‘Countries at Very Low Levels of Economic Development Face Such a Huge Challenge That They Cannot Hope to Address Them Without the Assistance from the Rest of the World’ to What Extent Do You Agree with This View?
‘Countries at very low levels of economic development face such a huge challenge that they cannot hope to address them without the assistance from the rest of the world’ To what extent do you agree with this view? [40]
In this essay I shall try and explore if countries of low levels of economic development; LICs, can only develop if they receive aid from already developed countries; HICs. I shall be weighing up both the benefits of aid and it downfalls, as well as the possibilities presented through trade alone. Is it easier for an LIC to develop through aid or by letting itself trade its way forward?
With two thirds of the world being made up by LICs, economic growth, the increase in output of goods and services that a country produces over a period of time, visible in its GDP, is essential for the growth of a country and the closure of the ‘development gap’. It has a multiplier effect that allows funds to be spent on infrastructure such as schools and roads; allowing living conditions to climb. Both aid and trade are used as a kick-starter for this multiplier effect, but which one is more efficient? Rostow’s model of Development notes this ‘kick-off’ as essential, with aid necessary for a ‘Traditional society’ to evolve into the ‘Transitional stage’ were specialization, surpluses and infrastructure allow Industrialization, growing investment, regional growth and political change to follow in Rostow’s ‘Take Off’ stage. For most of history this guide to development has been followed, with aims to develop being linked back to the giving of aid to LICs, but what does Aid actually involve and what really is it?
Aid involves the giving of money, most regularly from a MIC but now frequently from oil rich NICs, to poorer LICs. However, there are different types of aid. Bilateral aid involves the direct giving of fund from one government straight to another, for the recipient to spend on what it pleases. Another form of aid is multilateral aid, which is given by one
In this essay I shall try and explore if countries of low levels of economic development; LICs, can only develop if they receive aid from already developed countries; HICs. I shall be weighing up both the benefits of aid and it downfalls, as well as the possibilities presented through trade alone. Is it easier for an LIC to develop through aid or by letting itself trade its way forward?
With two thirds of the world being made up by LICs, economic growth, the increase in output of goods and services that a country produces over a period of time, visible in its GDP, is essential for the growth of a country and the closure of the ‘development gap’. It has a multiplier effect that allows funds to be spent on infrastructure such as schools and roads; allowing living conditions to climb. Both aid and trade are used as a kick-starter for this multiplier effect, but which one is more efficient? Rostow’s model of Development notes this ‘kick-off’ as essential, with aid necessary for a ‘Traditional society’ to evolve into the ‘Transitional stage’ were specialization, surpluses and infrastructure allow Industrialization, growing investment, regional growth and political change to follow in Rostow’s ‘Take Off’ stage. For most of history this guide to development has been followed, with aims to develop being linked back to the giving of aid to LICs, but what does Aid actually involve and what really is it?
Aid involves the giving of money, most regularly from a MIC but now frequently from oil rich NICs, to poorer LICs. However, there are different types of aid. Bilateral aid involves the direct giving of fund from one government straight to another, for the recipient to spend on what it pleases. Another form of aid is multilateral aid, which is given by one