Conclusion

This chapter invited readers to take a look at myths of international devel­opment cooperation, thereby choosing a perspective that differs in its ontological and epistemological standpoints from many existing studies on development cooperation.

The perspectives for a more inclusive interlinking of North-South and South-South Cooperation as well as the concept of development effective­ness will shape the ‘near future’ of international development cooperation. They bear the potential to significantly change the international aid archi­tecture and thereby result in forms of shared development governance. The selective opening of the DAC arena might be an important step in that direction, yet it could also mean a phase between two different set­tings and stories. To regard them not just as policy outcomes displayed in an expert language but as political myths that tell tales about certain actor dynamics as well as about the idea/utopia of development (cooperation) offers the possibility of exploring their potential as carriers of meaning and significance, driven by dynamics of their own.

Acknowledgements For valuable comments we wish to thank Lothar Brock, Jens Steffek, Cornelia Ulbert, and Aram Ziai.

Bibliography

Barthes, R. (1972). Mythologies. New York: The Noonday Press.

Bell, D. (2003). Mythscapes: Memory, mythology, and national identity. British Journal of Sociology, 54(1), 63-81.

Campbell, J. (2002). The inner reaches of outer space: Metaphor as myth and as reli­gion. New York: New World Library.

Cornwall, A. (2008). Myths to live by? Female solidarity and female autonomy reconsidered. In A. Cornwall, E. Harrison, & A. Whitehead (Eds.), Gender myths and feminist fables (pp. 145-164). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Derrida, J. (1972). Die differance. In Randgänge der Philosophie (pp. 29-52). Wien: Passagen.

Easterly, W. (2002). The cartel of good intentions. Foreign Policy, 131, 40-49.

Eyben, R. (2013a). Struggles in Paris. The DAC and the purposes of develop­ment. European Journal of Development Research, 25, 78-91.

Eyben, R. (2013b). Building relationships in development cooperation: Traditional donors and the rising powers (IDS Policy Briefing No. 36).

Eyben, R., & Savage, L. (2013). Emerging and submerging powers: Imagined geographies in the new development partnership at the Busan fourth high level forum. The Journal of Development Studies, 49(4), 457-469.

Ferguson, J. (1990). The anti-politics machine: Development, depoliticization and bureaucratic power in Lesotho. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gaventa, J. (2006). Finding the spaces for change: A power analysis. IDS Bulletin, 37(6), 23-33.

Hajer, M. A. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse. Ecological moderniza­tion and the policy process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hajer, M. A. (2003). Argumentative Diskursanalyse. Auf der Suche nach Koalitionen, Praktiken und Bedeutung. In R. Keller, A. Hirseland, W. Schneider, & W. Viehover (Eds.), Handbuch sozialwissenschaftliche Diskursanalyse 2: Forschungspraxis (pp. 271-298). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

Hayman, R. (2006). The complexity of aid: Government strategies, donor agendas and the co-ordination of development assistance in Rwanda 1994—2004.

Haymen, R. (2012). The Busan partnership: Implications for civil society (INTRAC Policy Briefing Paper 29). Oxford.

Hirschman, A. (1967). Development projects observed. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Hyden, G. (2008). After the Paris declaration: Taking on the issue of power. Development Policy Review, 26(3 ), 259-274.

Kindornay, S., & Samy, Y. (2012). Establishing a leepitimate development co­operation architecture in the Post-Busan Era. North-south Institute Working Paper, Ottawa.

Manning, R. (2006). Will ‘emerging donors’ change the face of international co­operation? Development Policy Review, 24(4), 371-385.

Mawdsley, E. (2012). The changing geographies of foreign aid and development cooperation: Contributions from gift theory. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(2), 256-272.

Mawdsley, E., Savage, L., & Kim, S.-M. (2013). A ‘post-aid world’? Paradigm shift in foreign aid and development cooperation at the 2011 Busan High Level Forum. The Geographical Journal 180(1), 27-38.

McGee, R., & Heredia, I. G. (2012). Paris in Bogota: The aid effectiveness agenda and aid relations in Colombia. Development Policy Review, 30(2), 115-131.

Moyo, D. (2009). Dead aid: Why aid is not working and how there is another way for Africa. London: Penguin.

Naim, M. (2007). Rogue aid. Foreign Policy, 159(March/April), 95-96.

OECD. (2005). Paris declaration on aid effectiveness, ownership, harmonisation, alignment, results, and mutual accountability. Paris: OECD.

OECD-DAC. (2011). Busan partnership for effective development. Signed at the 4th High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Busan, 29 November-1 December.

Rist, G. (2008). The history of development. From western origins to global faith. London: Zed Books.

Sala, V. D. (2010). Political myth, mythology and the European Union. Journal of Common Market Studies, 48(1), 1-19.

Sondermann, E. (2012). The Busan process: Milestone or stumbling block for inter­national development cooperation? (Global Governance Spotlight No. 2). Bonn.

Weber, C. (2010). International relations theory. A critical introduction (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.

Wolff, J. (2012). Democracy promotion, empowerment, and self-determination. Conflicting objectives in US and German policies towards Bolivia. Democratization, 19(3), 415-437.

Yanow, D. (1992). Silences in public policy discourse: Organizational and policy myths. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2, 399-423.

Ziai, A. (2004). The ambivalence of post-development: Between reactionary pop­ulism and radical democracy. Third World Quaterly, 25(6), 1045-1060.

Ziai, A. (2006). Zwischen GlobalGovernance und Post-Development: Entwicklungspolitik aus diskursanalytischer Perspektive. Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.