Question

What drives different levels of development across countries?

Please answer this as an argumentative essay of less than a 1000 words with an introduction, body and conclusion. Please include citations as well.

Answer 1

There are several explanations, both physical and human, to explain variations in the level of development between countries. Factors such as environment and the form of government are critical for the development of a country. Development refers to developing countries working their way up the ladder of economic growth, living standards, prosperity and equality that distinguishes them from so-called developed countries. The point at which developing countries are "developed" is a judgement call or a statistical line in the sand that is mostly focused on a mixture of development metrics.

The HDR classifies countries into four levels of development based on their HDIs: “very high human development,” “high human development,” “medium human development” and “low human development.” In general, each level of growth is followed by higher wages, longer life expectancy and more years of schooling, which combine to give people more power, independence and choice.

In general, each level of growth is followed by higher wages, longer life expectancy and more years of schooling, which combine to give people more power, independence and choice. Given the promising success of developed countries around the world, a lot of work needs to be done. Far too many people have not yet invested sufficiently in the success of growth. Around 2.47 billion people, or 43% of the total population of the developing world, were living on less than $2 a day in 2008 according to the World Bank 's February 2012 estimates. For those, almost a third or 801 million people struggled to live on less than $1 a day.

Inequality plays an significant role in the evaluation of growth statistics. While country averages that reflect incremental success, they may also obscure significant numbers of people who may have been left out of the gains enjoyed by others. The UNDP has improved its approach to assessing human development by adapting to many aspects of deprivation Environmental protection is a key component of sustainable development. In the face of climate change, efforts to conserve the Earth's dwindling supplies of natural resources and maintain the integrity of nature 's services are all the more important to ensure that future generations benefit from today's development initiatives.

The opposing theory reverses this assumption and gives primary importance to the development of capital. differences in production output, calculated by relative rates of total factor productivity, are the dominant factor in the difference in levels of growth. We also note that the difference between rich and most poor nations is likely to remain below the prevailing levels of saving and productivity improvement.

In cross-country studies, countries are sometimes grouped according to their stages of growth on the basis of wealth, the composition of total production, access to and adoption of technology, and the degree of human development. There are many possibilities within a country to classify sub-national units. They can be classified as developed or less developed on the basis of per capita income; the speed and direction of economic reforms at the state level, the level of human growth, and also the development of infrastructure.

Development is to expand, which many economists and policy makers have taken to mean economic growth. But progress is not limited to economic growth. Technology is no longer the domain of economists, and the subject itself has grown rapidly to become the focus of interdisciplinary scholarships in the fields of politics, sociology , psychology, history , geography, anthropology, medicine and many other disciplines.

In countries, the difference is even greater than between countries. The remarkable successes enjoyed by some take place amid the absolute and relative poverty of others. What is true in developed nations, such as the United Kingdom and the United States, is much more so in most, but not all, developing countries. There are several reasons that account for successes and failures in the significant unevenness of growth outcomes. Extensive literature attempts to clarify findings on the basis of natural resource endowments, geography, history , culture or otherwise.

The World Bank attributed the East Asian Miracle to sound macroeconomic policies with small deficits and low debt, strong savings and investment rates, free primary and secondary education, low taxes on agriculture, export development, the development of specific industries, the technocratic civil service, and high-ranking politicians. Nevertheless, the Bank has neglected to demonstrate the degree to which the gains have come at the cost of civil liberties and that, far from being free markets, the governments involved have subjugated the economy, mostly with the generous assistance of the United States and other development and military aid programs following the Korean and Vietnam Wars.

Which involve the use of long-term loans (at negative real interest rates), strong subsidies and export repression, tight regulation of international investment and foreign equity (in the case of Korea), highly ambitious development policies, and the creation of large-scale conglomerates, together with limits on the entry and exit of companies in key sectors. The relative contribution of selective forms of intervention, on the one hand, and market-friendly liberalization and export orientation, on the other, to the performance of the South East Asian economies remain a topic of debate.

Revenue interventions are just one aspect of deprivation. Other indicators, including those related to infant and child mortality, illiteracy, infectious diseases, malnutrition and education, are also essential. A number of countries have made remarkable progress in reducing poverty. Others have made improvements around the board, and some have managed to make very substantial progress on one level, while some have fallen back. With comparable rates of total per capita income, the average life expectancy in Bangladesh is 71, while in Zimbabwe it is 60 and in Tanzania it is 61.

Inequality between countries and within countries needs an study that goes beyond the headline economic indicators. While real per capita incomes are increasing in most countries, inequality is also growing almost everywhere. The wealthiest 20 % of the world 's population accounts for three quarters of global income and consumes about 80 % of global resources, while the poorest 20 % of the world 's population consumes just below 2 % of global resources. It's also shifting where disadvantaged people live. Twenty years ago, more than 90% of the poor lived in low-income countries; today, about three quarters of the world's estimated one billion people living on less than $1.25 a day live in middle-income countries.

While we may well be living in a world formed by natural resource endowments, geography , history and institutions, politics and power may still play a decisive role in driving economic performance and in deciding vulnerability to poverty.

Reference- Financial Times and Book on Strategy of Economic Development- Albert O. Hirschman