Abstract
We argue that the dominant geometry of development should be discarded, given the many limitations this model imposes on development policies and programs. Following a description of the dominant geometry of development, we critique this conceptualization based on grounds of morality and validity. Referencing illustrations of Japan as a development donor and the Chipko movement as an engaged community, we argue that new alternative geometries of development consider other structural and social arrangements. Finally, we consider more holistic, alternative perspectives that integrate material welfare with other humanitarian issues that transcend national boundaries. Reprinted by permission of Brill Academic Publishers