What is the first image that vaporizes itself into my mind when someone mentions the term “development”? Unfortunately, it is a scene of mass production, consumption and the false notion of progress. It appears as a journey, or even a race to reach the economic level and standard of living of a capitalistic dystopia. This image of a neoliberal method of a growth with so many negative connotations to it has been ingrained in my head ever since I was a child. A large number of developing countries (including my own) aspire for this market-based method of existence that evaluates the worthiness of lives based on the money they are making. However, what is it about this so-called final label of “developed” that makes it so appealing and so desirable? Is it the deceitful dream of an extremely progressive paradise that has everything one could want? In reality, we need to think of this question: is everything we want actually everything we need?

There is more to us than the income of our households. There is wellbeing of mind, body and nature that goes hand in hand in the microcosm of life. Current popular methods of development provide a new-fangled, alternative, destructive lifestyle to that of those who have been living within their needs and within nature’s means for thousands of years. This introduction and indoctrination of the developing world into the realms of this false development give rise to multiple problems such as cuts in public spending, ecologically unequal exchange through trade liberalization, disregard for values associated with nature, and above all a loss of sovereignty and culture to the incoming enforced idea of progress. There is a shift in power, from the state and the people to the markets and the money.

With the end of World War II and the creation of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (with their headquarters strategically in the United States), came the beginnings of the sea of capitalism trickling into the developing world. Following this, with the Cold War, the United States’ anti-communism ideology was at a high and they dreaded the rise of a communist movement in Latin America. Latin America, with views of nationalism and development in mind, was somewhere in the middle of the Right and Left points of view. In the 1990s, after the Washington Consensus, institutions like the WB and IMF began to implement the pillars of the Consensus like trade liberalization, privatization, and cuts in public spending through projects that promoted structural adjustments.

Within the country of Bolivia, a social movement headed by the MAS (Movimiento al Socialismo) party was born. It had two parts to it - the first focused on the process of decolonization and indigenous movements and the other is focused on Bolivia as a part of the movement of countries from the “developing” South against the capitalist “developed” North. These two are tied together at the basis of their ideologies by the concept of “Vivir Bien” which is derived from the indigenous phrase “Suma Qamaña” which means to live well.

Modern ways of evaluating the standard of living of people fail to take into consideration that wellness of being is not only material possessions but also a wellness of mind, body, relationships and surroundings. Suma Qamaña entails living well and living well together. The concept of Vivir Bien is easy to live by in small, tight-knit communities; however, it is a struggle to implement a way of life through policies of a country. What is a way to approach this?

Under the Presidency of the indigenous president Evo Morales of Bolivia, three documents were created to represent the ideology of Vivir Bien. The first was the National Development Plan. It was formulated to guide the country in its transition from a neoliberal model of existence to one with a new ideology of development. It has 4 broad objectives that it is divided into – dignity, sovereignty, productivity and democracy.

The second document is the constitution and it has set the definition of the country since 2009. Through the lens of indigenous concepts, it looks at major issues like the form of the economy, the justice system, ownership and distribution of land and resources, the election process, and education to name a few. Clearly to shift into a post-neoliberal model of living, the model of the economy must be restructured. The model outlined in this constitution creates a 4-way approach of community, state, social-cooperative and private. “At the same time, it argues that all economic models have to be built on principles of solidarity, redistribution, sustainability, and social justice in ways that complement individual and collective interests.”[1] Another key part of the constitution is the recognition of Bolivia as a plurinational state. Through this, it tries to make amends for the social segregation that was brought upon the indigenous population of the country.

The third document, formalized in the year 2012, is called the Law of Mother Earth and Holistic Development to Live Well. This law recognizes the Mother Earth or Pachamama not as a source of materials to exploit, but as a system that lives, breathes and needs to be respected. Mother Earth has the right to be free from forms of contamination by humans, the right to clean air and water systems, the right to carry on its processes and cycles free from anthropogenic involvement. Countries are always going to want to grow, however, there are methods of shaping this so-called growth that can prevent it from being exploitative or destructive and rather make it more well-rounded and considerate.

Even though Vivir Bien seems like the best alternative to development right now, it does not exist in a calm sea, rather it is on a wave in choppy waters. It definitely has its fair share of critics for a number of well-justified shortcomings. It begins with the concept of Suma Qamaña and Vivir Bien. The government claims to promote the ideology of Vivir Bien based off of indigenous ways of life, however, there are multiple indigenous groups of people, each with their own identities and cultures who are being lumped into one faction in the name of promoting a way of life that stems from indigenous living under Vivir Bien. Another problem is that the concept of Suma Qamaña has been romanticized and put on a pedestal by the MAS government when in reality people and their ongoing lives have evolved since the inception of neoliberalism in Latin America. Market-based methods of thinking have trickled into Bolivian life in a way that can make it hard to go back to the original methods of living. The government has also been criticized for its nationalization of resources. Critics have referred to this growth in state involvement in resources as “neoliberal nationalization”.

Some are positive towards Vivir Bien and some are not. However, we cannot argue that it is not an existing alternative to the destructive forms of development encouraged by capitalist society. It is a step towards a more holistic and biocentric way of living that is much needed. It is by no means perfect, but it is better than continuing the way of life that the majority of the world lives today.

[1] Suma qamaña in Bolivia: Indigenous Understandings of Well-being and Their Contribution to a Post-Neoliberal Paradigm, Kepa Artaraz and Melania Calestani, Latin American Perspectives published online 20 August 2014