Using

Southern Theory: Decolonizing Social Thought in Theory, Research

and Application

Raewyn Connell, University of Sydney

The final, definitive version of this paper has been published in Planning Theory, 13(2):
210-223, 2 September 2013, by SAGE Publications Ltd, All rights reserved. [The Author]
http://plt.sagepub.com/content/13/2/210

Introduction: Knowledge, globalization and coloniality
I work at the University of Sydney in Australia. This is a moderately large and
wealthy institution devoted to teaching and producing knowledge. The
managers of the University are much concerned with the visible production of
knowledge and our standing in global league tables. Therefore, when they got
the budget sums wrong in 2011 and proposed to get themselves out of trouble
by sacking three hundred of my fellow workers, the academics they targeted
were those who had failed to produce enough academically certified
publications. The managers were on trend. The Australian government has been
trying for years to introduce systems for ranking universities, departments, and
individuals in terms of research productivity, borrowing these schemes mostly
from Britain. Publication and patent counts, citation rates, journal impact factors
and peer rankings are among the dismal devices for making university research
output measurable, and so auditable.
These devices share a basic feature. To make neoliberal ranking exercises work,
authorities must assume there is a homogeneous domain of knowledge on which
the measuring operations may be performed. In this model there is a single
domain of biochemistry, on which all biochemistry journals and their
contributors can be arrayed and ranked. There is a single domain of sociology, a
single domain of philosophy, and so on. The Web of Knowledge stretches out
smoothly in all directions, embracing all countries, connecting all practitioners in
a global, homogeneous tissue.
In the last decade or so, social scientists on six continents have been arguing that
this model of knowledge is false though its hegemony is a matter of
importance. Quijano (2000) shows the coloniality of power shaping the
intellectual worlds of Latin America; the argument applies elsewhere.
Chakrabartys well-known Provincializing Europe (2000) argues that the
categories and reasonings of social history do not in any simple way translate
from Europe to India. Alatas (2006) documents a rich arena of social-scientific
thought in the Arab world, south and south-east Asia markedly different from
northern models. The anthropologists Comaroff and Comaroff (2011) show in
fine detail experiences and ways of theorising in Africa that may show the future

to the north. Bhambra (2007) makes a powerful critique of the Eurocentric

imaginings underpinning sociological concepts of modernity. Reuter and Villa
(2010) and Gutirrez, Boatc and Costa (2010) in Europe, Go (2012) in the
United States, show the need for postcolonial perspectives in sociology. Keim
(2008) makes an extended case study of the distinctive logic of industrial
sociology in southern Africa. My Southern Theory (Connell 2007) shows hidden
geopolitical assumptions in northern social theory and discusses a wide range of
powerful social thought from the colonized and postcolonial world.
A feature of this recent work, and one of the ways it differs from postcolonial
studies in the humanities, is a global sociology of knowledge based on what
might be called a political economy of knowledge. A key contribution was made
by Hountondjis (1997) analysis of the post-colonial periphery as a site of
knowledge production. There is a global division of labour, running through the
history of modern science and still powerful today. The role of the periphery is
to supply data, and later to apply knowledge in the form of technology and
method. The role of the metropole, as well as producing data, is to collate and
process data, producing theory (including methodology), and developing
applications which are later exported to the periphery.
Within this structure, Hountondji argues, the attitude of intellectuals in the
periphery is one of extraversion, i.e. being oriented to sources of authority
outside their own society. This is very familiar in academic practice even in a
rich peripheral country like Australia. We travel to Berkeley for advanced
training, take our sabbatical in Cambridge, invite a Yale professor to give our
keynote address, visit a Berlin laboratory, teach from US textbooks, read theory
from Paris, and try to publish our papers in Nature or the American Economic
Review. This pattern is empirically demonstrable; it is named academic
dependency by Alatas (2006) and quasi-globalization in my study of
Australian intellectual workers (Connell 2011 ch. 6).
The picture of the world sociology and economy of knowledge is being filled out
empirically in the course of these discussions. For instance Keim (2011) has
shown quantitatively the dominance of northern institutions in globally-
recognized social science; Murphy and Zhu (2012) do the same for management
studies. Keim has fascinating data on the limited presence of southern
intellectuals in a particular northern research centre. Collyer (2012) develops a
method of contextual citation analysis that shows the unequal location of
Australian, UK and US sociologists in a hierarchical world structure. Hanafi
(2011) shows the stratification of intellectual production in the Middle East, with
intellectual workers compartmentalized by language and type of institution and
research.
How can the global pattern of centrality vs dependence be contested? One way is
to assert alternative knowledge systems. There is, in some views, an African
knowledge system - or perhaps multiple ones - independent of the Western
knowledge system (see the discussions in Odora Hoppers 2002). Similar
arguments are made for indigenous knowledge in North and South America, in
Australia, and elsewhere. The de-colonial school (Mignolo 2007) presents a

politics of knowledge based on absolute opposition between the colonizing

culture and the colonized.
Indigenous knowledge is often asserted as a retort to the imperialism of Western
science or culture. This retort has had a political impact, and its consequences
have not always been happy. The attempt in South Africa to combat the HIV
epidemic by means of local healing practices in place of antiretrovirals (rather
than mutually supporting) was a devastating mistake (Cullinan and Thom 2009).
Hountondji is one who is critical of a silo approach to indigenous knowledge. He
has formulated a concept of endogenous knowledge which emphasises active
processes of knowledge production that arise in indigenous societies and have a
capacity to speak beyond them: the emphasis is communication not separation
(Hountondji 1997, 2002).
To understand these discontinuities and asymmetries in knowledge, we have to
start with what brought them into existence: conquest, the world of colonialism,
and the world of neoliberal globalization in which new kinds of colonialism have
appeared. In the eloquent opening passage of Architects of Poverty, Mbeki (2009,
pp. x-xi) compares the slave house on Goree Island, off the coast of Senegal at the
westernmost point of Africa, with the oil-rigs off the coast of the Gulf of Guinea.
Both have a door onto the sea. The former carried slaves onto waiting ships to
cross the Atlantic, while the latter pumps crude oil straight onto tankers bound
for the United States, industrialising east Asia, and Europe.

Intelligentsias, empire and knowledge production
Producing knowledge is a form of labour, done by specific groups of workers in
specific social contexts. There is a labour process, which was re-structured by
colonialism, and is now being re-structured by neoliberal globalization.
Intellectual workers are not only those with a PhD or a best-selling book.
Intellectual labour is often collective; it is done in institutional settings ranging
from corporations to schools to churches, and can be combined with other forms
of work. Further, intellectual work is shaped into different projects of
knowledge formation.
Intellectual workers reflect the divisions in and the history of the societies in
which they live. Often the gender division of labour creates very different
situations for women and men as producers of knowledge, a fact recognized in
feminist standpoint theory (Harding 2008). It is also important to recognize the
different situations for intellectual workers created by the process of
colonization.
In the periphery, the group closest to the intelligentsia of the metropole were the
intellectual workers of settler society. To use the language of Spanish America,
this is the creole intelligentsia. Creole intellectuals are as diverse as Sor Juana,
the great seventeenth-century poet of Mexico; Thomas Jefferson, revolutionary
and slave-owner of Virginia; Rudyard Kipling, story-teller and ideologue of
British India; and Alfred Deakin, journalist, historian and second Prime Minister
of federated Australia. Colonialism involved massive violence, everywhere, but it

also required an intellectual workforce to operate what Mudimbe (1988) calls

the colonizing structure controlling space, integrating the economy, and
changing the natives minds. There was also a need to maintain solidarity among
the settler population and adapt metropolitan culture to colonial conditions, as
missionaries, teachers, surveyors, agronomists, engineers, geologists,
ethnographers, poets and journalists.

The creole intelligentsia was defined by the fact of empire. They were bearers of
metropolitan culture in new lands, and often had an intense engagement with
fine details of this culture witness the technical virtuosity of Sor Juana,
deploying the abstruse literary knowledge and complex forms of baroque
versification in Spanish (Paz 1988). But they were constantly defined by
metropolitan culture as inferior - rough, derivative and remote. The cultural
cringe diagnosed two generations ago by the Australian literary critic Arthur
Phillips (1950) is characteristic of creole cultures. Yet part of the creole
intelligentsia could be pushed into outright opposition to empire: Jefferson and
Bolivar come to mind.
Initially sharply separate from creole intellectuals were the indigenous
intelligentsias, who found the societies supporting their work being directly or
indirectly disrupted. The ulama of Muslim societies in the Arabic and Persianate
regions, the Brahmin intellectuals of India, and the mandarin class of neo-
Confucian China, are the best-known groups in this situation. The poets and
technologists of sub-saharan Africa, the architects and scribes of meso-America,
the elders of Aboriginal communities in pre-colonial Australia, for all the
enormous differences between them, shared this relationship to empire.
The cultures of which they were the bearers became the subject-matter of
curiosity in the metropole, culminating in Orientalist scholarship and cultural
anthropology. A similar approach could be taken by intellectuals under colonial
rule, for instance G. S. Ghurye, the founding spirit of the Bombay school of
sociology, who saw the study of ancient Sanskrit texts as the key to
understanding contemporary Indian society (Dhanagare 2011). But the working
of the colonizing structure irreversibly re-shaped the conditions of intellectual
work.
Some of the intellectuals of colonized societies turned to the task of adapting
rather than simply preserving, combining this with critique of the conquest and
sieving the culture of the colonizers. Mahatma Gandhi famously said that he
discovered the principles of nonviolence in Christianity, not in Indian tradition.
Others found more help in marxism. The volus, the evolved ones, as French
colonialism called the adapters, were eventually the key to the liberation
movements of the mid-twentieth century. They shattered the French, Dutch and
British empires in Africa and Asia, as the creole leaders of the late eighteenth and
early nineteenth century had shattered the old empires in the Americas.
But after independence, both groups had to imagine a post-colonial social order.
The creole intellectuals of settler colonies laid the foundations for new nations
such as the United States and Australia, but were strikingly unable to fashion

inclusive societies with a respected place for indigenous cultures. The

modernizing intellectuals of indigenous-majority states the best-known being
Nkrumah, Nehru, and Sukarno also had to imagine new social orders, including
new educational and cultural projects. This has proved difficult in the face of
poverty, global capitalism and neo-colonial violence. Mbeki (2009), Mkandawire
(2005) and other authors trace the failure of the independence-era projects of
social and cultural development in Africa, in military coups, cold-war subversion
by the United States, and corruption of governing elites. Modernizing indigenous
intellectuals in settler-colonial states such as Australia have never had even
temporary relief from the pressure of the colonizing structure. It was the creole
intellectuals such as Deakin who wrote the constitution of Australia, which was
only amended to include indigenous people in the census of the population the
mark of acknowledged citizenship - as recently as 1967.
In the era of neoliberal globalization, the question is now what kind of
intelligentsia is sustainable in post-colonial settings, that has any kind of
autonomy from the powerful northern-centered economy of knowledge
described earlier. The privatisation of higher education, the standardization of
curricula and pedagogy, and the intensification of competition, all weaken an
autonomous workforce. So does the dependence of research, across much of the
periphery, on aid programmes and NGOs which tend to produce, as Mkandawire
(2005) emphasises, short-term, under-funded projects on applied problems.
The Iranian sociologist, theologian and activist Ali Shariati was one who worked
towards a longer-term solution. Towards the end of his life, he was in a
progressive Islamic centre, the Hosseiniyeh Ershad in Tehran, and developed for
this institution an ambitious research and teaching programme (Shariati 1986).
Shariatis concept of rushanfekr, intellectuals who have a sense of responsibility
for their time and society and wish to do something about it, is attractive. But
such intellectuals capacity to understand deeply and to connect with the mass of
the people has to be taken on faith. Hosseiniyeh Ershad was closed, and Shariati
died, before the programme had run very long.

Intellectual projects of the world arena
Intellectual work may also be analyzed in terms of the projects in which it is
organized: the tasks undertaken, the intentions, and the way the work evolves in
historical time. Certain intellectual projects are called into existence by the
historical process of colonization, decolonization and globalization.
The first, undertaken by intellectuals of the colonized society, is simply the
defence and preservation of indigenous knowledge and practices, in the chaos
and violence of conquest. The importance and difficulty of this task, and the
resilience of the communities doing it, are shown by stories such as Somerville
and Perkins beautiful book Singing the Coast (2010), based on the memories of
one Aboriginal community in northern New South Wales.
The second task is thinking the invasion. However unforeseen colonization is
from the point of view of the colonized incomprehensible violence being the

usual starting point - all colonized people try to make sense of what has
happened to them. Narratives of events are preserved among the survivors as
oral tradition, and sometimes written down as Somerville and Perkins did.
The picture of the colonizers is not likely to be flattering. Al-Afghani (1881), one
of the great Islamic modernisers, understood the British - the superpower in his
world - quite straightforwardly as a band of tyrants and robbers. It is difficult to
imagine any other view being taken by indigenous thinkers of Corts or Pizarro
in the conquest of Mexico and Peru. Documenting the violence of conquest is still
an uncomfortable matter for settler populations, as shown by right-wing
complaints about black armband history in Australia, or by the backlash against
Hochschilds book King Leopolds Ghost (2006), which narrated the ghastly
massacres of Congolese people by Belgian colonialism a hundred years before.
When the conquerors stayed, when the missionaries dug in, the plantations were
set up, the colonial cities were built, and the settlers began to reproduce
themselves, a third knowledge project formed. Analysis of colonial and global
social orders, not just conquest and domination, was required. This has been a
huge task, continuing to our day, and it is shared (though unevenly) across all the
intelligentsias of empire.
Among the great works in this genre are Jos Rizals (1887, 1891) two novels
dissecting the corrupt late-colonial society of the Philippines; Solomon Tsekisho
Plaatjes Native Life in South Africa (1916), on the causes and consequences of
the neo-colonial states grab for indigenous communities land; Frantz Fanons
Black Skin, White Masks (1952), on the psychology of racism and colonial
identity; Heleith Saffiotis Woman in Class Society (1969), a strikingly original
analysis of gender relations in colonial and postcolonial Brasil; Samir Amins
Accumulation on a World Scale (1974), analyzing the economics of global
capitalism; and Ashis Nandys The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self
under Colonialism (1983), which includes a brilliant account of the dynamics of
masculinity in British colonialism.
These remarkable writers did more than analyze colonialism or neo-colonialism.
Rizal had an ambivalent relationship with the underground resistance but he
was shot by the Spanish authorities as a subversive and became the national
hero. Plaatje was unambiguously the general secretary of the South African
Native National Congress, which became the ANC. Fanon went on to activism in
the Algerian war of independence and to write the enormously influential The
Wretched of the Earth. Amin worked for the post-colonial Nasser regime in
Egypt and then was deeply involved in African development debates. Saffioti
was a socialist militant and became an activist against gender violence. Nandy
went on to become one of the leading public intellectuals in India, and a critic
both of the secular developmentalist state and militant Hindu nationalism.
This third project, understanding the new society created by colonialism and
neocolonialism, articulating interests and purposes within that society, and
constructing art and knowledge from the periphery, is a dynamic project,
significantly different from the preservation of traditions. It means creating
theories that have not existed before, or greatly changing existing theories. The
project requires experimentation, boundary-crossing, and risk; it is likely to be

interdisciplinary, sometimes radically so. Hauofas (2008) combination of social

and cultural critique with experimental visual art is a notable example, in the
context of Pacific island society.
The analysis of colonialism therefore leads to problems about knowledge itself,
for these analyses do not generally arise, and are not comfortably contained
within, the knowledge structures of the global metropole. We can thus define a
fourth intellectual project: the reconstruction of knowledge that is set in train by
colonialism and decolonization. None of this is simple; indeed it may be highly
controversial. Hountondji (1976) made his reputation with a brilliant critique of
African philosophy, the genre of writing that purported to discover an ontology
in the folk tales, legends, oral poetry and language of African communities. Jos
Mauricio Domingues (2009) finds similar problems in the treatment of
indigenous thought in the contemporary de-colonial school. Familiar research
frameworks are called into question by Linda Tuhiwai Smiths (1999) argument
for decolonizing methodology, constructing social science around the needs,
and with the resources, of indigenous communities in Aotearoa New Zealand.
We also have the continuing problem of dependence and absorption into global
circuits. The central theme of Mbekis Architects of Poverty, mentioned above, is
the collusion between African elites and transnational capital, resulting in a
systematic looting of the continent. There is no reason to think intellectual
workers are immune from such temptations, even if the economic stakes are
smaller.
And yet the subaltern does speak. If not directly, then in coded ways, through
the subalterns impact on the privileged. The secret will out, even in the fears of
those who hold power. From this point of view, the neoliberal audit regime that
I mentioned at the start, the obsessive counting, measuring, ranking and testing
that reduces culture and knowledge to a tightly-packaged blancmange, is itself
proof of what it seeks to suppress: the tremendous lurid diversity, the erupting
multiplicity, of possible projects of knowledge.

Applications
A fifth project has attracted little discussion, but has actually been happening and
has large potential: the application of southern theory and postcolonial
perspectives. Many areas of social science are closely linked with forms of
professional or social-movement practice. Its not surprising if de-colonizing
approaches emerge in these arenas too; and very recently they have proliferated.
Since this is not a well-known change, I will list the areas in which I know such
work has already appeared, and give a few examples.

Education. Hickling-Hudson (2009, 2011) has a detailed discussion of the
uses of southern theory and recognition of the imperial aftermath in teacher
education. Epstein and Morrell (2012) develop the relevance for educational
research and policy about gender issues. Gale (2009) has made the application
to higher education.


Disability. Meekosha (2011) has made a full-scale postcolonial critique of
disability studies, pointing out that the majority of disabled people are in the
global south and colonialism itself is massively disabling. Meekosha and Soldatic
(2011) apply the critique to human rights discourse and argue for an embodied-
social alternative.

Applied Psychology. Burns (2008a, b) has applied southern theory to
counselling practice and education, including career development, with
suggestions for postcolonial practice in relation to indigenous culture. There is
an older Latin American literature of liberation psychology (Montero 2007) in
which practice supporting anti-colonial struggle is central.

