Kada razmišljamo o ponovnom osmišljavanju moći, pada na pamet afrička filozofska poslovica koja postavlja pitanje: Da li je brica nesposoban da ošiša kosu, ili njegov alat nije dobar, ili možda vlasnik kose ne zna kako i šta? Brica i njegov alat (pravila i sistemi) iz dvadesetog veka, zajedno s istorijskim događajima i razvojem, dali su povod za koncept „Ponovnog osmišljavanja moći“, koji postaje popularnija tema od drugih pokreta i osnovnih sila dvadesetog veka – poput rasta populacije, povećanja pismenosti i tehnološke revolucije. Ponovno osmišljavanje moći našlo je svoj put u mnoge škole mišljenja, ali teorijska pismenost često ne menja perspektivu onih koji su neupućeni. Ključno je prevođenje aspiracija u praktičnija, čvršća i stvarnija rešenja za izazove i životne poteškoće unutar sfera ljudskog razvoja. Jasno je da se i dalje suočavamo s velikim posledicama društvenih i ekonomskih posledica koje je stvorio brica, a koje su se proširile industrijalizacijom širom različitih nacionalnih granica. Alat je došao u sukob s različitim kulturama dok je brica dominirao Afrikom, Azijom i drugim regionima sveta. Zaista, bricina moć na globalnom nivou osvojila je i ponovo osvojila teritorije i kolonije koristeći religijske misije i identitete da prodre u život i sve strukture regiona koji je bio šišan.

Da bismo u potpunosti shvatili savremeni koncept „Ponovnog osmišljavanja moći“, naročito u kontekstu razvoja i vlasnika kose, moramo ga pratiti unazad do istorijskog pejzaža dominacije brice u dvadesetom veku. Ovaj period obeležio je vreme kada su bricine dinamike bile duboko oblikovane kolonijalizmom, imperijalizmom i pratećom ekonomskom, političkom i kulturnom dominacijom nad velikim delom Globalnog Juga. Nasleđe struktura moći brice nastavlja da utiče na savremene globalne odnose, razvojne paradigme i sam pojam o tome ko drži moć i kako se ona vrši.

Krajem 19. i početkom 20. veka, brice poput Britanije, Francuske, Belgije i drugih širili su svoje imperije kako bi kontrolisali velike teritorije širom Afrike, Azije i Amerike. Nametali su svoje sisteme upravljanja, ekonomske modele i kulturne norme kolonizovanim vlasnicima kose, fundamentalno menjajući frizuru vlasnika (političke i društvene pejzaže regiona Globalnog Juga). Kolonijalizam nije bio samo teritorijalno osvajanje; bio je to način stvaranja globalne hegemonije u kojoj su brice bile na vrhu političke i ekonomske moći, dok su kolonizovane nacije sistematski marginalizovane i eksploatisane.

Zaista, dominacija je opravdavana kroz kolonijalne ideologije kao što su ropstvo, trgovina ljudima, rasna superiornost i hegemonija civilizacije, koje su prikazivale kontrolu brice kao dobronamernu misiju da „civilizuje“ takozvane „zaostale“ narode kolonizovanog sveta. Ova naracija je prikrivala nasilno iskorišćavanje resursa (kosa), eksploataciju rada i uništavanje autohtonih kultura i sistema upravljanja. Kolonijalna vladavina obezbedila je da politička i ekonomska moć ostane koncentrisana u rukama brice, kako u kolonijama tako i na domaćem frontu, dok su ljudi u Globalnom Jugu uglavnom bili obespravljeni i svedeni na podređene uloge unutar globalnog poretka.

Posledice dominacije postale su još očiglednije u postkolonijalnoj eri nakon Drugog svetskog rata, kada su bivše kolonije sticale nezavisnost tokom 1950-ih, 60-ih i 70-ih. Međutim, nezavisnost nije automatski značila osnaživanje. Politički i ekonomski sistemi koje su ostavili brice često su bili slabi, korumpirani i neprikladni za potrebe novoosnovanih nezavisnih nacija. Bivše kolonijalne sile nastavile su da vrše uticaj kroz neokolonijalne odnose, poput ekonomske zavisnosti, vojnih intervencija i kontrole nad međunarodnim institucijama kao što su Svetska banka i Međunarodni monetarni fond.

Ovi odnosi nastavili su da održavaju nejednake dinamike moći koje su bile uspostavljene tokom kolonijalnog perioda.

