Making the Most of Knowledge for Development and Development Studies

  • Mike Powell
  • Sarah Cummings
Part of the EADI Global Development Series book series (EADI)


The chapter is concerned with the role of knowledge for development and in Development Studies. Development relies on many different sorts of knowledge, known as multiple knowledges. Multiple knowledges relate to ‘knowledges’ from different disciplines, schools of thought or derived from different learning processes, cultures or world-views. Different forms of knowledge have always existed: practical or theoretical, analytical or rhetorical, formal or informal. One way of encompassing this reality has been to view the various approaches within a number of implicit or explicit hierarchies. These hierarchies are counterproductive to producing good quality knowledge. There is a pressing need to develop new discourses, narratives and arguments which articulate a perspective on the transformational role of knowledge for development.


  1. Blackwell, A., Wilson, L., Boulton, C., & Knell, J. (2010). Creating Value Across Boundaries. London: NESTA. Accessed 17 March 2017.
  2. Brandner, A., & Cummings, S. J. R. (2017). Agenda Knowledge for Development: Strengthening the Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals. Vienna: Knowledge for Development Partnership. Accessed 12 February 2018.
  3. Brandner, A., & Oster, N. M. (2015). Community Note: Agenda Knowledge for Development Conference, Fall 2016 in Vienna, Austria. Knowledge Management for Development Journal, 11(2), 97–100.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, V. A. (2008). Leonardo’s Vision: A Guide for Collective Thinking and Action. Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, V. A. (2011). Multiple Knowledges, Multiple Languages: Are the Limits of My Language the Limits of My World? Knowledge Management for Development Journal, 6(2), 120–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bunders, J. F. G., Broerse, J. E. W., Keil, F., Pohl, C., Scholz, R. W., & Zweekhorst, M. B. M. (2010). How Can Transdisciplinary Research Contribute to Knowledge Democracy? In R. J. In’t Veld (Ed.), Knowledge Democracy: Consequences for Science, Politics and Media. Heidelberg and Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burgess, T. F., & Shaw, N. E. (2010). Editorial Board Membership of Management and Business Journals: A Social Network Analysis Study of the Financial Times 40. British Journal of Management, 21(3), 627–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Byrne, D. (2011). Applying Social Science: The Role of Social Research in Politics, Policy and Practice. Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cabral, A. (1980, original 1970). National Liberation and Culture. In A. Cabral (Ed.), Unity and Struggle. London: Heinemann Educational Books.Google Scholar
  10. Cummings, S. J. R., & Hoebink, P. (2017). Representation of Academics from Developing Countries as Authors and Editorial Board Members in Scientific Journals: Does This Matter to the Field of Development Studies? The European Journal of Development Research, 29(2), 369–383. Scholar
  11. Cummings, S., Pels, J., & Powell, M. (2011). Development Knowledge Ecology: Metaphors and Meanings. Knowledge Management for Development Journal, 7(1), 125–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cummings, S. J. R., Regeer, B. J., de Haan, L. J. A., Zweekhorst, M. B. M., & Bunders, J. F. G. (2017). Critical Discourse Analysis of Perspectives on Knowledge and Knowledge Societies Within the Sustainable Development Goals. Development Policy Review (online first, April 2017).Google Scholar
  13. Dahdouh-Gubas, F., Ahimbisibwe, J., van Moll, R., & Koedam, N. (2003). Neo-colonial Science by the Most Industrialised upon the Least Developed Countries in Peer-Reviewed Publishing. Scientometrics, 56(3), 329–343. Scholar
  14. Defila, R., & Di Giulio, A. (1999). Evaluating Transdisciplinary Research: Evaluation Criteria for Inter- and Transdisciplinary Research. Panorama, 1(29).Google Scholar
  15. Duffield, M. (2014). From Immersion to Simulation: Remote Methodologies and the Decline of Area Studies. Review of African Political Economy, 41(Suppl. 1), S75–S94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harcourt, W. (2016). Gender Dilemmas in International Development. European Journal of Development Research, 28, 167–174. Scholar
  17. Jha, A. (2012, July 25). UK Government Will Enforce Open Access to Development Research. The Guardian. Accessed 6 April 2016.
  18. KFPE. (2014). A Guide for Transboundary Research Partnerships. Swiss Commission for Research Partnerships with Developing Countries (KFPE). Accessed 6 July 2017.
  19. Kirimi, S., & Wakwabubi, E. (2009). Learning From, Promoting and Using Participation: The Case of International Development Organizations in Kenya (IKM Working Paper 6). Accessed 12 February 2018.
  20. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1948). Causeries. Paris: Editions du Seuil (2002). English edition: Merleau-Ponty. (2004). The World of Perception. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Oldekop, J. A., Fontana, L. B., Grugel, J., Roughton, N., Adu-Ampong, E. A., Bird, G. K., et al. (2016). 100 Key Research Questions for the Post-2015 Development Agenda. Development Policy Review, 34(1), 55–82. Scholar
  22. Polanyi, M. (1958/1974). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-critical Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Powell, M., & Cummings, S. (forthcoming). Challenging Ignorance. Emergent Works.
  24. Powell, M., Davies, T. & Taylor, K. (2012). CT For or Against Development? An Introduction to the Ongoing Case of Web 3.0’ (IKM Working Paper 16). Accessed 12 February 2018.
  25. Regeer, B. J., & Bunders, J. F. G. (2009). Knowledge Co-creation: Interaction Between Science and Society. A Transdisciplinary Approach to Complex Societal Issues (B. J. Regeer & J. F. G. Bunders, Trans.). The Hague: RMNO.Google Scholar
  26. ROAPE Editorial Working Group. (2013). Yes to Egalitarian ‘Open Access’, No to ‘Pay to Publish’: A Roape Position Statement on Open Access. Review of African Political Economy, 40(136), 177–178.
  27. Sen, A. (2006). The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity. London, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
  28. Srinivasan, R. & Wallack, J. S. (2009). Local-Global: Reconciling Mismatched Ontologies in Development Information Systems. In 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Waikoloa, Big Island, Hawaii, 1899, pp. 1–10.
  29. Sumner, A., & Tribe, M. (2009). International Development Studies: Theories and Methods in Research and Practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Taylor, L. (2016). No Place to Hide? The Ethics and Analytics of Tracking Mobility Using Mobile Phone Data. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 34(2), 319–336. Scholar
  31. UN. (2015). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. New York, NY: United Nations.Google Scholar
  32. Valters, C. (2015). Theories of Change: Time for a Radical Approach in Learning for Development (ODI Working Paper). Accessed 6 April 2016.
  33. van Ewijk, E., & Baud, I. (2009). Partnerships Between Dutch Municipalities and Municipalities in Countries of Migration to the Netherlands; Knowledge Exchange and Mutuality. Habitat International, 33(2), 218–226. Scholar
  34. wa Thiong’o, N. (2012). Globalectics: Theory and the Politics of Knowing. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mike Powell
    • 1
  • Sarah Cummings
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Emergent Works Ltd.PortsmouthUK
  2. 2.Athena InstituteFree UniversityAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Knowledge for Development PartnershipViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations