putting the first last is harder; for thosein power to set down, listen and learn from the weak and last. The objective ofdevelopment around the world is responsible well-being by and for all,combining and balancing the state and the market, ensuring means of livelihood,providing basic services including health, shelter, water, education andsecuring human rights. The act of putting the people first and the poor firstof all adds to uncertain active outcomes for the poor. For example; despiteputting the poverty as a main focus for the official aid, there is still deficiency in the actual spoken about amount of money. And the changecomes from the priorities of the powerful and the weak. Chambersdefine the development as a ‘good change’ and change is aprocess, this definition of development is aspiring to reach a suitable state.
Whether it is achieved in the short or long term, change has severalimplications for society. And disorder may occur in the different living classes within the society as it moves towards goodchange, but mere implication of something good is not enough for the word to beequal with the phrase good change. Which can leave a contradiction to itsintended meaning, and cause a discourse on what constitutes this ‘good change’.But it is important to consider that ideas about what is goodare disputed between actors in development and adjust over time (Chambers, Resposible well-being , 1997). In a lot of casesthe word development can be deceiving, in many times it is used by those whoare motivated by greed use it to justify their exploitative actions. While alot of the time it exploit the poor and destroy the natural resources to createprofit for rich elites.
Promoting a capitalist empire. The powerful development organizationsand institutions in the global North are the ones who actually decide what thisgood change is (Chambers, Resposible well-being , 1997) Thepersonal change is one suggested strategy, it maybe said its part of evangelismor mythology. But it is actually what kind of people we are and what we want tobecome. And are powerful people obliged enable lowers to express their valuesand to answer whose value count? Chambers put a number of tactics toself-changing, including; facilitating others, changing behavior, makingtraining experimental and interactive, reflect and share and finally chambersadded transform through children. But despite these tactics, we will diverseand each of us has its own reality. And that will give different outcome oneach, but the main idea as simple as it seems and looks easy to adapt is to benice to each other. As Chambers defend his idea, he goes further to the powershift, and empowering the poor, and the uppers giving up their place and allowthemselves to be vulnerable. Which in other means scarifying and the powerfulhave to lose.
(Chambers, Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last, 1997) Oneexample of success application of putting the first last, is the politicaldisempowerment in Africa; Kenya, Zimbabwe and South Africa, while it onlyexpected violence and revenge after thehanding over of power it showedextraordinary forgiveness of black Africans after the colonial and whitedomination. Simpler example when going beyond altruism and generosity bysteeping down, facilitating and giving opportunities in empowering the lowers.Which will give the people a sense of liberation andgain.
Butat the end one can’t simply expect the people of power to give in their power for the case of equality as much as the poor shouldhave same services and the power to decide, decades of developing hadmaintained a certain scenario which the world have been following despite thesmall number of exceptions. It could be related to the whole world developmentand the inability for some countries to develop due to the elites in the worldand if any change of the economic, political or the power arrangement couldaffect the wealth of those in power. If the change ought to be good; manychanges should happen, a theory for application could not be reasonable asnumber of theories that would preserve every humankind regardless to theirplace in the power.