Kao deo bricinih tehnika, uveli su tradicionalne modele razvoja koji su se pojavili sredinom 20. veka, a koji su često bili ukorenjeni u istoj kolonijalnoj dominaciji. Zapadnocentrična paradigma razvoja pretpostavljala je da je put ka napretku za Globalni Jug praćenje puta industrijalizovane Evrope i Severne Amerike. Fokusirala se na ekonomski rast, modernizaciju i primenu zapadnog stila upravljanja i institucija. Ovaj pristup često je bio nametan novooslobođenim nacijama, bez uzimanja u obzir njihovih jedinstvenih istorija, kultura ili potreba. Rezultat je bio nastavak moći odozgo prema dole, koja je karakterisala kolonijalnu eru. Razvoj je tako bio uokviren kao proces sustizanja Zapada, s malo razmatranja za ulogu lokalnih zajednica u oblikovanju njihove sopstvene budućnosti. Jezik „pomoći“ i „asistencije“ dodatno je pojačavao ovu dinamiku, pozicionirajući Globalni Sever kao davaoca, a Globalni Jug kao pasivnog primaoca. Čak su i razvojni projekti s dobrim namerama često imali paternalističke tonove, gledajući na ljude Globalnog Juga kao na one koji nemaju kapacitet da sami rešavaju svoje probleme i kojima je potrebna pomoć zapadnih stručnjaka.

Neuspeh ovih razvojnih modela da se bave osnovnim uzrocima siromaštva, nejednakosti i nerazvijenosti postao je sve jasniji krajem 20. veka. Uprkos značajnim ulaganjima u stranu pomoć i razvojne programe, mnoge zemlje Globalnog Juga nastavile su da se suočavaju s ekonomskom stagnacijom, političkom nestabilnošću i društvenim nemirima. Upornost ovih problema istakla je nedostatke tradicionalnog pristupa razvoju i pokrenula pozive za preispitivanje načina na koji se moć distribuira i sprovodi u globalnom sistemu.

Koncept „Ponovnog osmišljavanja moći“ pojavio se kao odgovor na ove istorijske nepravde i shvatanje da modeli razvoja odozgo prema dole nisu samo neefikasni već i održavaju same one neravnoteže moći koje su pokušavali da reše. Globalni Jug, dugo potisnut na margine globalnog donošenja odluka, počeo je da afirmiše svoju sopstvenu viziju razvoja—onu koja je u centru imala lokalno vlasništvo, rešenja koja dolaze iz baze i osnaživanje marginalizovanih zajednica. Ova promena u razmišljanju predstavljala je dubok izazov za tradicionalne strukture moći koje su dominirale globalnim razvojnim diskursom tokom većeg dela 20. veka.

„Ponovno osmišljavanje moći“ odnosi se na udaljavanje od evropocentričnih, hijerarhijskih modela razvoja i prelazak ka decentralizovanijem i pravičnijem pristupu. Priznaje istorijska nasleđa kolonijalizma i nastoji da ispravi neravnoteže moći koje su dugo favorizovale Globalni Sever. To je poziv za osnaživanje lokalnih zajednica da preuzmu kontrolu nad sopstvenim razvojnim procesima i da daju prioritet svojim potrebama, znanjima i rešenjima. Ova promena u moći ne odnosi se samo na razvojne politike, već i na fundamentalno preispitivanje globalnog poretka. Evropska dominacija 20. veka stvorila je duboke strukturalne nejednakosti koje i dalje oblikuju svet danas. Ove nejednakosti odražavaju se u globalnim upravljačkim institucijama, trgovinskim odnosima i raspodeli bogatstva i resursa. Zemlje Globalnog Juga često se suočavaju s nepovoljnim položajem pri pregovaranju trgovinskih sporazuma, pristupu međunarodnim finansijama i učešću u globalnim procesima donošenja odluka. Zbog toga je „Ponovno osmišljavanje moći“ toliko važno—nastoji da izazove ove ukorenjene dinamike moći i stvori inkluzivniji i pravedniji globalni sistem.

U kontekstu ciljeva Sistema održivog razvoja (SDG), „Ponovno osmišljavanje moći“ dobija dodatni značaj. SDG predstavljaju globalni okvir za rešavanje nekih od najhitnijih izazova s kojima se svet danas suočava, od siromaštva i gladi do klimatskih promena i nejednakosti. Međutim, postizanje ovih ciljeva zahteva više od finansijskih resursa i tehničke stručnosti—zahteva fundamentalnu promenu u načinu na koji se moć distribuira i sprovodi unutar globalnog razvojnog sistema. Sistem održivog razvoja neće biti ostvareni ako ljudi i zajednice koje su najviše pogođene ovim izazovima ne budu osnaženi da preuzmu vodeću ulogu u njihovom rešavanju.

