Oregon Microenterprise Network
Millennium Development Goals (MDG's) are a great example to a multilateral approach towards tackling the worlds problems. 15 years seems like a great benchmark as it is short and results are easily measurable.
However, some feel the tensions of global competition, would third world growth create a lower standard of living for those in already developed countries? There is the theory of convergence, we will lose our standard of living, and they or rather developing countries will experience an increase in standard of living; we would then meet somewhere in the middle. Another issue is world resources, we really can't have everyone consuming as much as we do currently; I truly do enjoy driving for example but if everyone in China and India wanted a car and consumed gasoline we would be out in a matter of years. While it is important to focus on sustainability, many of the third world countries are overpopulated; they have a number of problems that western countries do not. The answers to all of this is technological improvement and changes in consumer habits but currently I don't think our planet could support this many developed countries consuming as much as we are currently.
I was really happy to see the William Easterly article which offers the basic critique of foreign aid. We are always dishing out money but it doesn't always help. In a past political science class we read a number of works by modernization and development theory. Simply, these third world countries do not follow the same path to development as the west. They may not have the legal institutions and infrastructure in their country to accommodate development. Further, corruption could exist; these development organizations may not have the social impact they were hoping as money leaks out everywhere. Modernization theory states that there are certain stages to development and that this occurs in gradually. Dependency theory is rather the reason many states fail; it is social, economic, and political factors that must evolve simultaneously. If one of these factors is off then it harnesses instability. I would like to note additionally on the work of Samuel Huntington, who is the author clash of civilizations; he contributes cultural factors as a reason for failed states. I personally believe that development is complicated and that you can not simply follow a universal model. Each case is unique and it is the role of small groups such as NGO's who make the difference. Below is a link to Samuel Huntington's latest book, Political Order in Changing Societies, he addresses a number of the latest topics surrounding development.
Millennium Development Goals (MDG's) are a great example to a multilateral approach towards tackling the worlds problems. 15 years seems like a great benchmark as it is short and results are easily measurable.
The website stated the results that would occur if these goals are achieved, "world poverty will be cut by half, tens of millions of lives will be saved, and billions more people will have the opportunity to benefit from the global economy". Development is interesting to me as it will be a different world if everywhere is equally developed.
However, some feel the tensions of global competition, would third world growth create a lower standard of living for those in already developed countries? There is the theory of convergence, we will lose our standard of living, and they or rather developing countries will experience an increase in standard of living; we would then meet somewhere in the middle. Another issue is world resources, we really can't have everyone consuming as much as we do currently; I truly do enjoy driving for example but if everyone in China and India wanted a car and consumed gasoline we would be out in a matter of years. While it is important to focus on sustainability, many of the third world countries are overpopulated; they have a number of problems that western countries do not. The answers to all of this is technological improvement and changes in consumer habits but currently I don't think our planet could support this many developed countries consuming as much as we are currently.
I completely agree with you that development is not simple and that there is no such thing as a universal approach. Nonprofits can be a group who fosters that kind of understanding, ensuring that communities get the kind of aid that they actually want and need.
ReplyDeleteI also really like you brought up the point that if countries reach levels of development equal or even similar to those of the US and Europe, it is entirely possible that the world does not have enough resources to sustain such growth. At the same time, who are we to tell countries like China and Brazil that they cannot enjoy the same luxuries that the United States does? How can we lecture them about their consumption when we clearly are guilty of the same crimes?
Additionally, you bring up the point of sustainability which is directly related to consumption. I think sustainability should be a number one priority, but, once again, it is hard to tell other countries how important it is that they develop sustainably when we haven't even figured out how to do so ourselves, not to mention remedy the environmental and social problems we have created as a result of our failure to be more consumption-conscious. The issue is further complicated by the fact that many countries cannot even imagine focusing efforts to be more sustainable when a large majority of their country's population is dying because they lack access to basic human needs such as food and water.
.....basically, development is complicated!! However, that should not dissuade ordinary citizens, international nonprofits, and governments from finding answers/solutions to the problems and questions you discussed in your post. Some, such as MeryCorps, appear to already be doing so!
I really enjoyed your note on the definitions of ‘modernization theory’ and ‘dependency theory’. I feel like both give an important insight into the nature of development, and something that we as philanthropists need to acknowledge. Feeling compassion for the strife of other human beings is an honorable quality, but often times I could see this drive resulting in naivety easily warped by corrupt individuals along the long path of international action. I feel that we are pushing too fast for what we believe we are accomplishing, and our aspirations are weakening the necessary precise action that we must do first to set the stage for long-term, effective work.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that foreign aid cannot be the end all be all answer to all of the domestic problems in these developing countries. At the same time we have benefited from the "aid" of these countries for generations whether by human resources or natural resources. These countries are not outfitted to receive aid appropriately and then use it. In terms of relating this to the dependency theory this is even more so true. Kofi Annan the ex UN secretary general mentioned this in one of his articles. These multi-national corporations really end up with more institutional say than the countries own domestic actors.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.slideshare.net/HARRIETB/in-what-senses-are-multinational-corporations-global-political-actors
These countries certainly need to modernize and that requires some sort of domestic institution rather than structural changes pushed on by the IMF/World Bank.
The United States pushing "sustainable development" on these third world countries is hypocritical, not only does the United States not comply with the Kyoto Protocol (because China or India can gain a competitive edge) but we do not even have sustainable development in practice here. Sustainable development which is really an oxymoron, is tremendously difficult to achieve and only until we accomplish it in the United States can we require other countries to sign onto it as well. As of now the United States cannot be sustainable nor develop much less do them both at the same time.
You're right in stating that the United States cannot, and should not, support every impoverished nation on Earth. So many arguments can be made for this claim (sovereignty, uncooperative government, wasteful spending, lack of natural resources, etc.). Ultimately, the United States cannot afford to shell out immediate care to every struggling person nor is it physically capable of doing so. The Easterly reading was the most compelling (for me at least) because it pinpoints the real issue behind lack of change and stifling economies. A corrupt government will always stand in the way of long-lasting reform until that government is ousted by those who are capable of cleaning up its messes.
ReplyDeleteI am very interested in how exactly NGO's that focus on microfinance (specifically for women) work overseas, especially in areas where banks are sparse, electricity comes sporadically, and men hold all the power. I think nonprofits that specialize in women entrepreneurs are bringing about the most reform. By undermining 50% of your population, economic growth is impossible. Giving women business tips and small loans empowers them to take more control over their lives and simultaneously tone down misongynist attitudes.
I respect the work that Mercy Corps does, they try to make the world a better place. Micro finance is the new way of promoting economic development and it would be interesting to see more nonprofit around the world doing this, instead of just giving aid. I agree with you on the cost development difference in third world countries because they can do some more much with less money. In relations to the Millennium goals, I believe 15 years are too short to see effective change because it takes time for any country to progress, usually around 30 years. Look at postwar Germany and South Korea, these two took at least 30 years to be a powerful economical state. In regards to your question, I think the standard of living in a third world country is lower because if you are a rich in the United States, and move to somewhere in the Congo, you would be good for life since everything is so cheap.
ReplyDelete