Abstract This study presents a comparative analysis of ‘Development Governance’ and ‘Development Management’ curricula across selected elite international universities. It aims to identify structural patterns, pedagogical approaches, and evaluation strategies to inform curriculum design in developing countries. Utilizing a qualitative methodology based on Berliner's Neo‐formal model, the research analysed 13 postgraduate programmes (Master's and Doctoral) from leading institutions in the Global North. Data were collected from official programme specifications and syllabi. The findings reveal a structural dichotomy: Master's programmes primarily function as professionalizing instruments, emphasizing technocratic skills and project management, whereas Doctoral tracks operate as academic stewardships focused on theoretical abstraction and independent research. The study also identifies a pedagogical tension between the efficiency logic of ‘management’ and the accountability logic of ‘governance’. The results suggest that effective curriculum design in developing contexts may benefit from a hybrid approach that integrates these dimensions while remaining mindful of potential issues of epistemic dominance.
Abdolhosseinzadeh et al. (Sat,) studied this question.