Praktično, radeći i živeći ovde, u Globalnom Jugu, ono što čitamo, čujemo i što se priča, razlikuje se od stvarnosti kada je reč o ponovnom osmišljavanju moći; složenost razvoja nije samo teorijska vežba, već stvarnost koja se živi. Svakodnevno se zajednice suočavaju s mnoštvom međusobno povezanih izazova—siromaštvom, neuspesima u upravljanju, degradacijom životne sredine, rodnom nejednakošću i nedostatkom pristupa osnovnim resursima. Tradicionalni modeli razvoja, uglavnom oblikovani od strane Globalnog Severa, često ne uspevaju da se izbore s ovim složenim i duboko ukorenjenim problemima. Često se zasnivaju na pretpostavkama o potrebama Juga, što dovodi do pristupa odozgo prema dole koji ne uzima u obzir jedinstvene kontekste i glasove onih koje pokušava da unapredi. Kao rezultat toga, mnoge inicijative ne postižu transformativni uticaj koji obećavaju. Priča je ista od mog detinjstva i malo se toga promenilo kada je u pitanju dekolonizacija u različitim aspektima života Afrikanaca i onoga što vidimo s vremena na vreme.

Šta nije u redu i ko je kriv između Globalnog Severa i Juga? Globalni Jug je često prikazan kao pasivni primalac pomoći i razvojnih napora. Međutim, on je dom vibrantnih kultura, bogatih resursa i inovativnih mislilaca koji stvaraju sopstvena rešenja za probleme s kojima se suočavaju. Ipak, dinamika moći koja diktira globalne razvojne inicijative istorijski je bila neuravnotežena, pri čemu su donošenje odluka dominirale bogatije zemlje Globalnog Severa. Ova nejednaka struktura moći dugo je gušila potencijal lokalnih rešenja da procvetaju, budući da su globalne razvojne strategije često nametane odozgo, bez adekvatnog unosa od zajednica kojima su namenjene.

Ponovno osmišljavanje moći u razvoju zahteva suštinsku promenu pristupa u kojem sve strane—brica, alat i vlasnik kose—moraju biti svesni posledica moći, ljudi, razvoja i budućnosti ako se ništa pozitivno ne promeni. Pozitivne promene koje donose korist i prepoznaju ljude koji žive u Globalnom Jugu ne samo kao primaoce razvoja, već kao glavne agente promene. Pozitivan, istinski, održiv napredak neće doći spoljašnjim intervencijama, već osnaživanjem ovih agenata promene u zajednicama da sami vode svoje razvojne procese.

Ova promena, često nazvana „premeštanjem moći“, odnosi se na postavljanje lokalnih glasova, lokalnog znanja i lokalnih rešenja u centar razvojnog rada. To znači udaljavanje od modela dobrotvornih intervencija i programa koji su dugo dominirali međunarodnom pomoći, i prihvatanje partnerskog modela koji visoko ceni međusobno poštovanje, jednakost i saradnju. Ljudi koji žive u Globalnom Jugu su nosioci stvarne promene izvan tradicionalnog razvojnog modela, koji obično prikazuje neuspehe, upornost siromaštva, nejednakosti, seksualno i rodno zasnovano nasilje i degradaciju životne sredine širom mnogih delova Globalnog Juga.

Uprkos decenijama međunarodne pomoći i bezbrojnih razvojnih programa i ulaganja, milioni ostaju zarobljeni u ciklusima nepoznatog razvoja i teškoća. To nije zato što ljudi u Globalnom Jugu nisu sposobni za napredak, već zato što modeli razvoja koji su im nametnuti često nemaju sadržaj i prilagodljivost potrebne za zadovoljenje njihovih specifičnih potreba. Kao rezultat pristupa odozgo prema dole, koji pretpostavlja da jedno rešenje odgovara svima, razvoj se ne odvija na isti način svuda, jer ono što funkcioniše na jednom mestu možda neće funkcionisati na drugom.

Na primer, rešenja za siromaštvo u ruralnoj Nigeriji mogu biti potpuno drugačija od onih potrebnih u urbanom Nepalu ili u područjima zahvaćenim sukobima u Siriji. Štaviše, tradicionalni razvojni model često ne uspeva da se pozabavi sistemskim nejednakostima koje održavaju same probleme koje pokušava da reši.

Razvojna pomoć može nenamerno učvrstiti te nejednakosti tako što će koncentrisati moć u rukama nekolicine elita, dok će marginalizovane grupe biti isključene iz koristi razvoja. Žene, autohtone zajednice i najsiromašniji slojevi društva često su izostavljeni iz procesa donošenja odluka, iako su oni najviše pogođeni razvojnim politikama. Zbog toga je preusmeravanje moći toliko ključno, jer osigurava da oni koji su najugroženiji i najviše pogođeni razvojnim inicijativama budu ti koji ih oblikuju.

