A New Era in Development - Assignment Example

Name: Course: Instructor: Date: Question 1 Development entails growth and the advancement of something over a period. There have been several developments in the 21st Century, health sectors, agricultural sectors and the economic status have improved in several countries. The immediate crisis should always be solved and at the same time, investments should be made for long term growth. A billion people have been saved from starvation due to the development of the agriculture sector. Innovations like vaccines have been made in the 21st century that has improved the health sector and the death rate of children under 5 years of age has been cut by 80%. A new era in development has therefore been created because more countries can contribute their resources to development than before. The number of innovative people has also risen compared to the past years. Development should be based on partnership and not patronage, a partnership is all about sharing different responsibilities. Countries that have invested and partnered with other developing countries have been able to grow over the years. Ideas are turned into results that last under these partnerships. These partners should be committed to the development and practice good governance, do away with corruption and make financial contributions towards programs of development. Taxes should be levied on those who can afford them and countries with natural resources should be able to manage the resources and devote them to development. It is at times risky to partner up with countries that have not succeeded in development, some countries have no capacity to develop but have the will; this is something that can, therefore, be built. Resources can be used to cultivate the ability of countries to build their futures. Aid and investment are different from each other. Aid is through helping those who need help especially in countries that have less developed. Help can be through food, medicine cartons and even money to take care of the budget that might have been shaky. Investment, on the other hand, focuses on breaking the dependency cycle; this can be done by helping countries that have not developed to build institutions and have capacity to deliver their services independently. Japan, the United Kingdom, Canada, Sweden and the Netherlands have been I long time leadership and have reached out to dozens of countries. Other new countries have also developed and play a key role in supporting sustainable solutions in development. There are organizations that have more resources with extensive networks and expertise in finance, health, and infrastructure; they played a role in the development and opened up opportunities causing an impact in the sector of development. In the 21st century, government agencies should act and think globally. There are several departments in states, for instance, the treasury department should manage the international system of finance. The department of justice should be able to curb crime internationally and energy department should team up with global partners to come up with new energy sources. Trade should also be expanded and attract investments. The work of development should not only be done by contractors but with professionals and all those who have the capacity, contractors are there for support. The new technology embraced has also contributed to development in the 21st century. Farmers can be able to use their mobile phones to check on the current market rates and know when a drought or flood is predicted. Mobile banking has also helped most people in the remote places to access their saving accounts using their phones. Scientists have come up with techniques for immunization, and engineers have come up with laptops that use solar energy; suitable for people who have no power. Women have also been involved in development. More women are being hired to reach out to the women farmers and also those in the health and education sector. They have also been trained to promote development, improve the health of women their income and access to food and health. Development is not an easy work, but it has enabled people with potential and abilities to create a world that is equitable, prosperous and democratic. Question 2 Prosperity, power and poverty vary around the world. There are different views of the economists on the factors and conditions that make a country poorer or richer. Good institutions is one of the factors that came up, this can be defined as the practices that people get motivated from to work harder, for a productive economic that will be able to enrich the country and the people. The financial institutions that people get motivated from and become productive include the rights to protection of private property, enforcement of contracts, exchange of currency openly, inflation control; investment opportunities and retention of power of money. This way, with the knowledge that they have opportunities and profitably investing the money they earn, people will be motivated and work harder. Countries that share a border and are neighbors may differ significantly in terms of wealth. This can be supported by Nogales in Arizona which is richer than Nogales in Sonora, the two share a border but have different institutions. The population and environment are similar in both areas but the political and economic systems are very different. Questions may arise as to why some countries have good facilities while others don’t. Most countries with long history of governments have good systems; those with a short history have problems because it is not possible for a person to come up with new institutions and expect people to adopt and do away with their previous organizations. Some countries have also internalized their practices and this creates a platform for leaders to satisfy their interests and not interest for everyone. People fought for political rights in some countries and won, this way, they used these rights to expand opportunities for economic purposes.(Acemoglu and Robinson,4) Historical differences and agriculture also determine the wealth and productivity of a country. Africa had less agricultural productivity while Europe was highly productive. The differences have led to the different distribution of wealth, because countries who started practicing agriculture long time ago are way richer than those who started most recently. Those with state governments that have a long history have also developed and are wealthier than the countries with a short history of state governments. Countries that were rich and later colonized became poorer while those that were poor became richer after being colonized. This is because, the natives who were in rich countries were forced to work and in the process, the settlers took away their resources, while colonialists who were in poor countries worked for themselves and after gaining independence, the natives inherited everything the settlers worked on. Another fact that can make a country poor or rich is the natural resources. Countries are poor in these resources tend to be richer than those with many resources. This is because, bad institutions are established in the countries rich in resources and corruption, civil wars, and inflation is promoted; this makes the country poorer. However, some leaders invest in the natural resources and use the proceeds for economic development, and the country becomes richer. Poverty is common in tropical countries, unlike in temperate countries. The main issues being diseases and low agricultural productivity. The tropics are always attacked by parasitic diseases because of the high temperatures, compared to the temperate countries. The diseases affect the population and people are unable to work and the economy, therefore, has a burden. Agricultural activities in tropical areas are lower because of the high temperature that kill the leaves. Question 3 Hegemony is about leadership, authority, supremacy, control and dominance of power over a group. The debate was about the dominance of power and it did not mean that US had control over everything and that it could do whatever it wanted; rather, it was about how the scope of powerwas greater in the US than the other countries. This is the status quo of the US and how it would affect the world. The debate on whether US hegemony was desirable stirred up some questions as opponents debated the issue. Issues such as a change in polarity were talked about with one of the opponents who thought that it would be destructive. Multipolarity is where multiple states exercise equal power or influence and hegemony is absent in the nation. Unipolarity is the state experienced in the current world, the US, on the other hand, spends so much on the military, five times more than any other nations. In case the US collapses, there will be a power vacuum that no state can fill. No nation is capable of taking US’ place and in case it collapses, other nations would try to take control and multipolarity will be experienced. Conflicts would arise if the US disappears and other states would use the opportunity to gain regional hegemony. Establishments have been made that there is no country with the capability of taking the role such as the US. Another issue that came up is that policies of the US are beneficial. The US does not tolerate a dictatorship, and has never been involved in genocide during its time as the hegemon compared to other powers. On free trade, the US reduced tariff barriers and this led to the establishment of the world trade organization. Maximum economic exchange is brought about by free trade, countries gain wealth and living standards are improved. The proposing opponents of the debate concluded by stating that a global hegemony is necessary for the stability of the globe. The opposing opponents do not agree that hegemony is desirable because has affected the world in one way or the other. On safety, the US is powerful and other states would team up and attack in order to gain the same powers. The economy will also be drained because the money gained is used to help foreigners. Multi polarity is more desirable than hegemony. There is less conflict in multi polarity because states cooperate, and deal with each other’s concerns. Hegemony encourages power to be used in other states and this leads to conflicts. Not only the US is able to stop conflicts, other countries can also stop the conflicts since not every conflict is stopped by the US. Hegemony is bad because other states spend less on their military and depend on the US to take care of their problems; this in turn drains the economy of the US. Works Cited Acemoglu, Daron, and James A Robinson. Why Nations Fail. London: Profile, 2012. Read More