The African survey team (including Maliniowski) tied their work with development. “Studying the continent in comparative terms, they argued, would enable colonial states to pursue “African development” less erratically and more success- fully.” (87)
The data work in Africa in the 1930s is justified as helping towards development and to “solve African problems.” Assumptions are that what works in one site may/will work in another. “The idea would be to have a model district, which might be eventually of use as a practice ground for young sanitary officers who have left Makerere and Mulago, before taking up a career.” The results, he argued, would include “less incidence of disease . . . a lower death rate, improved physique—greater intelligence, more inclination to work, [and] more enterprise.” Equally important, the data gathered would lead to new insights, “under present conditions in Africa,” about disease distribution, susceptibility, and immunity. “Such an experiment in health is a scientific necessity.” (170)
This appears to continue to hold true today based on my own observations of data and development rhetoric...