Više nije reč o brici ili alatu, već se u centru ovog ponovnog osmišljavanja moći nalazi princip iskrenosti, istinskih vrednosti, poverenja, transparentnosti, odgovornosti i etičkih pokretača koji zajedno čine da razvoj uspe—stoga vlasnik kose mora preuzeti odgovornost i čvrsto vlasništvo. Kada razvoj vode oni koji poseduju ove kvalitete, razumeju lokalni kontekst i kulturu, kao i osnovne potrebe i patnje masa, veća je verovatnoća da će uspeti. Zajednice su u najboljoj poziciji da prepoznaju sopstvene prioritete i osmisle odgovarajuća rešenja prilagođena svojim specifičnim potrebama. To ne znači potpuno odbacivanje saradničke uloge spoljašnjih aktera, već redefinisanje njihove uloge od spasilaca ka partnerima, ko-kreatorima i agentima. Spoljašnja podrška treba da dopunjuje i osnažuje lokalne napore, a ne da ih zasenjuje ili diktira. Na taj način, razvojne inicijative postaju pragmatičnije, održivije i efikasnije u stvaranju trajnih promena.

Takođe, jedan od obećavajućih aspekata preusmeravanja moći je potencijal za kreativnost. Lokalne zajednice već razvijaju kreativna rešenja za izazove s kojima se suočavaju, često na načine koje spoljašnji akteri možda ne bi uzeli u obzir. Na primer, u delovima Nigerije, organizacije na lokalnom nivou vode napore za promovisanje održive poljoprivrede, trgovine, obnovljivih izvora energije i klimatske otpornosti. Ove inicijative ne samo da odgovaraju na trenutne potrebe, već doprinose i širim globalnim ciljevima, kao što su Ciljevi održivog razvoja Ujedinjenih nacija (SDGs). Podržavanjem ovih lokalnih inovacija, međunarodna razvojna zajednica može pomoći da se prošire rešenja koja su i uticajna i kontekstualno relevantna.

Štaviše, unutar prostora upravljanja, preusmeravanje moći je važno jer je loše upravljanje glavni prepreka razvoju u mnogim afričkim zemljama, gde korupcija, slabe institucije i nedostatak odgovornosti koče napredak. Tradicionalno, razvojni napori su se fokusirali na jačanje vlada odozgo prema dole, često kroz uvođenje novih politika, sistema ili strane stručnosti. Međutim, ovaj pristup zanemaruje ulogu koju civilno društvo može imati u tome da drži vlade odgovornima i sprovodi reforme s lokalnog nivoa. Lokalne organizacije i aktivisti često su na čelu napora za promovisanje transparentnosti, borbu protiv korupcije i zahtev za boljim uslugama i reformama od strane svojih vlada. Osnaživanjem ovih grupa i davanjem veće uloge u razvojnim procesima, možemo podstaći inkluzivniji i odgovorniji oblik upravljanja koji zaista služi ljudima.

Ne treba zaboraviti ni rodnu ravnopravnost i pravdu kao druge ključne oblasti gde ponovna osmišljavanja moći može imati transformativne efekte. Žene u Globalnom Jugu nesrazmerno su pogođene siromaštvom, sukobima i negativnim uticajima na životnu sredinu, a ipak su često isključene iz procesa donošenja odluka koje utiču na njihove živote. Preusmeravanje moći znači osigurati da žene imaju ravnopravan glas u razvojnim procesima, programima i da se njihov glas čuje na svim nivoima društva. Ovo uključuje ne samo formalne liderske pozicije, već i neformalne prostore gde se donose odluke o prioritetima zajednice i raspodeli resursa. Žensko liderstvo pokazalo je pozitivan uticaj na razvojne rezultate, posebno u oblastima kao što su obrazovanje, zdravstvo i izgradnja mira. Prioritizovanjem rodne ravnopravnosti i osnaživanjem žena kao lidera, možemo ubrzati napredak ka pravednijem i ravnopravnijem svetu.

Sloj klimatskih promena jedan je od najhitnijih izazova s kojima se suočavaju i Globalni Jug i Sever trenutno, i naglašava potrebu za inkluzivnijim i pravednijim pristupom razvoju. Globalni Jug je nesrazmerno pogođen uticajima klimatskih promena, uprkos tome što najmanje doprinosi njihovim uzrocima. Zajednice u niskim obalnim područjima, oblastima sklonim suši i u konflikt-zonama su posebno ranjive na efekte porasta temperatura, ekstremnih vremenskih događaja i degradacije životne sredine. Tradicionalni modeli razvoja često ne uspevaju da adresiraju jedinstvene ranjivosti ovih zajednica, fokusirajući se umesto toga na projekte velike infrastrukture koji možda nisu prikladni ili održivi na duži rok. Preusmeravanje moći u kontekstu klimatskih promena znači prioritetizaciju glasova farmera, žena i potreba onih koji su najviše pogođeni njenim uticajima. To podrazumeva podržavanje lokalnih napora za prilagođavanje i ublažavanje koji su zasnovani na znanju i praksama autohtonih i ruralnih zajednica. Ove zajednice imaju duboko razumevanje svojih okruženja i često su na čelu napora da zaštite prirodne resurse, očuvaju biološku raznolikost i promovišu održivu upotrebu zemljišta. Ulaganjem u lokalna rešenja za klimatske promene, možemo izgraditi otpornije i prilagodljivije društva koja su bolje opremljena za suočavanje s izazovima promenljivog klime.

