The world development is a very difficult term to define. The reason is that it has different meanings to different groups and classes of people at different locations and time periods. In common usage development describes a process through which the potentialities of an object or organism are released until it reaches its natural, complete full-fledged form. Development in this sense is seen as a means to an end and must affect the majority and not a few people. Development is therefore not a cluster of benefits “given to the people in need but rather a process by which populace/society acquire greater master over its own destiny.
The document brings to light the various conceptualizations of development and move further to address some of the approaches used for measuring the rate of development in both developed and developing countries. These approaches are built on the indicators which are underpinned by the various ideology and meanings people holds about development.
1 Introduction
Development is seen as a highly subjective concept and as such has different meaning reflecting the ideology of different groups and classes of people at different locations and time period. This is confirmed by Tadaro’s (1997) assertion that, development is relative term, which may mean different things to different people. To him development is both physical reality and a state of mind in which society has through some consideration of social, economic and institutional processes secured as the means of obtaining better life. According to Gunner Myrdal (1975), development is the movement upward of the entire social system. To him the social system includes both economic and non-economic factors such as health, education, water, electricity and others. Regardless of the different meaning of development upheld by different scholars, development throughout history has been understood as “change in a desirable direction and encompassing many different dimensions”.
Traditionally, development was equated to economic growth. Development policies were dominated by the thinking of economists for whom development was seen as a process through which all countries would pass provided conditions were right. The barriers to such modernization were seen as a lack of capital, foreign exchange, trained personnel and what might now be termed an “enterprise culture”. The intention of development strategies was to close these gaps. The indicator of success was seen as growth of the gross national product (GNP) and ministries of economic development and planning produced development plans that largely reflected this approach. This approach to development was based on the premise that growth in GNP was seen rather as the necessary precursor to social development- the generator of resources to allow the social sectors including health, education and others to grow.
However, by the early 1970s there was increasing recognition that any growth in GNP which had occurred was not having concomitant effects on social indicators (infant mortality, literacy rates, and income distribution). Also social thinkers recognised that defining development on economic basis had a great deficiency on the ground that, averaging the material wealth per head of a population conceals the great discrepancies of income which actually exist between individual and groups. Again it was possible to see massive expenditure on luxury goods by a minority at a time when the majority is barely able to survive (Thmompson, 1984). On the basis of the weaknesses of the economic approach to development, others argued that development could not be thought of simply as an accumulation of wealth but that it must be concerned with the distribution and use made of that wealth, with the impact both on the way in which it has been created and the way in which it is used upon the quality of the lives people lead. Based on the above, attempts were made at conceptualising development to reflect the chief evils of the world rather than a mere growth in GNP. New ways of reconceptualising development included the following:
- The first conceptualisation of development was expressed in the Cocoyoc Declaration in 1974. The declaration was made at a seminar organized by the Technical Council on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the United Nation Environmental Programme (UNE) in Cocoyoc (Mexico). The declaration states that;
“Our first concern is to redefine the whole purpose of development. This should not be to develop things but to develop man. Human beings have basic needs: food, shelter, clothing, health, and education. Any process of growth that does not lead to their fulfilment, or even worse disrupts them is a travesty of the idea of development” (Ghai, 1977:6).
- In 1975, the Seventh Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly asked for a more effective way than that of the International Development Strategy adopted for achieving social objectives of development. Due to this, the ILO in June 1976 organised a conference on Employment, Income Distribution and Social Progress which gave birth to a new conceptualisation of development known as the Basic Needs Approach.
- Another conceptualisation of development focused on Human Capital. This approach saw education accomplishment as basically a means to higher competitiveness and therefore, was a variant of the economic growth perspective
2 Measuring Development
Frequently asked questions
What is the definition of development according to the text?
Development is a subjective concept with varying meanings depending on the ideology, location, and time period of different groups and classes. It's a relative term (Tadaro, 1997) encompassing both physical reality and a state of mind where a society improves its life through social, economic, and institutional processes. Myrdal (1975) defines it as the upward movement of the entire social system, including economic and non-economic factors like health, education, and infrastructure. Generally, development is understood as change in a desirable direction with many dimensions.
How was development traditionally measured and what were the criticisms of this approach?
Traditionally, development was equated with economic growth, primarily measured by the Gross National Product (GNP). Development policies focused on addressing a lack of capital, foreign exchange, trained personnel, and an "enterprise culture." The criticism was that GNP growth didn't necessarily translate into improved social indicators (infant mortality, literacy rates, income distribution). Averaging material wealth per capita masked income discrepancies. Luxury spending by a minority coexisted with the majority struggling to survive (Thmompson, 1984).
What alternative conceptualizations of development emerged as a response to the limitations of the economic approach?
Several alternative conceptualizations emerged, including:
- The Cocoyoc Declaration (1974): Redefined development's purpose to focus on developing people, emphasizing basic needs like food, shelter, clothing, health, and education.
- The Basic Needs Approach (1976): A new conceptualisation of development focused on Employment, Income Distribution and Social Progress.
- The Human Capital Approach: Focused on educational accomplishment as a means to increase competitiveness and economic growth.
How is development measured currently?
Development is measured by outcomes and indicators of human well-being. The approaches used depend on the conceptualization of development. Prior to the 1970s, economists used GDP. However, because development is broader than economic growth, composite indicators that address the shortcomings of GDP, measuring "normal" or "optimal" patterns between social, economic, and political factors, and those that measured quality of life began to be created.
What were some of the early attempts to create composite indicators for measuring development?
One early study by the United Nations Research Institute on Social Development (UNRISD) in 1972 identified 16 indicators (9 social and 7 economic). Another study by Irma Adelman and Cynthia Morris identified 40 indicators for measuring development.
- Citation du texte
- Gabriel Appiah (Auteur), 2012, Approaches for measuring development, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/194954
