The authors point out the many definitions of development in an attempt to show how development is historically and geographically specific and changing. Thus, there have been many critiques of development, and the authors mentions some of these critiques noting some of their validities and their faults. Overall though, the authors argue that the discourse of development, in its fragmented multi-world definitions, does not accurately account for the state of the world and reflect definitions of development from multiple localities. This is because at the base of these definitions is Western capitalist ideologies, which have now been imposed on underdeveloped countries. The author concludes that the conflicts between development discourse in academics and practice needs to be addressed, as does the changing role of geography in development.