Youth Studies. Nilan (2011) offers a postcolonial critique of the
intellectual division of labour in youth studies, and conceptions of globalization
such as the inappropriate generalization of ideas of individualization.

Social Work. Ranta-Tyrkk (2011) offers a postcolonial critique of
orthodox social-work thinking and training, from a Scandinavian starting-point,
with discussion of practice in India and Nordic involvements in the colonial
world.

Management Studies. Westwood and Jack (2007) offer nothing less than a
postcolonial manifesto for management studies! - arguing for overthrowing the
dominant perspectives in this field.

Development Studies. This is where southern perspectives might be
expected in strength; and postcolonial critiques are not lacking (Escobar 1995).
Nevertheless Schech (2012) shows that northern hegemony in this field
continues, and explores the possibility of an antipodean perspective within it.

Criminology. White (2009) examines which global actors accounts of
criminality count, and develops a concept of transnational environmental harm.
Aas (2012) provides a remarkable synthesis of the geopolitics of criminological
knowledge and their consequences.

Geography. Not an applied field in quite the same sense, but closely
involved with development policy issues, so Ill note the vigorous discussion
going on about southern perspectives in geographical knowledge (Parnell and
Robinson 2012) and the implications for, among other things, mapping (Sidaway
2012).

Urban Studies and Planning. Robinsons Ordinary Cities (2006) has
already had a large impact as an alternative to global city models. Watson
(2008, 2009) argues for refocussing urban planning theory and practice on the
worlds central urban issues, i.e. those of the south, requiring a critique of
dominant models in planning.
This list is certainly not exhaustive, but it shows the scope of discussions already
under way about practical uses of southern and postcolonial perspectives from
the social sciences. It is enough, I hope, to support a few reflections on the
possibilities and problems.

In many of these contributions, an important part of the process is a critical

unpacking of mainstream literature in a field of practice textbooks, established
paradigms, bibliographies revealing northern dominance of the discourse, and
extraversion in the global south. As well as showing something important about
the history of a specific practical field, this helps explain the persistence of the
overall northern-centric pattern of global knowledge production discussed at the
start of this essay. The intellectual hegemony of the metropole has a broad
institutional underpinning, including universities but extending far beyond them
into professions, governments, corporations and communities of practice;
creating in these institutions a common-sense in which other logics of
knowledge seem exotic, objectionable or downright crazy.
We cannot oppose this by treating southern theory as if it were a distinct set of
propositions, an alternative paradigm to be erected in opposition to the
hegemonic concepts. We dont want another system of intellectual dominance.
Certainly there are important propositions to be advanced from southern
perspectives; such as the great importance of the land for social theory and
practice (Agarwal 1994, Connell 2007 ch. 9, Davy 2009, Maia 2011). But Epstein
and Morrell put the main point perfectly when they write:
Southern theory does not exist simply to be picked up and adopted or
showcased. It is a challenge, something that needs to be developed... It is
a project that is an integral part of campaigns for democracy and social
justice though it invites fresh, and possibly iconoclastic, approaches to old
problems. (2012: 472)
The literature just outlined has many examples of the practical uses of southern
perspectives in professional or political practice. An excellent example is
provided by Hickling-Hudsons (2011) discussion of teacher education in
Brisbane. Using experience and stories from Jamaica, Ghana, Malawi, Cuba and
mainland America as well as Australia, she is able to launch students on
challenging debates about curriculum and pedagogy, including the hidden
curriculum of mainstream western education, as well as aid politics and global
history. Similarly Burns (2008) discusses white counsellors in New Zealand
learning from Maori culture; Singh (2011) shows how doctoral education can
learn from international students; Schech (2012) discusses changing practices of
development aid; Fennell and Arnot (2008) and Watson (2008), in very different
fields, discuss practices of researchers.
Thinking at the level of practices helps with a persistent problem about the
reception of intellectual work from the south in mainstream northern settings.
When talking about these issues in northern universities I have often been asked,
in one way or another, What does this add to what we already know? The
assumptions bear thinking about, but these questions relate to real issues about
curriculum, citation practices, and the like. And it is in practical terms that the
issue should be reformulated: What does this ask us to do that we are not now
doing, as knowledge workers?
The argument for southern theory isnt mainly about different propositions, but
about different knowledge practices. And what we ask northern intellectuals to
do, more than anything else, is start learning in new ways, and in new

relationships. This is vigorously argued by McFarlane (2006) in a notable

exploration of the creative learning possibilities between north and south,
contesting the usual models of knowledge transfer and the epistemic and
institutional bases of north/south divisions. And it is the practical purpose of my
story-telling in Southern Theory.
Applications in practice have a further consequence: they have intellectual
effects, and lead back to theory. In their very different fields, the explorations of
practice by Aas (2012), Watson (2008) and Meekosha and Sodatic (2011) pose
profound questions for theorists and researchers in the pure social sciences on
which criminology, urban planning and disability studies draw including
questions about the nature and scale of social violence, the contemporary role of
the state, and the nature of social embodiment. Fields of critique are also up for
change: as Parnell and Robinson (2012) show, the familiar critiques of global
neoliberalism by northern intellectuals need re-thinking from the south.

