Origins and history of development aid
The idea behind development aid is nothing new. We have been helping those in need since the dawn of time even if it is only for our own benefit. However our approach towards development aid has change over the years. Modern development aid is still a relatively new conception.
There is no clear line of when we can say that modern development aid started. Most people seem to agree that the concept of development aid began in the late nineteenth century, which coincides with the colonisation of Africa (1981 – 1914). When the colonies where first colonised the settlers preferred to use the Laissez-faire concept . The definition behind the Laissez-faire concept is: an economic environment in which transactions between private parties are free from government restrictions, tariffs, and subsidies, with only enough regulations to protect property rights.1 The profit that was made in the export of different types of raw materials usually ended up in the hands of the coloniser. The money that did end up going to the colonial governments was never enough to be of any beneficial help. The change in the approach when it came to development aid was a slow process.
As there is little information about the early stages of development aid. I will focus on the history of development aid in the United Kingdom. After the Second World War most developed countries began working together when it came to giving development aid, so I will be able to show a more global insight to the history of development aid.
The first sign of change in the United Kingdom came in the form of a speech on the 22nd of August 1895 by Joseph Chamberlain, who was appointed as the Secretary of State for the Colonies of the United King...
... middle of paper ...
... education
To promote gender equality and empowering women
To reduce child mortality rates
To improve maternal health
To combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
To ensure environmental sustainability
To develop a global partnership for development
In 2005 the United Nations came with the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, which is to help improve the effectiveness of development aid.
Compared to how the world used to help underdeveloped countries we have come a long way. Development is still primarily used to promote economic development, but now we also promote social development.
Works Cited
Gaspard, Toufick. A Political Economy of Lebanon 1948–2002: The Limits of Laissez-faire. Boston: Brill, 2004. Print
George C. Abbott – The Economic History Review A Re-Examination of the 1929 Colonial Development Act Pages 68
http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/
Samii, Abbas William. "The Shah's Lebanon policy: the role of SAVAK." Middle Eastern Studies 33.1 (1997): 66+. World History in Context. Web. 19 May 2014.
Trias Monge, Jose. "The shaping of colonial policy," from: Trias Monge The Trials of the Oldest Colony in the World. New Haven: Yale University press, 1997. PP 36-51
Before extending aid to other countries, we should focus on our more prevalent domestic problems. Patrick Buchanan said, "The idea that we should send endless streams of tax dollars all over the world, while our own country sinks slowly in an ocean of debt is, well, ludicrous. Almost every American knows it, feels it, believes it." The topic of United States foreign policy is greatly debated, and a decision on how to handle is very hard to come by. It seems as if we are finally leaning towards less aid to foreign countries, as we try to cut wasteful spending. The American government is finally opening its eyes to the realization that all of the aid we are giving out may not be worth it. Our priority should be to help our homeless, instead of other countries' poor.
Evans, Eric. "A British Revolution in the 19th Century?" BBC News. Accessed October 4, 2015.
The first food aid program in the world was started during the Great War by soon to be President Herbert Hoover. Food production kicked in and the United States started to feed areas under Bolshevik control in Russia literally right outside the Tsar’s palace in the hopes that hunger – and therefore the main void and driver of need that communism fills could possibly be tackled. In a time absolutely different from our own where the United States gives foreign aid as a matter of routine, Hoover’s program was given over $700 million from France and Britain in order to feed Belgium and wartime
One facet of this unique system involved the numerous economic differences between England and the colonies. The English government subscribed to the economic theory of mercantilism, which demanded that the individual subordinate his economic activity to the interests of the state (Text, 49). In order to promote mercantilism in all her colonies, Great Britain passed the Navigation Acts in 1651, which controlled the output of British holdings by subsidizing. Under the Navigation Acts, each holding was assigned a product, and the Crown dictated the quantity to be produced. The West Indies, for example, were assigned sugar production and any other colony exporting sugar would face stiff penalties (Text, 50). This was done in order to ensure the economic prosperity of King Charles II, but it also served to restrict economic freedom. The geographical layout of the American colonies made mercantilism impractical there. The cit...
The first reasons to think that foreign aid should be spend is that “Aid saves lives” which is clearly illustrated by the researches conducted. Compare 1990 to 2010, as a result of aid in vaccines and health, there was a decrease in number of children who died from illness of pneumonia and diarrhoea (BBC). For example, in Botswana, the foreign aid fund had provided a test of HIV for pregnant mothers and therefore decrease the amount of newborn babies which catches HIV. Furthermore, in Bangladesh, there is a 62% drop in death rate for the under five children, the aid fund allows the government to be able to afford “vaccines and trained the midwives”.
