Abstract
In the proposed paper I will focus on development engineering and, more specifically, on the choices made by development civil engineers when creating the design of a (development) building. While the authors understand such choices as objective and dictated by the needs of the recipient community and location, existing anthropological literature - based mainly on the actor-network theory or, more broadly, belonging to STS - would suggest otherwise.
The design process inevitably entails many decisions by the authors, as they prioritize specific aspects, values and priorities (and neglect others). This is quite easily exemplified by the fact that solutions proposed for the same locality and purpose are usually very different.
I therefore believe it appropriate to ask: what decisions informed the creation of a specific development design; in which ways are such decisions inscribed in its design; and how do these decisions influence the building's operations once completed. I will discuss the above questions in relation to three school buildings in the high mountain village of Kargyak in the region of Zanskar, India.
The buildings were constructed by three different entities - two Czech NGOs and the Indian authorities - and are very different in terms of appearance, employed technologies, materials, costs, and formal recognition. Since the buildings share a common location and (development) purpose, their differences can hardly be explained by different local needs and expectations.
They also cannot be simply attributed to the professional qualities of their authors. As I will show, the only way to explain the different designs is to understand the priorities of their respective authors, as well as the specific ways in which they were inscribed into each design.