In conclusion
Changing the practices of knowledge workers is not easy; it needs organized
support as well as convincing argument. The South-South dialogues that have
occurred in the last two decades episodic and uncertain as they are therefore
seem of great importance. They include dialogues around indigenous
knowledge, and links among southern knowledge institutions such as CODESRIA
and CLACSO. Transnational feminist and environmental movements have
produced multiple networks and forums; there are connections around the
World Social Forum and even through United Nations forums. There are
imaginative adventures such as the Russian/Argentine comparison of post-
authoritarian transition recently published by Laboratorium (Heredia and
Kirtchik 2010), and the international project of rethinking social transformation
led by Santos (2007).
The literature on southern theory and the decolonization of knowledge
mentioned at the start of this paper is connected with these moves. Global
reviews of fields of knowledge that give attention to work around the periphery
have been multiplying (e.g. Patel 2010, Burawoy Chang and Hsieh 2010).
Specific sites such as www.southernperspectives.net and the International
Sociological Associations lively www.isa-sociology.org/global-dialogue/ have
been created.
These initiatives are still on a limited scale. They are, perhaps, important as
indications of what is possible. The structural differences between metropole
and periphery, and between rich and poor in the periphery, remain important.
They still shape the formation of intelligentsias, their resources, and the
conditions of their work. The multiple knowledge projects that arise in the
world social order are also shaped by global structures. But they are in an
important sense open-ended, and can be shared by intellectual workers who
have different structural positions. In that sense, despite all the modern
mechanisms of high-technology surveillance and cultural control, a far more
democratic agenda for knowledge formation on a world scale has now become

10

possible. It is up to us now to find practical ways of educating, resourcing, and

sustaining the workforces who can make it real.

Acknowledgments
I am very grateful to Rebecca Pearse, whose professionalism and imagination as
research assistant underpin key parts of this paper.

REFERENCES
Aas, Katja Franko. 2012. The Earth is one but the world is not: Criminological
theory and its geopolitical divisions. Theoretical Criminology, vol. 16 no. 1,
5-20.
Agarwal, Bina. 1994. A Field of One's Own: Gender and Land Rights in South Asia,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Al-Afghani, Sayyid Jamal ad-Din. 1881. Refutation of the Materialists. Pp. 130-
174 in An Islamic Response to Imperialism: Political and Religious Writings
of Sayyid Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani. Trans. Nikki R. Keddie and Hamid Algar.
Berkeley, University of California Press, 1968.
Alatas, Syed Farid. 2006. Alternative Discourses in Asian Social Science: Responses
to Eurocentrism. New Delhi, Sage.
Amin, Samir. 1974. Accumulation on a World Scale: A Critique of the Theory of
Underdevelopment. New York and London: Monthly Review Press.
Bhambra, Gurminder K. 2007. Rethinking Modernity: Postcolonialism and the
Sociological Imagination. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Burawoy, Michael, Mau-kuei Chang and Michelle Fei-yu Hsieh, ed. 2010. Facing
an Unequal World: Challenges for a Global Sociology. Three volumes. Taipei,
Academia Sinica.
Burns, Edgar. 2008. How can a southern theory perspective contribute to New
Zealand counselling? New Zealand Journal of Counselling, vol. 28 no. 2, 10-
24.
Burns, Edgar. 2008. Southern theory perspective and career development.
Australian Journal of Career Development, vol. 17 no. 2, 30-37.
Chakrabarty, Dipesh. 2000. Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and
Historical Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Collyer, Fran. 2012. Sociology, sociologists and core-periphery reflections.
Journal of Sociology, online DOI: 10.1177/1440783312448687.
Comaroff, Jean and John L. Comaroff. 2011. Theory from the South: Or, How Euro-
America is Evolving towards Africa. Boulder: Paradigm.

