Critical Disability Studies at the Edge of Global Development: Why Do We Need to Engage with Southern Theory?

  • Xuan Thuy Nguyen Assistant Professor Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies, Carleton University
Keywords: critical disability studies, Southern theory, epistemology, global development, colonialism, imperialism, decolonization

Abstract

This paper examines critical disability studies through the lens of Southern theory–a theoretical perspective on the process of knowledge production in social sciences which embodies intellectual projects from the global South (Connell, 2007). Building on Helen Meekosha’s question on decolonizing disability (2011), I critique the domination of Northern disability studies by proposing an engagement with Southern theory. My argument is three-fold: First, the use of Southern theory enables us to interrogate the domination of Northern epistemologies in Southern contexts; second, this theory unveils how colonialism has continued to manifest itself through the knowledge practices which have made the experiences of disabled people in the global South invisible; and finally, situated within the context of global development, this theory enables critical disability studies to act as a project of decolonization that engages with Indigenous ways of knowing about disability experiences. 

Author Biography

Xuan Thuy Nguyen, Assistant Professor Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies, Carleton University

Assistant Professor

Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies, Carleton University

References

Bartlett, P. (2010). Thinking about the rest of the world: Mental health and rights outside the "First World". In B. McSherry & P. Weller (Eds.), Rethinking rights-based mental health laws (pp. 397-418). Oxford and Portland, OR: Hart Publishing.
Ben-Moshe, L., & Magaña, S. (2014). An introduction to race, gender, and disability: Intersectionality, disability studies, and families of color. Women, Gender, and Families of Color, 2(2), 105-114.
Connell, R. (2011). Southern bodies and disability: Re-thinking concepts. Third World Quarterly, 32(8), 1369-1381.
Connell, R. (2007). Southern theory: Social science and the global dynamics of knowledge. Cambridge: Polity.
Darian-Smith, E. (2010). Religion, race, rights: Landmarks in the history of modern Anglo-American law. Oxford, England: Hart Publishing.

Department of International Development (2015, December). 80% of people with disabilities live in developing countries. And the barriers that people face aren't just physical (Speech). Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/80-of-people-with-disabilities-live-in-developing-countries-and-the-barriers-that-people-face-arent-just-physical
Erevelles, N. (2014). Crippin' Jim Crow: Disability, Dis-Location, and the School-to-Prison Pipeline. In L. Ben-Moshe, C. Chapman, & A. Carey (Eds), Disability incarcerated: Imprisonment and disability in the United States and Canada (pp. 81-100). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.
Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality. In Foucault, G. Burchell, C. Gordon & P. Miller (Eds.). The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentalit with two lectures by and an interview with Michel Foucault. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Ghai, A. (2012). Engaging with disability with postcolonial theory. In D. Goodley, B. Hughes, & L. Davis. (Eds). Disability and social theory: New developments and directions (pp. 270-286). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Goodley, D. (2013). Dis/entangling critical disability studies. Disability & Society, 28(5), 631-644.
Grech, S. (2015). Decolonising eurocentric disability studies: Why colonialism matters in the disability and global South debate. Social Identities, 21(1), 6-21.
Grech, S. (2016). Disability and development: Critical connections, gaps and contradictions. In S. Grech & K. Soldatic (Eds). Disability in the Global South (pp. 3-19). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Groce, N., Kett, M., Lang, R., & Trani, J. F. (2011). Disability and poverty: The need for a more nuanced understanding of implications for development policy and practice. Third World Quarterly, 32(8), 1493-1513.
Hick, S. (2001). The Political Economy of War-Affected Children. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 575(1), 106-121.
Jarman, M. (2005). Resisting "good imperialism": Reading disability as radical vulnerability. Retrieved from http://www.uwyo.edu/wind/_files/docs/jarman/resisting%20good%20imperialsim.pdf

