Abstract
This paper proposes that there are three essential elements or phases of development: (i) systemic capacity; (ii) individual capability, and (iii) social citizenship. Significantly, the role of government within each element of development is decidedly different. Systemic capacity refers to the development of the economic means, or wealth creation, needed to provide society with services and public goods. Capability building refers to providing individuals with the basic conditions required to live a long and fulfilling life, such as health and education. Social citizenship recognizes that values held by individuals and groups will often conflict, and there is rarely a singular social end that can determine life in a free society. Fostering citizenship reflects the importance of belonging, and the obligations, responsibilities, and restraint that individuals owe to others, society, and the environment. This third element is a notable departure from many traditional approaches to development, which tend to concentrate on development as largely a process of feeding individual needs. The proposed approach is labelled “freedom from development,” for it is premised on the recognition that while society often benefits from the pursuit of traditional development, it does not do so exclusively nor without qualification. So while there are many instances in which development is a desirable social end, as when people derive greater capabilities from economic growth, there are also situations when the end of development must be displaced in favour of other social priorities. For example, there are times when markets yield freedom, and times when the freedom people crave will be found in rejecting the market altogether. Freedom from development suggests that values represented under the third element of citizenship will often have come at the expense of those of the first two elements, meaning that development in a traditional manner is superseded in a given context. In order to determine when freedom from development is socially desirable, it is suggested that a form of cost-benefit analysis is implicitly conducted, comparing the economic and individual gains available under the first two elements with the potential social gains from belonging under the third element of citizenship.
Implementing an evidence‐based dementia care program in the Australian health context: A cost–benefit analysis