11

Connell, Raewyn. 2007. Southern Theory: The Global Dynamics of Knowledge in

Social Science. Sydney, Allen & Unwin.
Connell, Raewyn. 2011. Confronting Equality: Gender, Knowledge and Global
Change. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Cullinan, Kerry and Anso Thom, ed. 2009. The Virus, Vitamins and Vegetables:
The South African HIV/AIDS Mystery. Cape Town: Jacana.
Davy, Benjamin. 2009. The poor and the land: poverty, property, planning.
TPR, vol. 80 no. 3, 227-265.
Dhanagare, D. N. 2011. Legacy and Rigour: The Bombay School of Sociology
and Its Impact in Universities in Maharashtra. Pp. 127-157 in Sujata
Patel, ed., Doing Sociology in India: Genealogies, Locations, and Practices.
New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Domingues, Jos Maurcio. 2009. Global Modernization, Coloniality and a
Critical Sociology for Contemporary Latin America. Theory, Culture &
Society, vol. 26 no. 1, 112-133.
Epstein, Debbie and Robert Morrell. 2012. Approaching Southern theory:
explorations of gender in South African education. Gender and Education,
vol. 24 no. 5, 469-482.
Escobar, Arturo. 1995. Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of
the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Fanon, Frantz. 1967 [1952]. Black Skin, White Masks. London: Pluto.
Fennell, Shailaja and Madeleine Arnot. 2008. Decentring hegemonic gender
theory: the implications for educational research. Compare, vol. 38 no. 5,
525-538.
Gale, Trevor. 2009. Towards a southern theory of higher education. Keynote
address to 12th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education conference,
Townsville.
Go, Julian. 2012. For a postcolonial sociology. Theory and Society, online
10.1007/x11186-012-9184-6.
Gutirrez Rodrguez, Encarnacin, Manuela Boatc and Srgio Costa, eds. 2010.
Decolonizing European Sociology: Transdisciplinary Approaches. Farnham,
Surrey and Burlington, VT, Ashgate.
Hanafi, Sari. 2011. University systems in the Arab East: Publish globally and
perish locally vs publish locally and perish globally. Current Sociology, vol.
59 no. 3, 291-309.
Harding, Sandra. 2008. Sciences from Below: Feminisms, Postmodernisms, and
Modernities. Durham: Duke University Press.
Hau'ofa, Epeli. 2008. We Are the Ocean. Honolulu, University of Hawai'i Press.

12

Heredia, Mariana and Olessia Kirtchik. 2010. Comparing post-Soviet and Latin
American societies: from transition to transformation. Laboratorium,
vol. 2 no. 3, 5-12.
Hickling-Hudson, Anne. 2009. Southern theory and its dynamics for postcolonial
education. Pp. 365-376 in Roland Sintos Coloma, ed., Postcolonial
Challenges in Education, New York, Peter Lang.
Hickling-Hudson, Anne. 2011. Teaching to disrupt preconceptions: education for
social justice in the imperial aftermath. Compare, vol. 41 no. 4, 453-465.
Hochschild, Adam. 2006. King Leopolds Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror and
Heroism in Colonial Africa. Updated edition. London: Pan Macmillan.
Hountondji, Paulin J. 1983 [1976]. African Philosophy: Myth and Reality. Trans. H.
Evans and J. Re. London, Hutchinson.
Hountondji, Paulin J., ed. 1997 [1994]. Endogenous Knowledge: Research Trails.
Dakar, CODESRIA.
Hountondji, Paulin J. 2002. The Struggle for Meaning: Reflections on Philosophy,
Culture, and Democracy in Africa. Athens OH, Ohio University Press.
Keim, Wiebke. 2008. Vermessene Disziplin: Zum konterhegemonialen Potential
afrikanischer und lateinamerikanischer Soziologien. Bielefeld: transcript
Verlag.
Keim, Wiebke. 2011. Counterhegemonic currents and internationalization of
sociology: theoretical reflections and an empirical example. International
Sociology, vo. 26 no. 1, 123-145.
McFarlane, Colin. 2006. Crossing borders: development, learning and the North-
South divide. Third World Quarterly, vol. 27 no. 8, 1413-1437.
Maia, Joo Marcelo Ehlert. 2011. Space, social theory and peripheral imagination:
Brazilian intellectual history and de-colonial debates. International
Sociology, vol. 26 no. 3, 392-407.
Mbeki, Moeletsi. 2009. Architects of Poverty: Why African Capitalism needs
Changing. Johannesburg, Picador Africa.
Meekosha, Helen. 2011. Decolonizing disability: thinking and acting globally.
Disability and Society, vol. 26 no. 6, 667-681.
Meekosha, Helen and Karen Soldatic. 2011. Human rights and the global south:
the case of disability. Third World Quarterly, vol. 32 no. 8, 1383-1398.
Mignolo, Walter D. 2007. Delinking: The rhetoric of modernity, the logic of
coloniality and the grammar of de-coloniality. Cultural Studies, vol. 21 nos.
2-3, 449-514.
Mkandawire, Thandika, ed. 2005. African Intellectuals: Rethinking Politics,
Language, Gender and Development. Dakar, CODESRIA; London, Zed Books.

