|
Abstract:
|
In the last 50 years the African continent has gone through an immense transformation. From
the era of colonisation to the independence of African nations and in recent years the uprising
of a pan-African movement that has institutionalised through the making of the African Union
and its developmental programme New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD).
NEPAD has been portrayed as the first serious development initiative that has arisen internally
from Africa, an initiative that the world of development has embraced as Africa’s primary
continental development programme. Somehow NEPAD’s impact and implementation of
priorities as well as the positive reactions to the programme has faded since its formation in
2001. The communication as to why leads to conclusions that centres itself on themes as
corruption, conflict, food crisis, lack of financial resources and so forth.
This thesis looks at other explanatory influences that can lead to a conclusion as to why
NEPAD’s impact is limited in arguing that communication in regards to NEPAD also shapes
the way NEPAD functions. Communication, and the power structures an analysis of
communication unfolds, has profoundly shaped the perception of Africa and African
developmental issues.
By using Michel Foucault genealogical criticism on liberal moral and rationalities this thesis
takes its starting point in the construction of an Africa discourse. It reveals a Liberal logic that
influences the perception of African nation states as ‘weak’ or ‘fragile’ that need to be
empowered to become ideal strong liberal democracies as the one we see in Denmark. These
perceptions are then integrated further in the analysis of ‘the African development field’ that
focuses on two agents - NEPAD and Denmark’s development agency Danida. Field, agents
and the relations between them are constructed using Pierre Bourdieu’s theoretical elements on
symbolic power and forms of institutional and economical capital.
Through these theoretical fundamentals NEPAD’s position within the African development
field is discussed by examining the liberal communicational structures that influences and
limits NEPAD. Furthermore how these communications hinder an actual implementation
process and thereby ultimately influence NEPAD’s mandate and success. |
