Dominant Paradigm

The dominant development paradigm The old paradigm stressed economic growth through
industrialization as the key to development. Its centered on neo-liberal economic policy,
emphasizing open markets, trade liberalization, foreign investment and macroeconomic stability
and the reduction of the role of the state. Within this paradigm, international trade and the private
sector have been flaunted as the best means by which to achieve national development and
wealth.



As a result, resources have progressively shifted away from an aid for development model that
supports public intervention in development policies, to an aid for trade agenda that advances
the notion that aid is most effective when used to increase private sector competitiveness and
production.

Criticisms of Dominant Paradigm
the old paradigm implied that poverty was equivalent to underdevelopment. And the obvious
way for less developed countries to develop was for them to become more like the developed
countries.
It uses top down development approach where by it encourages development activies to be
imposed to the community from top without letting them to be part and participate in the process.
It discourages traditional systems and encourages western cultures to be followes so that
development could be achieved.

Alternative Paradigm
Alternative development has been concerned with alternative practices of development
participatory and people-centred and with redefining the goals of development.

Alternative paradigm encourages communities to rely on them selves and avoid international
dependency. It also suggest people to remain with their systems as they are improving it to make
it go with the modern technology.

Critiques
Alternative development represents an alternative paradigm. This is a problematic idea for four
reasons: because whether paradigms apply to social science is questionable; because in
development the concern is with policy frameworks rather than explanatory frameworks;
because there are different views on whether a paradigm breaks with conventional development
is desirable; and finally because the actual divergence in approaches to development is in some
respects narrowing.