13

Montero, Maritza. 2007. The political psychology of liberation: from politics to

ethics and back. Political Psychology, vol. 28 no. 5, 517-533.
Mudimbe, V. Y. 1988. The Invention of Africa: Gnosis, Philosophy, and the Order of
Knowledge. Bloomington, Indiana University Press.
Murphy, Jonathan and Jingqi Zhu. 2012. Neo-colonialism in the academy? Anglo-
American domination in management journals. Organization, vol. 19 no. 6,
915-927.
Nandy, Ashis. 1983. The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self under
Colonialism. New Delhi, Oxford University Press.
Nilan, Pam. 2011. Youth sociology must cross cultures. Youth Studies Australia,
vol. 30 n o. 3, 20-26.
Odora Hoppers, Catherine A., ed. 2002. Indigenous Knowledge and the Integration
of Knowledge Systems: Towards a Philosophy of Articulation. Claremont,
New Africa Books.
Parnell, Susan and Jennifer Robinson. 2012. (Re)theorizing cities from the global
south: looking beyond neoliberalism. Urban Geography, vol. 33 no. 4, 593-
617.
Patel, Sujata, ed. 2010. International Handbook of Diverse Sociological Traditions.
London, Sage.
Paz, Octavio. 1988. Sor Juana, or, The Traps of Faith. Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press.
Phillips, Arthur. 1950. The cultural cringe. Meanjin: A Literary Magazine, vol. 9
no. 4, 299-302.
Plaatje, Sol. T. 1982 [1916]. Native Life in South Africa: Before and since the
European war and the Boer rebellion. New edition, Braamfontein, Ravan
Press.
Quijano, Anbal. 2000. Coloniality of power and Eurocentrism in Latin America.
International Sociology, vol. 15 no. 2, 215-232.
Ranta-Tyrkk, Satu. 2011. High time for postcolonial analysis in social work.
Nordic Social Work Research, vol. 1 no. 1, 25-41.
Reuter, Julia and Paula-Irene Villa, ed. 2010. Postkoloniale Soziologie: Empirische
Befunde, theoretische Anschlsse, politische Intervention. Bielefeld:
transcript.
Rizal, Jos. 2006 [1887]. Noli Me Tangere. New York: Penguin.
Rizal, Jos. 2011 [1891]. El Filibusterismo. New York: Penguin.
Robinson, Jennifer. 2006. Ordinary Cities: Between Modernity and Development.
London: Routledge.

14

Saffioti, Heleieth I. B. 1978 [1969]. Women in Class Society [A mulher na sociedade

de classes] New York: Monthly Review Press.
Santos, Boaventura de Sousa, ed. 2007. Another Knowledge is Possible: Beyond
Northern Epistemologies. London: Verso.
Schech, Susanne. 2012. Development perspectives from the Antipodes: an
introduction. Third World Quarterly, vol. 33 no. 6, 969-980.
Shariati, Ali. 1986. What Is to be Done? The Enlightened Thinkers and an Islamic
Renaissance. Ed. Farhang Rajaee. Houston, Institute for Research and
Islamic Studies.
Sidaway, James D. 2012. Geographies of development: new maps, new visions?
The Professional Geographer, vol. 64 no. 1, 49-62.
Singh, Michael. 2011. Learning from China to internationalize Australian
research education: pedagogies of intellectual equality and optimal
ignorance of ERA journal rankings. Innovations in Education and Teaching
International, vol. 48 no. 4, 355-365.
Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. 1999. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and
Indigenous Peoples. London, Zed Books.
Somerville, Margaret and Tony Perkins. 2010. Singing the Coast. Canberra,
Aboriginal Studies Press.
Watson, Vanessa. 2008. Down to earth: linking planning theory and practice in
the metropole and beyond. International Planning Studies, vol. 13 no. 3,
223-237.
Watson, Vanessa. 2009. Seeing from the south: refocusing urban planning on the
globes central urban issues. Urban Studies, vol. 46 no. 11, 2259-2275.
Westwood, R. I. and Gavin Jack. 2007. Manifesto for a post-colonial international
business and management studies: a provocation. Critical Perspectives on
International Business, vol. 3 no. 3, 246-265.
White, Rob. 2009. Researching transnational environmental harm: toward an
eco-global criminology. International Journal of Comparative and Applied
Criminal Justice, vol. 33 no. 2, 229-248.

15