Na kraju, preusmeravanje moći takođe podrazumeva preusmeravanje naših pojedinačnih, ličnih, zajedničkih i kolektivnih ponašanja i karaktera kako bismo se prilagodili onome što je ispravno i plodonosno. To znači ponovo preispitivanje sebe i poznavanje i identifikovanje šta je loš i dobar život, kultivisanje pozitivnog načina života koji bi mogao uticati na promenu. To znači raditi pravu stvar i obavezati se na lični razvoj unutrašnje i spoljašnje u svakom trenutku. Uključuje ponovo razmatranje uloge pojedinaca i međunarodnih organizacija i donatora u razvoju i procesu. Prečesto, razvojno finansiranje dolazi s postavljenim uslovima, primoravajući lokalne organizacije da se prilagode spoljnim prioritetima i zahtevima izveštavanja koji možda nisu u skladu s njihovim lokalnim potrebama ili kapacitetima. To može gušiti lokalnu kreativnost i stvoriti zavisnost od spoljne podrške prema Globalnom Jugu. Da bi se zaista preusmerila moć, donatori moraju biti spremni da veruju lokalnim organizacijama i pruže im fleksibilnost i autonomiju da dizajniraju i implementiraju svoja rešenja i prioritete potreba. Ovo zahteva pomeranje s kratkoročnog, projektnog finansiranja ka dugoročnom, ljudima orijentisanom i fleksibilnom podrškom koja omogućava organizacijama da izgrade svoje kapacitete, odgovore na nove izazove i prošire uspešne inicijative.

U zaključku, preimaginacija moći nije samo promena autoriteta ili kontrole, već duboka transformacija koja prevazilazi površinu. To je holistički pristup koji zahteva potpunu uključenost u ponovo razmatranje kako se moć razume, koristi i deli. Ovo putovanje uključuje refleksiju o prošlosti, priznavanje njenog uticaja i korišćenje sadašnjosti za ispravljanje nepravdi na načine koji stvaraju održivu promenu za budućnost. Da bismo zaista preimaginirali moć, moramo prihvatiti oprost, pomirenje i spremnost da se oslobodimo kontrole. To je o otpuštanju tradicionalnih struktura moći koje uspevaju na dominaciji i umesto toga podsticanju okruženja u kojima su izlečenje i rast mogući. To znači suočavanje s teškim istinama, priznavanje nepravdi i donošenje svesne odluke da krenemo napred, ne kao žrtve, već kao pobednici. Oprost ne znači zaboraviti; umesto toga, uključuje suočavanje s istorijskim nepravdama i trenutnim nejednakostima s hrabrošću da ih promenimo. Pomirenje ide ruku pod ruku, zahtevajući otvoreni dijalog, međusobno poštovanje i zajedničku posvećenost pravdi i jednakosti. Žrtva postaje ključni element, jer oni koji su na pozicijama moći moraju biti spremni da redistribuiraju svoj uticaj za opšte dobro. Preimaginacija moći je čin hrabrosti, zahtevajući od nas da se suočimo ne samo s spoljnim sistemima kontrole, već i s unutrašnjim pristrasnostima koje ih perpetuiraju. To je poziv na akciju, ohrabrujući nas da koristimo moć na načine koji osnažuju druge, grade zajednicu i podstiču kolektivnu snagu.

OBI ONYEIGW Nigerijac, posvećeni Afrikanac, lider i stručnjak. Saradnik međunarodnog ekspertskog tima Lobisti, član organizacije Disrupt Development i ko-lider Disruptive Den-a. Praktikant u oblasti mira, bezbednosti, rodne ravnopravnosti i održivog razvoja. Pisac, agent promena i inovator. Pratite ga na LinkedIn-u

