Accounting for the visiting economist syndrome: Reflections on the emergence of a prevalent phenomenon

Abstract

Purpose

Economic experts play a decisive role in development aid. Yet their propensity to prescribe universal solutions to developmental challenges without an in-depth knowledge of local circumstances has been criticized time and again as the “visiting economist syndrome.” The purpose of this paper is to investigate the historic foundations of this oft-criticized behavioral pattern, adding a missing historical dimension to a contemporary discussion.

Design/methodology/approach

The main method employed is historical analysis, or to be more precise, an examination of the history of ideas. The question to be answered with this method is: where and in what context did the idea of the know-it-all “development expert” emerge?

Findings

The commonly observed behavioral pattern of development experts has its roots in a coherent development mindset invented by one particular thinker and expounded in one particular text in the late eighteenth century. As will be shown, the “visiting economist” is an integral part of the western notions of progress and civilization.

Practical implications

The paper contributes to an ongoing discussion. By identifying the hitherto overlooked historical foundations of current expert behavior, it can suggest new directions based on a reassessment of the fundamental assumptions regarding the notions of progress and development.

Originality/value

The paper will sensitize those interested in or working in the field of development to the fact that much of the current practice is influenced by mindsets that emerged several 100 years ago. Links to the past are seldom considered in a field focussed on improving the future. Nonetheless, such an approach is invaluable if genuine change in expert behavior is to be achieved.

Citation

Lepenies, P. (2015), "Accounting for the visiting economist syndrome: Reflections on the emergence of a prevalent phenomenon", International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 42 No. 12, pp. 1214-1226. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-03-2014-0065