Jones, S. (2014, October 23). People with disabilities 'simply don't count' in many developing countries. The Guardian Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/oct/23/people-disabilities-dont-count-developing-countries-lynne-featherstone
Kennedy, S., & Newton, M. J. (2016). The hauntings of slavery: Colonialism and the disabled body in the Caribbean. In Disability in the Global South (pp. 379-391). Switzerland; Springer.
Kim, E. (2017). Curative violence: Rehabilitating disability, gender, and sexuality in Modern Korea. Durham: Duke University Press.
Meekosha, H. (2011). Decolonising disability: Thinking and acting globally. Disability & Society, 26(6), 667-682.
Meekosha, H., & Shuttleworth, R. (2009). What's so 'critical' about critical disability studies?. Australian Journal of Human Rights, 15(1), 47-75.
Meekosha, H., & Soldatic, K. (2011). Human rights and the global South: The case of disability. Third World Quarterly, 32(8), 1383-1397.
Million, D. (2013). Therapeutic nations: Healing in an age of indigenous human rights. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Monnais, L. (2009). Modern medicine in French colonial Vietnam: From the importation of a model to its nativisation. London, England and New York, NY: Routledge.

Nguyen, X. T. (2015a). The journey to inclusion. Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, the Netherland: Sense Publishers.
Nguyen, X. T. (2015b). Genealogies of disability in global governance: A Foucauldian critique of disability and development. Foucault Studies. Special issue on New work on Foucault and Disability, 19, 67-83. Available at http://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/foucault-studies/article/view/4825/0
Nguyen, X. T., Mitchell, C., De Lange, N., & Fritsch, K. (2015). Engaging girls with disabilities in Vietnam: Making their Voices Count. Disability and Society, special issue on Disability: Who counts? What count?, 30(5), 773-787.
Puar, J. (2017). The right to maim (pp. 63- 93). Durham: Duke University Press.
Ramzy, B. (2017, September). The Genocide Of The Rohingya: Big Oil, Failed Democracy And False Prophets. Available at http://www.countercurrents.org/2017/09/13/the-genocide-of-the-rohingya-big-oil-failed-democracy-and-false-prophets/
Rioux, M. Pinto, P., & Parek, G. (2015). Advancing rights: Politics of disability, monitoring and social change. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press.
Shildrick, M. (2012). Critical disability studies: rethinking the conventions for the age of postmodernity. In N. Watson, A. Roulstone & C. Thomas (Eds.), Routledge handbook of disability studies (pp. 30-41). Abingdon: Routledge.
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: University of Otago Press.
Soldatic, K., & Meekosha, H. (2012). Disability and neoliberal state formations. In N. Watson, A. Roulstone, & C. Thomas (Eds.). Routledge handbook of disability studies (pp. 195-210). London: Routledge.
Soldatic, K., & Grech, S. (2014). Transnationalising disability studies: Rights, justice and impairment. Disability Studies Quarterly, 34(2).
Swartz, L., & Bantjes, J. (2016). Disability and global health. In S. Grech & K. Soldatic (Eds). Disability in the Global South (pp. 21-33). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Titchkosky, T. (2000). Disability studies: The old and the new. Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 197-224.
Titchkosky, T. (2011). The question of access: Disability, space, meaning. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Titchkosky, T. (2003). Governing embodiment: Technologies of constituting citizens with disabilities. Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers Canadiens de sociologie, 517-542.
Titchkosky, T., & Aubrecht, K. (2015). Who's mind, whose future? Mental health projects as colonial logics. Social Identities, 21(1), 69-84.
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, education & society, 1(1), 1-40.
United Nations. (2016). Leaving no one behind: the imperative of inclusive development. Report on the World Social Situation 2016 Executive Summary. Available at http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/rwss/2016/executive-summary.pdf
United Nations (n.d.). Washington Group on Disability Statistics. Available at https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/citygroups/washington.cshtml
United Nations Children's Funds (UNICEF). (2016). Module on child functioning. Available at https://data.unicef.org/resources/module-child-functioning/
UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. (2017). Report of OHCHR mission to Bangladesh: Interviews with Rohingyas fleeing from Myanmar since 9 October 2016. Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/MM/FlashReport3Feb2017.pdf
World Health Organization, & World Bank. (2011). World report on disability. Malta: World Health Organization.
Published
2018-03-29
Section
Articles