In reimagining power, what comes to mind is the philosophical African proverbial commentary that comes with the question: Is it that the Barber is incompetent in barbing the hair, or is it that his tool is not good or that the owner of the hair does not know how and what? The Barber and its tool (rules and systems) of the twentieth century, its historical events and development as a result gave birth to “Reimagining Power” a concept that is becoming popular subject than other movements and underlying forces of the twentieth century- population growth, increasing literacy and technological revolution. Reimagining Power has found its way into many schools of thoughts, most times the theoretical literacy around the globe does not shift the perspective of the oblivions. Intrinsically important is translation of aspirations into more practical, solid and real solution to the challenges and life difficulties within the human development spheres. Clearly, we are still dealing with huge impact created by the Barber’s social, economic consequences with industrialization across different national fronters in the globe, the tool that clashed with diverse cultures as the Barber came to dominate Africa, Asia and other regions of the world. indeed, the Barber’s Power in the global dimension captured and recaptured territories and colonies using religious missions and identities to penetrate into the life and all fabrics of the regions that was barbed.   To fully appreciate the modern concept of „Reimagining Power,“ particularly within the context of development and owner of the hair, one must trace it back to the historical landscape of twentieth-century domination of the Barber. This period marked a time the Barber’s dynamics were profoundly shaped by colonialism, imperialism, and the accompanying economic, political, and cultural dominance of the Barber over much of the Global South. The legacy of the Barber’s power structures continues to influence contemporary global relations, development paradigms, and the very notion of who holds power and how it is exercised. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Barbers such as Britain, France, Belgium, and others expanded their empires to control vast territories across Africa, Asia, and the Americas. They imposed their governance systems, economic models, and cultural norms on the colonized hair owners, fundamentally altering the hair owner’s hair style (political and social landscapes of the global south regions). Colonialism was not merely about territorial conquest; it was about creating a global hegemony where the Barbers stood at the apex of political and economic power, and the colonized nations were systematically marginalized and exploited.

Indeed, the domination was justified through colonial standards ideologies such as slavery, human trafficking, racial superiority and civilization hegemony, which framed the Barber’s control as a benevolent mission to „civilize“ the so-called „backward“ peoples of the colonized world. This narrative masked the violent extraction of the hairs (resources), exploitation of labor, and destruction of indigenous cultures and systems of governance. Colonial rule ensured that political and economic power remained concentrated in the hands Barbers, both in the colonies and in home front of the Barbers, while the people in the Global South were largely disempowered and relegated to subservient roles within the global order. The aftermath of the domination became even more evident in the post-colonial era following World War II, as former colonies gained independence throughout the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. However, independence did not automatically mean empowerment. The political and economic systems left behind by the Barbers were often weak, corrupt, and ill-suited to the needs of the newly independent nations. Former colonial powers continued to exert influence through neocolonial relationships, such as economic dependency, military intervention, and control over international institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. These relationships perpetuated the unequal power dynamics that had been established during the colonial period.

As part of the Barbers techniques, they brought the traditional development models that emerged in the mid-20th century which often was rooted in this same colonial domination. The Western-centric paradigm of development assumed that the path to progress for the Global South was to follow the trajectory of industrialized Europe and North America. It focused on economic growth, modernization, and the implementation of Western-style governance and institutions. This approach was often imposed on newly independent nations without regard for their unique histories, cultures, or needs. The result was a continuation of the top-down power dynamics that had characterized the colonial era. Development was thus framed as a process of catching up with the West, with little consideration for the agency of local communities in shaping their own futures. The language of „aid“ and „assistance“ further reinforced this dynamic, positioning the Global North as the giver and the Global South as the passive recipient. Even well-intentioned development projects often had paternalistic overtones, viewing the people of the Global South as lacking the capacity to solve their own problems and needing guidance from Western experts. The failure of these development models to address the root causes of poverty, inequality, and underdevelopment became increasingly clear by the late 20th century. Despite significant investments in foreign aid and development programs, many countries in the Global South continued to struggle with economic stagnation, political instability, and social unrest. The persistence of these issues highlighted the flaws in the traditional development approach and sparked calls for a rethinking of how power is distributed and exercised in the global system. The concept of „Reimagining Power“ emerged as a response to these historical injustices and the realization that top-down development models were not only ineffective but also perpetuated the very power imbalances they sought to address. The Global South, long relegated to the margins of global decision-making, began to assert its own vision for development—one that centered on local ownership, grassroots solutions, and the empowerment of marginalized communities. This shift in thinking represented a profound challenge to the traditional power structures that had dominated global development discourse for much of the 20th century.

„Reimagining Power“ is about moving away from the Eurocentric, hierarchical models of development and toward a more decentralized and equitable approach. It acknowledges the historical legacies of colonialism and seeks to rectify the imbalances of power that have long favored the Global North. It is a call to empower local communities to take control of their own development processes and to prioritize their needs, knowledge, and solutions. This shift in power is not just about development policy but also about fundamentally rethinking the global order. The European domination of the 20th century created deep structural inequalities that continue to shape the world today. These inequalities are reflected in global governance institutions, trade relationships, and the distribution of wealth and resources. Countries in the Global South often find themselves at a disadvantage in negotiating trade deals, accessing international finance, and participating in global decision-making processes. This is why „Reimagining Power“ is so important—it seeks to challenge these entrenched power dynamics and create a more inclusive and just global system.

