In many parts of the Global South, locally rooted, indigenous – or indigenised – cultural conceptualisations have become key denominators in state politics and policy-making processes. This is an interesting fact in itself, since many of these alternative concepts arising from grassroots social movements, indigenous activists and radical decolonisation scholars articulate a fundamental criticism at existing state structures, at the dominant economic systems, and at the notion of development. In all their multiplicity, they articulate profound questioning of continuities of coloniality and global capitalism. Against this background, this special issue discusses histories, discourses and practices of alternative paradigms of development in state politics and policy-making processes in the Global South. It focuses on cultural politics within state formation processes, including governmental discourses and such governing tools as legislation, policies, state programmes, and projects. The attempt to draw on local cultural traditions and indigenous practices as source of resistance has a long history. It was practised by colonised peoples in their struggle against their colonisers and colonial exploitation. In Latin America, the struggle of indigenous people against Spanish colonial rule and – after independence – against domestic elites of Spanish descent is well documented (Mamani Rámirez, 2012; Ranta, 2014). In different parts of Africa and Asia, decolonisation processes and independence movements drew their political rhetoric on locally rooted concepts, such as ujamaa in Tanzania and harambee in Kenya. The Indian independence movement built on the local concept of swaraj (self-rule). The reference to ubuntu played a decisive role in the post-Apartheid reconciliation process in South Africa in which it was used to build up a sense of common postcolonial identity, belonging and sovereignty. In the 1990s and 2000s, indigenous or indigenised types of organising in Latin America unfolded a specific dynamism and served as political and strategic resource for movements against neo-liberal state policies and economic globalisation (Ranta, 2018; Zibechi, 2010). Some of these movements, in alliance with other popular sectors,

中文翻译：

---

南方国家政治与政策制定的替代发展范式：简介

在全球南方的许多地区，本地化，本地化或土著化的文化概念已成为州政治和政策制定过程中的关键要素。这本身就是一个有趣的事实，因为基层社会运动，土著活动家和激进的非殖民化学者提出的许多替代概念都对现有的国家结构，主导的经济体系和发展概念提出了基本的批评。他们千篇一律地表达了对殖民主义和全球资本主义连续性的深刻质疑。在此背景下，本期专刊探讨了南方南方国家政治和政策制定过程中替代发展范式的历史，论述和实践。它侧重于国家形成过程中的文化政治，包括政府话语以及诸如立法，政策，国家计划和项目之类的管理工具。利用当地文化传统和土著习俗作为抵抗的源头的尝试已有很长的历史。殖民地人民在与殖民者的斗争和殖民剥削中进行了实践。在拉丁美洲，有文献记载土著人民反对西班牙殖民统治以及（独立后）反对西班牙血统的国内精英的斗争（MamaniRámirez，2012； Ranta，2014）。在非洲和亚洲的不同地区，非殖民化进程和独立运动对当地根植的概念发表了政治言论，例如坦桑尼亚的乌贾玛和肯尼亚的哈兰比。印度独立运动建立在当地的swaraj（自治）概念上。对ubuntu的提述在南非的种族隔离之后的和解进程中起着决定性的作用，在该进程中，ubuntu被用来建立一种共同的后殖民身份，归属感和主权感。在1990年代和2000年代，拉丁美洲的土著或土著类型的组织展现出特定的活力，并成为反对新自由主义国家政策和经济全球化运动的政治和战略资源（Ranta，2018; Zibechi，2010）。其中一些运动与其他受欢迎的部门结盟，归属与主权。在1990年代和2000年代，拉丁美洲的土著或土著类型的组织展现出特定的活力，并成为反对新自由主义国家政策和经济全球化运动的政治和战略资源（Ranta，2018; Zibechi，2010）。其中一些运动与其他受欢迎的部门结盟，归属与主权。在1990年代和2000年代，拉丁美洲的土著或土著类型的组织展现出特定的活力，并成为反对新自由主义国家政策和经济全球化运动的政治和战略资源（Ranta，2018; Zibechi，2010）。其中一些运动与其他受欢迎的部门结盟，