As the Arab Spring enters its second year, major uprisings and revolts have occurred all over the Middle East, pushing for an end to the corrupt autocratic rule and an expansion of civil liberties and political rights. Most recently, images from Syria have emerged, depicting the government’s use of force to suppress the voice of its people. One might ask, “Is this the beginning of a revolution? Is the country on the path to democracy?” To assess this question and examine the future trends in the region, one must look back on the country’s somewhat tumultuous history, the relationship between the citizens and the state, and the political economy.
Firstly, there is a need to understand what is meant by development. It is defined as “the continuous and positive change in the economic, social, political and cultural dimensions of the human condition, guided by the principle of freedom of choice and the limited capacity of the environment to sustain such change.” (Sharpley, 2003: 8-7). Sharpley (2000) explains how theories of development have progressed; Firstly the ‘Modernisation Theory’ (1950s- 1960s), in which societies are seen to switch from traditional to modern only through economic growth. Next is the ‘Dependency Theory’ (late 1960s), this takes into account the historical and economic structures of developing countries, distribution of benefits, social players such as local elites, state interests and private companies, and situations in which an economy and development of a country can be conditioned by a more dominant country (Santos, 1970). The ‘Neo Classical Counter Revolution theory’ (1980s) was made to fit in with global events such as the economic depression, and development policies that build upon dependence on free market. Finally, ‘Sustainable development’ (late 1980s) is the theory that creates the encouragement for development of many developing countries. This theory aided by government policies of backings, tax breaks, and incentives. These theories have developed through growing knowledge of evolving processes, and dismissal of past theories (Sharpley, 2000).
The rise of development theory has been an interesting phenomenon. In the latter half of the 20th century, many theorists have tried to explain the origins of "under-development." The debate over the idea of development has been intense, and has led to the emergence of two contending paradigms: Modernization theory and dependency theory. Upon close investigation, one realizes that both theories are problematic. This paper is based on readings of Escobar, Martinussen, Cruise O'Brien, and Pieterse. The purpose of this paper is to chronicle the origins and growth of development discourse, and to show how both paradigms share three flaws: an economist approach to social change, and an ethnocentric and teleological worldview of development, and the perceived universal application of the West's development experience throughout the developing world.
Poor countries have been receiving aid from the international community for over a century now. While such aid is supposed to be considered an act of kindness from the donor nations or international bodies, it has led to over dependence among the developing countries. They have adopted the habit of estimating and including international aid in their national budgets to reduce their balance of trade deficits. It is believed that foreign aid is necessary for poor nations in order to break the cycle of poverty that ties their citizens in low productivity zones and so their economy will not be weak. However, some critics view the extension of aid to poor countries as means of keeping the nations in economic slumber so that they can wake up from only by devising ways of furthering self-sustainability. Because of these two schools of thought concerning the topic, debate has arisen on which side is more rational and factual than the other. The non-sustainable nature of international aid, however, leaves the question of what may happen in the event that foreign aid is unavailable for the poor nations. After thorough consideration on the effects of the assistance to poor countries, it is sufficient to state that giving international aid to the poor nations is more disadvantageous than beneficial to the nations. This point is argued through an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of giving international aid to the poor countries with appropriate examples drawn from various regions of the world to prove the stance.
When looking through the topic of development, two drastically different ways to assess it arise. The majority of the western world looks at development in terms of per capita GNP. This means each country is evaluated on a level playing field, comparing the production of each country in economic value. Opposite this style of evaluation is that of the alternative view, which measures a country’s development on its ability to fulfill basic material and non-material needs. Cultural ties are strong in this case as most of the population does not produce for wealth but merely survival and tradition.
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines development as the act or process of growing or causing something to grow larger or more advanced. We live in a world that is continuously developing, in ways that we cannot even begin to try to describe. Nonetheless, The World Bank measures indicators of development. To do this, they look at three-hundred and thirty-one different indicators which cover a vast number of areas, including agriculture, aid effectiveness, climate change, economic policy, education, energy and mining, environment, the financial sector, poverty, science and technology, social development, and urban development. The World Bank’s World Development Indicators data is has been used for over fifty years as the standard by which development is measured. While this list may seem like a comprehensive, all-inclusive list, it does not consider the idea of sustainable development. While development for the sake of advancement may seem like a good option for an undeveloped country, it can be argued that development that is not sustainable is not development at all, but merely the illusion of one.
Darwin, John. 2011. BBC - History - British History in depth: Britain, the Commonwealth and the End of Empire, 3 March 2011. Accessed 11 April 2014. Available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/endofempire_overview_01.shtml.
Underdevelopment can be understood in relation to development. Development is explained by the Oxford Dictionary as the process of developing or developed in a specified state of growth or advancement. Underdeveloped, as according to the Oxford Dictionary, is ‘not fully developed or not advanced economically’ which is meant for a country or a region. We can certainly see the difference between underdeveloped and developed, where the changing situation emerges from the economic point of view. To be more specific, worlds within the world were created i.e. the nomenclature of First World and Third World came into picture.