In the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), „Reimagining Power“ takes on added significance. The SDGs are a global framework for addressing some of the most pressing challenges facing the world today, from poverty and hunger to climate change and inequality. However, achieving these goals requires more than just financial resources and technical expertise—it requires a fundamental shift in how power is distributed and exercised within the global development system. The SDGs cannot be realized if the people and communities most affected by these challenges are not empowered to take the lead in addressing them.

Practically, working and living here in the Global South, what we read, hear and what they say is different from the realities of practice when it comes to reimagining Power, the complexities of development are not just a theoretical exercise but a lived reality. Every day, communities grapple with a multitude of interconnected challenges—poverty, governance failures, environmental degradation, gender inequality, and a lack of access to basic resources. The traditional development models, largely shaped by the Global North, often fall short in addressing these intricate and deeply rooted issues. They are frequently based on assumptions about the needs of the South, leading to a top-down approach that fails to consider the unique contexts and voices of those it seeks to uplift. As a result, many initiatives do not achieve the transformational impact they promise. The story has been same since my childhood and not much has changed towards decolonization in different spheres of lives of Africans and what we see every now and then.

What is wrong and who is wrong between the Global North and South? the Global South is often portrayed, a passive recipient of aid and development efforts. It is home to vibrant cultures, rich resources, and innovative thinkers who are crafting their own solutions to the problems they face. Yet, the power dynamics that dictate global development initiatives have historically been imbalanced, with decision-making dominated by the wealthier nations of the Global North. This unequal power structure has long stifled the potential of local solutions to flourish, as global development strategies are frequently imposed from above without adequate input from the communities they are meant to serve. Reimagining power in development requires a surgical shift in this approach in which all parties- the Barber, tool and hair owner must made to know the consequences of the power, the people, development and the future if nothing fruitful and positive changes.  Positive changes that benefit and recognizes the people who live in the Global South   not just as merely beneficiaries of development but as primary agents of change. Positive, true, sustainable progress will come not from external interventions, but from empowering these community agents of change to lead their own development processes by themselves. This shift, often referred to as „shifting the power,“ is about placing local voices, local knowledge, and local solutions at the center of development work. It’s about moving away from the charity model interventions, programmes that has long dominated international aid and embracing a partnership model that highly values mutual respect, equity, and collaboration. The people who are in the global south are the vessels of real change beyond the traditional development model, which typically depicts failures, persistence of poverty, inequality, sexual and gender-based violence and environmental degradation across many parts of the Global South. Despite decades of international aid and countless development programs and investments, millions remain trapped in cycles of unknown development and hardships. This is not because the people of the Global South are incapable of progress, but because the development models imposed on them often lack the substance and adaptability required to meet their specific needs. As a result of the top-down approach that assumes one size fits all, but this is not how development is, it is not monolithic architecture and what works in one place may not work in another.

For example, the solutions to poverty in rural Nigeria may be vastly different from those needed in urban Nepal or conflict-affected areas of Syria. Moreover, the traditional development model often fails to address the systemic inequalities that perpetuate the very problems it seeks to solve. Development aid can inadvertently reinforce these inequalities by entrenching power in the hands of a few elites, while excluding marginalized groups from the benefits of progress. Women, indigenous communities, and the poorest segments of society are often left out of the decision-making process, even though they are the ones most affected by development policies. This is why shifting the power is so crucial as it ensures that the vulnerable of the vulnerable and most impacted by development initiatives are the ones shaping them.

It is no longer the Barber or the tool, rather at the heart of this reimagining of power is the principle of sincerity, true values, trust, transparency, accountability and ethical drivers that jointly makes development succeed- therefore the owner of the hair must take responsibility and firm ownership. When development is led by those who have these qualities and understand the local context and culture, and the core needs and the suffering of the masses, it is far more likely to succeed. Communities are best positioned to identify their own priorities and design appropriate solutions that are tailored to their specific needs. This does not mean abandoning the collaborative role of external actors altogether, but rather reframing their role from that of saviors to partners, co-creators and agents. External support should complement and strengthen local efforts, rather than overshadow or dictate them. By doing so, development initiatives become more pragmatic, sustainable, and effective in creating lasting change.

Moreso, one of the promising aspects of shifting the power is the potential for creativity. Local communities are already developing creative solutions to the challenges they face, often in ways that external actors might not consider. For instance, in parts of Nigeria, grassroots organizations are leading efforts to promote sustainable agriculture, trade, renewable energy, and climate resilience. These initiatives are not only addressing immediate needs but are also contributing to broader global goals, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). By supporting these local innovations, the international development community can help scale up solutions that are both impactful and contextually relevant.

