Why are Some Countries Rich and Some Countries Poor
In the past pretty much all countries in the world where about as rich as each other. Some were doing things differently; China for example was way ahead of countries like the UK in terms of writing and maths.
Then the European countries set about taking over areas of the world and forming vast empires, just like the Romans really. But there was one major spin off from this; the European countries suddenly owned a huge amount of land that produced crops that could be used in the European countries. This freed the European countries to set up industry.
In the 1800's the Industrial Revolution occurred. The UK suddenly became the place in the world where things got made. We still had an empire so carried on getting cheap raw materials from the countries we `owned` and were able to very quickly improve everyone’s standard of living. This still holds pretty much true today even though we have no empire. The poor countries sell us raw materials like coal or iron ore. These materials are relatively cheap and we can buy lots of them. We then make them into cars, TV's etc which we then sell on for lots of money. Manufactured goods are always more expensive than primary goods.
The poor countries want the manufactured goods but cannot afford to build their own factories as we charge so much for the goods. This means the poor stay poor and the rich get richer.
How do Cities in Developed Countries Differ from Those In Developing countries
One of the main differences is that cities in the developed world are not growing as rapidly as cities in the less developed world. London grew rapidly in the 1800s as did most British cities because of the Industrial Revolution. Factories developed in cities and their population soared. Rows of terraced houses were built to house the workers. Gradually as transport improved the more well off moved to better standard residential areas in the suburbs. The population of many large cities in the developed world has actually been static or even falling because more and people have decided to live in the countryside and commute to work. In general terms the poorest parts of developed cities are the older inner city areas and the richer parts are on the edge. Cities like Mexico City and many others in the less developed world have grown very rapidly in population in recent years. The cities attract people (PULL factors) because they offer the promise of a better life. The rural areas are often poor and over populated, encouraging people to leave (PUSH factors). This process is called rural to urban migration. Although there is industry in less developed cities there are not enough jobs for everyone. The cities are not able to provide enough houses or schools or other services for the huge number of new arrivals. Often people have to build their own housing-called shanty towns-wherever there is spare land. In less developed cities the poor shanty towns are usually found on the edge and the better quality expensive housing near to the city centre with all the shops and offices nearby. All big cities suffer from similar problems in the form of pollution and congestion. The main problem for less developed cities is the sheer pace of urbanisation and the lack of money to deal with all the problems
Population differences
In poor countries children generally help their families, for example in farming. In these countries people have to look after themselves because the government does not have enough money for things like old age pensions. Having a lot of children makes sense and it makes it more likely that a child will be around to look after the parents when they get old. In richer countries children are not much of an economic asset! Having children is expensive, women want to have careers, people marry later, and people have financial security so do not need to depend on their children caring for them in old age. Studies have shown that the best way of slowing down population growth in a country is to educate the girls. So even without a country becoming richer it is possible to slow down the birth rate.
Average Life Expectancy
There is a very strong connection between population and economic development and this can be seen in the changes to the two measurements you have mentioned. In the early stages of economic development, birth rates are higher because:
- There is little or no birth control or family planning
- so many children die in infancy, that parents have more children so that some will survive to both work on the land and to look after the parents in old age
As the economic development of a country increases then birth rates fall because:
- Infant mortality falls and so there is less need for numbers of children to ensure the survival of some.
- Increased industrialisation means that there are more jobs other than farming and so less need for child labour.
- As people become better off, they prefer material possessions (cars, holidays, bigger homes) rather than large families.
- Education and more freedom for women enable them to follow their careers rather than solely raise large families.
Life expectancy increases as a country becomes more economically developed because:
- Better diets mean that people are healthier, can fight off diseases, and so live longer.
- Improved medical facilities (hospitals, doctors and medicines) mean that people can survive illnesses that would otherwise have ended their lives and so people on average live longer.
Education
Children will be lucky to have just a few years education. The schools they attend will have few resources, in some places none. Slates or chalk maybe used for writing as they are reusable. Paper and pencils may be scarce or they bring their own (if it is available and they can afford it). Girls, especially, are more useful at home - doing chores or looking after younger siblings. Boys may have to help with farming or the family business. Some schools have very few books (not one per pupil, but one per class) and no technical or science equipment. Classes are often very large (50-60) pupils, and often only half a day so that pupils come in the morning or afternoon, to fit more in! Some of those in teaching have had little education themselves.
An agency of the churches in the UK and Ireland, Christian Aid works wherever the need is greatest, irrespective of religion. It supports local organisations, which are best placed to understand local needs, as well as giving help on the ground through 16 overseas offices.
Christian Aid believes in strengthening people to find their own solutions to the problems they face. It strives for a new world transformed by an end to poverty and campaigns to change the rules that keep people poor. Supported and sustained by the churches and driven by the Gospel, Christian Aid is inspired by the dream of a new earth where all people can secure a better and more just future. Christian Aid's purpose is to expose the scandal of poverty and to contribute to its eradication. The organisation strives to be prophetic, challenging the systems and processes that work against the interests of those who are poor or marginalised. Christian Aid recognises that change will only come about as a movement is built of individuals who are committed to a better world for all, bringing their faith and talents, their energy, their influence, their gifts and their actions, to achieve what should surely be possible.
Oxfam believes that:
Oxfam’s Aims
Oxfam's vision is of a world where there is no longer poverty and suffering. They want to help ensure that every individual is assured of...
Long-term Objectives
Oxfam’s five aims are very broad in scope and its resources limited. In order that these resources can be channelled to areas where they can have the greatest impact, Oxfam has agreed a set of nine statements which describe what we would like people living in poverty to be able to achieve for themselves.
These are long-term objectives towards which we will make a specific contribution as part of the broader global movement against poverty and injustice. They are objectives which will guide the work of the whole organisation – not just the international programme – and against which we will judge our impact.
This Article was written and illustrated by Jasvinder Sandhu