“Development Capital of the Poor” Toward the Shaping of Policy and Ethics: Case Studies of IKEA–EDF and Prudential–FOPDEV
Keywords:
Development Capital, Cross-Sector Collaboration, Development Project, Beneficiary, NonprofitAbstract
This research critically examined the role of the “development capital” of “the poor” in shaping decision-making on policy, ethics, and practices in beneficiary selection within cross-sector collaborations. Focusing on partnerships between multinational corporations (MNCs) and local foundations in Thailand, the research aimed to unpack development capital [1], influencing how beneficiaries were identified and selected for development projects.
Employing a qualitative, interpretivist methodology grounded in the epistemological application of the “field of practice” [2], the study analysed two prominent case studies: IKEA–EDF (Nonthaburi Province) and Prudential-FOPDEV (Chiang Mai, Chiang Rai, Ayutthaya, and Krabi Provinces). Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 51 participants were conducted with project stakeholders, including foundation and MNC staff, selected beneficiaries, non-beneficiaries, and community leaders, providing a comprehensive exploration of collaborative practices.
Findings revealed inherent and ethical tensions in selecting beneficiaries for development projects, highlighting conflicting conceptualizations of poverty, variations in perceived beneficiary agency, and implicit conditions of development projects. The interplay of different forms of development capital including objectified capital, embodied capital and habitus significantly shaped policy formulation, ethical considerations, and practical guidelines within cross-sector collaborations involving local foundations and MNCs in Thailand.
References
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
Krause, M. (2014). The good project: Humanitarian relief NGOs and the fragmentation of reason. University of Chicago Press.
Brehm, V. M. (2004). Autonomy or dependence? Case studies of North–South NGO partnership. INTRAC Publications.
Banks, N., Hulme, D., & Edwards, M. (2015). NGOs, states, and donors revisited: Still too close for comfort? World Development, 66, 707-718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.09.028
Bourdieu, P. (2021). Forms of capital (P. Collier, Trans.; P. Champagne & J. Duval, Eds.). Polity.
Kenan Institute Asia. (2012). Thailand NGO Awards 2012 casebook. On Art Creation.
Fowler, A. (2000). NGO futures: Beyond aid: NGDO values and the fourth position. Third World Quarterly, 21(4), 589-603.
Pulsawasd, S. (2024). Who are the chosen poor?: An examination of cross-sector partnerships for development projects between MNCs and local NGOs in Thailand (Doctoral thesis). University of East London. https://doi.org/10.15123/uel.8yxvz
Schöneberg, J. (2016). Making development political: NGOs as agents for alternatives to development. Nomos.
van Wessel, M. (2023). Starting advocacy programmes from the South: Rethinking multi-country programming. In M. van Wessel, T. Kontinen, & J. N. Bawole (Eds.), Reimagining civil society collaborations in development (pp. 249-264). Routledge.
Smith, S. R. (2009). NGOs and contracting. In E. Ferlie, L. E. Lynn, & C. Pollitt (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public management (pp. 591–614). Oxford University Press.
Anheier, H. K., Gerhards, J., & Romo, F. P. (1995). Forms of capital and social structure in cultural fields: Examining Bourdieu’s social topography. American Journal of Sociology, 100(4), 859-903.
Ebrahim, A. (2005). NGOs and organizational change: Discourse, reporting, and learning. Cambridge University Press.
Pickering-Saqqa, S. (2019). Why work “at home”? Oxfam’s value-added and the UK Poverty Programme. Development in Practice, 29(4), 477-488. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2018.1560078
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago Press.
Habib, Y. A., & Gilalo, J. J. (2025). Social justice theory in Indonesia reviewed from the philosophy of law. International Journal of Business, Law, and Education, 6(1), 238–247.
Tudoran, M. A., Tîru, L. G., & Neagoe, A. (2025). Converging concepts of social justice: A bibliometric analysis. Social Work Review/Revista de Asistență Socială, (2).
Nasirov, E. O., & Uwanyirigira, E. (2016). Managing beneficiary involvement in non-governmental organisations implementing with, for, and by the beneficiaries. Umeå School of Business and Economics.
Perić, M., Pavlović, M., & Premović, J. (2024, April). Integrated approach to development in protected natural resources. In Proceedings of the Third International Scientific Conference: Challenges of Modern Economy and Society through the Prism of Green Economy and Sustainable Development-CESGED 2024 (pp. 383-393).
Fowler, A. (2008). Development and the new security agenda: W(h)ither(ing) NGO alternatives? In A. Bebbington, S. Hickey, & D. C. Mitlin (Eds.), Can NGOs make a difference? The challenge of development alternatives (pp. 111-130). Zed Books.
Fowler, A., & Malunga, C. W. (Eds.). (2010). NGO management: The Earthscan companion. Earthscan.
Fowler, A., & Biekart, K. (2013). Relocating civil society in a politics of civic-driven change. Development Policy Review, 31(4), 463-483.
Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds.). (2012). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. University of Chicago Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 PAAT Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