Also, within the governance space, shifting the power is important as poor governance is a major barrier to development in many countries in Africa, where corruption, weak institutions, and a lack of accountability hinder progress. Traditionally, development efforts have focused on strengthening governments from the top down, often through the introduction of new policies, systems, or foreign expertise. However, this approach overlooks the role that civil society can play in holding governments accountable and driving reform from the grassroots level. Local organizations and activists are often at the forefront of efforts to promote transparency, combat corruption, and demand better and reform services from their governments. By empowering these groups and giving them a greater voice in development processes, we can foster a more inclusive and responsive form of governance that truly serves the people.

And not to forget gender equality and justice as other critical area where reimagining power can have transformative effects. Women in the Global South are disproportionately affected by poverty, conflict, and environmental negative impacts, yet they are often excluded from decision-making processes that impact their lives. Shifting the power means ensuring that women have an equal say in development progress, programmes and processes and that their voices are heard at all levels of society. This includes not only formal leadership positions but also informal spaces where decisions are made about community priorities and resource allocation. Women’s leadership has been shown to have a positive impact on development outcomes, particularly in areas such as education, health, and peacebuilding. By prioritizing gender equality and empowering women as leaders, we can accelerate progress towards a more just and equitable world. The layer of climate change is one of the most pressing challenges facing both the Global South and North presently, and it highlights the need for a more inclusive and equitable approach to development. The Global South is disproportionately affected by the impacts of climate change, despite contributing the least to its causes. Communities in low-lying coastal areas, drought-prone regions, and conflict zones are particularly vulnerable to the effects of rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and environmental degradation. Traditional development models often fail to address the unique vulnerabilities of these communities, focusing instead on large-scale infrastructure projects that may not be suitable or sustainable in the long term. Shifting the power in the context of climate change means prioritizing the voices farmers, women and needs of those who are most affected by its impacts. It means supporting locally led adaptation and mitigation efforts that are rooted in the knowledge and practices of indigenous and rural communities. These communities have a deep understanding of their environments and are often at the forefront of efforts to protect natural resources, conserve biodiversity, and promote sustainable land use. By investing in locally driven climate solutions, we can build more resilient and adaptive societies that are better equipped to face the challenges of a changing climate.

Finally, shifting the power also means shifting our individual, personal, community and collective misbehaviors and characters to suit what is right and flourishing, it means re-examining oneself and knowing and identifying what bad and good life is all about, cultivating positive lifestyle that could affect the shift. It means doing right thing and committing to self-development inwardly and outwardly at all times.  it involves rethinking the role of individual and international organizations and donors in the development chart and process. Too often, development funding comes with strings attached to it, forcing local organizations to conform to external priorities and reporting requirements that may not align with their local needs or capacities. This can stifle local creativities and create dependency on external support to the Global South. To truly shift the power, donors must be willing to trust local organizations and give them the flexibility and autonomy to design and implement their own solutions and need priorities. This requires a shift from short-term, project-based funding to long-term, people centered and need- base and flexible support that allows organizations to build their capacity, respond to emerging challenges, and scale up successful initiatives.

In conclusion, Reimagining power is not just a shift in authority or control, but a profound transformation that goes beyond the surface. It is a holistic approach that calls for a complete involvement in rethinking how power is understood, utilized, and shared. This journey involves reflecting on the past, acknowledging its impact, and using the present to correct injustices in ways that create sustainable change for the future. To truly reimagine power, we must embrace forgiveness, reconciliation, and the willingness to release control. It’s about letting go of traditional power structures that thrive on dominance and instead fostering environments where healing and growth are possible. This means confronting hard truths, acknowledging wrongs, and making the conscious decision to move forward, not as victims, but as victors. Forgiveness does not mean forgetting; rather, it involves facing historical wrongs and current inequalities with the courage to change them. Reconciliation goes hand in hand, requiring open dialogue, mutual respect, and a shared commitment to justice and equity. Sacrifice becomes a key element, as those in positions of power must be willing to redistribute their influence for the greater good. Reimagining power is an act of courage, demanding that we confront not only external systems of control but also the internal biases that perpetuate them. It is a call to action, encouraging us to use power in ways that empower others, build community, and foster collective strength.

OBI ONYEIGWE Nigerian, Devoted African and Human Leader and Expert. Contributor to the Lobisti International Expert Team, Member of Disrupt Development, and Co-Lead of Disruptive Den. Peace , security , gender and sustainable development practitioner . A Writer, Change Agent and innovator. Follow him on LinkedIn