| Abstract: | There have long been attempts to humanize the conduct of development by taking into account the mental and cultural constitution of those amongst whom it is to occur. Very largely, these have been unsuccessful owing in part to the conception that has been used of the things of which account has to be taken. In consequence, developmental thought has remained mechanistic and impersonal generally and corresponding problems afflict development practice. Seeing this approach exemplified in the two articles by Rondinelli and Mandel (1981a, 1981b) the author takes issue with it. He argues in the light of experience with health planning and medical practice that fresh attention should be given both to understanding local social realities and to the way in which development work could be related to such realities. In the process the author suggests that the value of the approaches characteristic of social anthropology should be more widely recognized. |
