There are many flaws in international development models, but the most fundamental is this: it is impossible to help anyone – all you can do is support them while they help themselves. Until African nations choose to develop, choose to be moral and honest and just and tolerant, they cannot be helped at all.

Jeff

For example, we consistently structure the agriculture of developing nations around export, commodity crops. The assumption is that export generates money which will then be used to buy food, often imported food. But this leaves the local farmers caught in the double bind of increasing yield. The more they grow, the lower the prices. And to grow more they must increase their reliance on expensive inputs like fertilizers and pesticides. Or, as in the case of Ethiopia, they choose to use their most productive land to grow crops like cut flowers for the European market.

The example of Russia is a good one, but it must be remembered that there was a great debate during the nineties of how to convert that economy. The choice was simple and described by visualizing a chasm with the Soviet economy on one side and a market economy on the other. Either Russia could attempt to slowly build a bridge, or they could jump the chasm Evil Knievel style. The West pushed hard for just making the jump, and that’s what happened. Only the Russian economy didn’t quite make it and a lot of people fell into the chasm. Those who didn’t make it became disillusioned. I was there, and people might be surprised at how many Russians started to look upon the Soviet Union as the “good old days.”

I would suggest that our model of development is fundamentally flawed for the developees, because its primary concern is the health and wealth of the developers. What’s more important, well fed Ethiopians or cheap cut flowers for Germans? It depends on whether you’re German or Ethiopian, i guess.

Outstanding analysis.

This story has been submitted to Stirrdup. Your support can help it become hot….

A thoughtful, detailed analysis of the economic prospects in nations dominated by corrupt leaders, including multiple African governments, Russia, and Venezuela….

When sub-saharan Africa was claimed by Europe she had a history of development that spanned centuries and S-S A was a sitting duck for the civilization that bore down upon it. While America was colonised and the Native American numbers decreased the exact opposit happened in Africa. The black man was harnessed wholesale and uniquely…in a way that the Native American never was. Africa was never going to be another America.

I can’t see the indigenous people of S-S A breaking free from their tribal heritage and traditions, their propensity to settle matters with physical violence, their male dominated mindset, women as lesser beings, their ‘polygamous society’ and their bully boy tactics any time soon.