Explain why development is a complex term to measure and define

The term development is one that is difficult to define, and is often based upon the perception of an individual. In the past, countries have been labelled first world, second world and third world countries, with first world being the more developed countries of Northern America, Europe etc., the second world being communist countries such as the former USSR and third world meaning those which are less developed, such as sub-Saharan Africa. Over the years, this terminology has been modified as this terminology may have been offensive or even patronising to countries classes as second and third world, as it assumes that capitalism is the most developed form of government, and other forms such as communism are inferior; this is the opinion of many, but by no means a proven fact. When it was realised that this terminology may be offensive, the terms developed and developing were used. Again, there were issues with this terminology, as it implies that once a country has gained developed status it has finished developing and will develop no further, when, really, countries are developing all the time no matter how developed they are already. More recently, countries have been classed as MEDCs and LEDCs – more and less economically developed countries. However, this terminology is seen to place too much emphasis upon economic development rather than other factors such as culture, time spent with families and happiness of the population. Evidently, development is a very difficult term to define, and therefore is inevitably a difficult term to measure because it is uncertain what should be measured in order to satisfy the definition.

The most commonly used measurement of development is a country’s gross domestic product (GDP) or gross national product (GNP). Both are given in US dollars so that comparisons can be made between countries more easily, and are usually given as GDP/GNP per capita to account for differences in population. However, there are several problems with this measurement. Firstly, as stated above, all of the emphasis when using this measurement is on economic terms of development. Other factors of development are not included such as culture and happiness. Furthermore, there may be uneven distribution within a country, meaning that the GDP or GNP would not give an accurate reflection of the wealth of the people in that country. For example, in Mexico the distribution is very uneven; a large proportion of the GDP is in the hands of a small proportion of the population. Furthermore, the informal sector of the economy is not included in the GNP. Considering the informal sectors of each country varies in size, the figures given by measuring GNP are not a completely accurate measure of even a country’s economic development, let alone its overall development. To add to this is the problem of countries having different purchasing power parity: $1 in the USA will be worth a different amount to $1 in Zimbabwe, for example. Therefore, even if countries have the same GDP per capita, people in those countries will not be able to afford the same things. To try to account for the difference in purchasing parity, The Economist have developed the Big Mac Index, which shows the purchasing parity in different countries by comparing the price of a McDonalds Big Mac, which is so similar in hundreds of countries making it a good item for comparison. Using comparisons like this one, purchasing parity maps can be produced which gives a more accurate snapshot of global development, although the problem still exists of development solely being based upon economic development when using this measurement.

Another issue with GDP and GNP is that, although a country may be doing well economically, this wealth may not be used effectively by governments to improve the social development of their country. For example, China is the fastest growing economy in the world, and is therefore commonly thought to be the most rapidly developing country. However, when you look at other possibly measures of development other than economic growth; we see that China has a poor standard of social wellbeing compared to other countries. For example, in 2004, at least 3400 people were executed in China according to Amnesty ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

However, assuming that laws such as the one-child policy are poor is an example of how development is often based on Western ideology: in my opinion, the one-child policy is a large infringement of people’s freedom and has many negative consequences. However, the policy is successful in limiting the unsustainable growth of population, which is a global problem. Therefore, China may just be the first country in the world to implement a policy which may eventually be adopted by western countries such as the USA and the UK. Although this is unlikely, it is a possibility, and an example of how the Western idea of development may sometimes affect one’s perception of another country’s development. In this case, China may be the most developed country in terms of meeting the problem of overpopulation.

Indicators other than GDP/GNP can be assessed when measuring development, such as the life expectancy, infant mortality rate, literacy rate, number of people per doctor etc. However, some of these indicators may be skewed; in the same way that GDP may be skewed by an uneven distribution of wealth, other indicators may sometimes be skewed. Also, when indicators are taken in isolation, there are various problems and disagreements, as seen with using GDP/GNP as the sole indicator. As a result of this problem, the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) use the Human Development Index (HDI) for its annual Human Development Report. The HDI yields a result between 0 and 1, which makes it easy to understand and provides a basis for ranking countries, as well as enabling comparisons between the performances of a country over time. The HDI for any country is calculated using the GDP per capita, the literacy rate and the measured life expectancy at birth (longevity). The HDI is probably the most accurate way which has been devised of measuring development, as it gives us a fairly good idea of a country’s development in terms of the given factors. However, as mentioned already, factors such as happiness, culture and time spent with families are not considered, and therefore there is still an issue with this measurement.

In the 1960s, Rostow put forward a linear theory of development, based on the history of developed countries which seemed to suggest a common pattern of structural change. A country began as a subsistence economy based on agriculture and must meet certain preconditions in the second stage in order to reach the third stage, in which industrialisation increases, with workers switching from the land to manufacturing. In the fourth stage, a country drives to maturity before it reaches the final stage of mass consumption. This model implies that countries must invest in capital in the first stage in order to reach industrialisation. However, there are a number of limitations with Rostow’s model. Firstly, some countries will struggle to meet the preconditions necessary to reach stage 3 if they lack money or resources to invest in capital. Secondly, affluent countries may also be unwilling to lend money to countries with struggling economies, and high interest rates on loans may leave countries with huge debts. Also, a strong government is necessary in order to drive a country forward, and there is always risk of something going wrong. For example, resource curse theory hit the Zambian economy when fibre optics were invented, as the economy was based on copper.

It may also be said that Rostow’s model was simply a politically motivated model to gain support for capitalism, at a time when there was much competition between capitalism and communism, and less than a decade later Andrew Frank proposed the dependency theory, which suggest that it is in the best interests of MEDCs for less developed countries to remain less developed, as this makes mass consumption in MEDCs more successful as poorer countries can be exploited. Although there may be some truth in this theory, Newly Industrialising Countries (NICs) such as India have proven that it is not impossible to develop, so the theory cannot be completely accurate. The theories put forward by Rostow and Frank show that development is a very complex process which cannot be achieved by some linear equation, and also cannot be easily achieved or prevented.

In conclusion, development is a very difficult term to define, as it is largely based upon perception. As well as uncertainty over the best terminology to use, there is also confusion over whether development refers to a country’s economic strength alone, or whether it includes the development of society, for example. Clearly, if something is difficult to define it is going to be difficult to measure, as there will be uncertainty over what should be measured in order to find a result. Even more problems arise when you consider how to measure development. Indicators may only look at one aspect of development – usually economic – and are often skewed, therefore they must be used with caution and it is advisable to use more than one indicator in order to get a more accurate idea of a country’s development. The UNDP have devised the HDI combining three main indicators, and this is probably the most accurate measure of a country’s development that can be used, but still is not perfect.