In the late 1990s I coined the term “Southern Consensus” to refer to the approach to national development which was being espoused by Latin American neo-structuralists such as Ricardo Ffrench-Davis and Fernando Fajnzylber, and was being practiced in successful late industrializers in East Asia. I identified the main tenets of these convergent but independent ideas, and also argued that the Southern Consensus, not the UNDP’s human development approach, was the most effective alternative to the Washington Consensus.

At the time I also stated that the future demise of the Washington Consensus was inevitable because its methodology and ideology were in conflict. But, although the Southern Consensus was a much more effective approach to national development, I did not see it as the best alternative to the Washington Consensus because neither the Washington Consensus nor the Southern Consensus was fully globalized.

This lecture will present the analytical framework on which these ideas were based. It will also locate subsequent influential ideas, including some work of Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen, Michael Spence and Justin Lin, against the background of this interpretation. Finally it will consider how global Sustainable Development Goals can be integrated with the Southern Consensus approach as part of a desirable and viable future trajectory for development thinking.