In a recent paper published in Global Public Health, Chisom Udeze and Dr. Frode Eick challenge the very foundations of how we understand global development. Their argument is bold yet timely: the language and logic underpinning development discourse are deeply flawed, perpetuating colonial hierarchies and ecological harm. As climate crises intensify and inequality deepens, the authors call for a radical reframing, one that prioritizes sustainability, equity, and human flourishing over consumption-driven growth.
Colonial Roots of Development Language
Terms like “developed” and “developing” may seem benign, but Udeze and Eick argue they are steeped in imperial histories. These labels divide the world into zones of achievement and deficiency, ranking nations according to metrics designed by former colonial powers and global financial institutions. This classification system naturalizes inequity, signalling whose progress is validated and whose suffering is minimized. Even modern acronyms such as “Low-Income Countries” or “Middle-Income Countries” carry the same hierarchical weight.
The authors urge us to interrogate this colonial scaffolding. Development, they note, is often framed as a linear journey from scarcity to prosperity, a narrative that ignores diverse worldviews and alternative ways of organizing life. As they put it, “Who decides what counts as progress, and who gets to measure it?”
The Cost of Overconsumption
Central to the critique is the role of consumption as a proxy for progress. High consumption levels are often equated with prosperity, yet this framework validates patterns of extraction and excess while ignoring environmental and social externalities. Overconsumption is not merely a national choice; it is sustained by global political-economic structures, multinational corporations, trade regimes, and financial institutions that privilege throughput over ecological care.
The consequences are stark. High-consuming nations exhaust their ecological budgets early each year, as highlighted by Country Overshoot Day. Norway, for example, typically surpasses its annual biocapacity by spring, while Nigeria remains within planetary limits despite bearing severe ecological burdens from oil extraction in the Niger Delta. This dynamic underscore the injustice of consumption-based emissions: wealthy nations outsource environmental costs to low-consumption regions through global supply chains.
Beyond GDP
The paper critiques conventional metrics like Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Gross National Income (GNI), which prioritize economic output over well-being. War, pollution, and deforestation all contribute to GDP, while unpaid caregiving and environmental stewardship remain invisible. Feminist economics has long documented this omission, revealing how extractive models are elevated as the pinnacle of success while care economies are sidelined.
Instead, Udeze and Eick propose a new classification based on Household Final Consumption Expenditure (HFCE) per capita. This measure, while imperfect, offers a more direct lens on material throughput and everyday well-being than output-centred indicators. HFCE categories range from very high consumption (over $30,000 per capita) to very low (under $2,000), challenging conventional labels by recasting “developed” nations as over-consuming and “developing” nations as low-consuming.
Toward a Pluriverse of Possibilities
The authors draw on post-development scholarship, degrowth theory, and Indigenous worldviews to envision alternatives. Practices such as agroecology, community forestry, and circular repair economies exemplify pathways to regenerative livelihoods. These models prioritize reciprocity, sufficiency, and ecological limits, values absent from capitalist-driven development paradigms.
Ultimately, Udeze and Eick argue that infinite growth on a finite planet is a contradiction. “We cannot consume our way to a sustainable planet,” they write. The challenge is not only technical but ethical: to move beyond GDP and toward frameworks that centre care, justice, and planetary boundaries.
A Call for Critical Dialogue
This paper is more than an academic critique; it is an invitation to reimagine development itself. By shifting language, metrics, and priorities, policymakers and scholars can help dismantle colonial hierarchies and ecological harm. Low-consuming nations, often portrayed as lagging, may hold the keys to a sustainable future, if global discourse allows them to lead.
As the authors conclude, reframing development is not optional; it is urgent. The question is whether we have the courage to abandon outdated narratives and embrace a pluriverse of possibilities.
Reference:
Udeze, C., & Eick, F. (2026). Rethinking development: Language, power and the cost of progress. Global Public Health, 21(1), 2610059. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2025.2610059
Dr. Frode Eick is an associate professor at Lovisenberg Diaconal University College, Norway. He is a registered nurse with a master’s degree in international Community Health. He has long experience with health care provision to undocumented migrants and EU citizens in Norway and to marginalized populations in other countries. His PhD explored pregnant undocumented migrants’ use of antenatal care in Norway and their pregnancy outcomes.
