Abstract:
This study explores the central tenets of Complexity Thinking and applies them to an analysis of international aid interventions for development (or transformative change). Examining the post-war emergence of orthodox models of international development and aid modalities, with particular reference to the evolution of sector wide approaches (SWAps), it argues that established models inadequately understand how ‘development’ occurs. It is maintained that, in applying linear management approaches, orthodox models assume causality in achieving social and behavioural change at system level and, more implicitly, change to deeply embedded political structures (Girdwood, 2012). Conversely, a complexity perspective examines development as a complex adaptive system of dynamic, selforganising agents that co-evolve and allow certain behaviours to emerge over others, dependent on initial conditions and the stability of the system. The focus of the thesis is two-fold. First, drawing on data from a historical study of international development and two Pacific Island case studies (Solomon Islands and Tonga), it investigates the extent to which the international aid agenda has shaped education development in each country. In particular, it shows how New Zealand’s convergence with the ‘better’ aid agenda and its move to SWAps has driven its relations with the respective governments. Secondly, a complexity-focused analytical framework is applied to both case studies to examine how the SWAp has evolved in each country. Examining each case study as a continuous, dynamic ‘whole’ system, comprising networks of agents that act and react within loose boundaries and in response to their initial ‘state’ has revealed that the nature and extent of change cannot be assumed. Instead it highlights how change is dominated by agents self-organising and co-evolving in relation to associated systems and networks, which themselves are continuously adapting to their environments.
