欢迎来到留学生英语论文网

Post World War 2 development in Europe

发布时间:2018-02-26
该论文是我们的学员投稿,并非我们专家级的写作水平!如果你有论文作业写作指导需求请联系我们的客服人员

If we take 1945 as the starting point, "development" is an effort that is 70 years old. Do you think the 70 years of "development" experience been a success or a failure? Why? Why not?

The concept of development has evolved trough time, and is a concept that is socially constructed and thus, is susceptible to change. The concept of development emerged as a political and economic response to the condition of the world at the moment of decolonization, and continued to be molded as globalization’s interconnectedness started raising awareness of other margins for development.

It began in Europe in 1945 and accelerated at the height of US and Soviet tension. In 1944, policy-makers gathered at the Bretton Woods institutions in the USA to consider how to solve two serious problems. (Washington consensus) [1]First, they needed to ensure that the depression of 1930s wouldn’t happen again. Therefore, they had to find ways to ensure a stable global monetary system and an open world trading system. Second, they needed to rebuild the war torn-economies of Europe. Thus, three instituitons were planned in order to promote a new world economic order. The International Monetary Fund was created to establish a stable exchange rate regime, and the provision of emergency assistance to countries facing temporary crisis.[2] The international Bank for Reconstruction and Development that later became the World Bank, was created to facilitate private investment and reconstruction in Europe. The Bank was also charged with assisting development in other countries, a mandate that later became later the main reason for its existence.[3] Finally, the GATT became a forum for negotions on trade liberization.[4] The three instituitons provided the foundations of a liberal international economic order based on the pursuit of free trade, minimalistic state intervention and an enhanced role of the market. The belief was that global welfare would be maximized by the liberation of trade, finance and investment and by the restructuring of the economies to provide an environment for capitalism.

As the ideological war proceeded, so did the means of legitimizing the Great Power’s ideologies. As a compliment to the Washington consensus, there was the development of the modernization theory. The theory put forward the idea against imperialism, support for free trade, sovereignty of the state and most importantly economic progress.[5] The Modernization theory’s main purpose was to secure the position of US ideology by making an explanation for the differences in development between countries, and legitimizing and stabilizing these differences trough further idealization of the Modernity myth. At the end of World War II the world subdivided into three geopolitical segments, dividing the capitalist (First World), the communist Soviet (second world) and the postcolonial nations (Third World).[6]

The Modernization Theory, looked at how the societies of the Global south, were in some ways similar to the once traditional societies of now modernized countries. By looking at how the western societies developed from traditional to modern trough economic growth, the development Project was created. The project, had its ingredients to make the under-developed societies into the perfect modern society. Traditional societies would then have to follow the steps of the Western countries. The two main ingredients were: to establish the existence of a nation state and to induce economic growth.[7] This could only be achieved by the promotion of utilizing foreign inputs and foreign aid subsidies to increase manufacturing, promote investment and as a result increase economic growth. The plan then was to make economies commercially tenable to the demands of hegemons of International Trade. This meant that by having economies developing, there would be an increased dependence on Western economies for aid, foreign inputs, investment, and further integration to the International Market. Those labelled as underdeveloped, were meant to follow the Project. It became not only a model but also an austere measurement of the developmental achievements of state. ”No country can claim to be modern without being advanced or progressive.”[8]

Furthermore, the Washington Consensus, and The modernization theory fabricated labels such as ‘underdevelopment’, ‘undeveloped’ and ‘economically backwards’. Philip McMichael argues that “development was the restoration of capitalist world market to sustain the First World health, trough access to strategic natural resources, and the opportunity for Third world countries to emulate First world living standards”. He further states that the notion of inevitability and neutrality of the Project devalued non- European cultures. Thus, usually the label underdeveloped meant that there was something to be “fixed”[9].

For Nada Shrestha, who lived in Nepal, and survived with his family by cultivating crops, hunger was common and rain water would usually come in their house. Under Western conditions he and his community would be classified as poor and disadvantaged. However, he did not perceived it that way, for him poverty looked natural and unchangeable. After western-funded developments were introduced in Nepal, the people saw everything as related to the projects as good and of value and everything else as inferior. “It was regarded as desirable because it brought paved roads, school-buildings, technology, even though hunger persisted and self-reliance and autonomy declined.” He interprets this process as a different but similar form of colonialism, where Western ideas and cultures are seen as superior to the Nepalese way of leaving.[10] Similar arguments are put forward by Arturo Escobar, who experienced similar instances in Colombia. [11]

These interpretations of development then, were to solely categorize the extent of economic growth or lack of thereof.

.

The Bretton woods system began to change when weaknesses emerged in the US economy. As weakeness in US economy increased, the confidence in US dollar decreased. Meanwhile other countries in the World Economy were enhancing their position. In Asia, the success of export led-growth in Japan and in South Korea and Taiwan created a new challenge to US trade competitiveness.[12]

As 1970 arrive there was high inflation, this accompanied by the oil crisis of 1973 led to stagflation. The Bretton Woods Institutions collapsed. The gains that had been made in reducing tariffs barriers, especially among industrialized countries were reversed by policies of new protectionism. In particular this were implemented to keep out the new competitive imports form successful developing countries[13]The developing countries sought better representation in international economic situations and concerted a campaign for a New International order, which reflected many ideas supported by the dependency theory, that highlights negative aspects of interdependence.[14] In 1979 the US dramatically increased its interest rates. As US aid and loans were mostly landed on developing countries. For many creditors and borrowers, these loans could not be repaid. It led to a debt crisis. Thus, it was largely the role of the IMF to ensure that countries undertook “structural adjustment” which included, trade liberizaton, privatization and deregulation.

The problem with this solutions was that they were, first unsuitable to be applied to all economies equally, and second, it neglected the role of non-economic factors that highly affect the success of such policies. For instance, part of the economic adjustment required for the government to reduce spending. While cuts are aimed to address imbalances, the reduction of public expenditure may also impact on government investment in social provisions such as health and education. This is what happened to Zimbabwe in 1990s as it tried to apply the World Bank’s reforms (ESAP). According to the Southern African report, when Zimbabwe implemented the ESAP prescription by reducing health and education expenditure, many people became unable to afford the Health Care they needed.[15] In a country were in 1990 the average life expectancy was of about 59.2 years of age, and child rate mortality of children under 5 was 74%[16], such structural measurements did not seem to take accountability for the side effects of independently persuading the economic growth. In a neo-liberal perspective however, economic growth would lead to a “trickle-down” effect, where economic development would lead to improvements in other areas. However, in the case of Zimbabwe the ESAP program affected the country’s social welfare system and as a result the standard of living decreased. These event were highly associated with emerging diseases such as Cholera, Malaria, and an increased spread of HIV/Aids. Similarly, literacy rates also fell impacting on the skilled labour.[17]

Poverty was majorly seen as an economic condition dependent on cash transactions in the market place for its elimination. Today, the World Bank measures poverty uses the standard income of $1.25 per day.[18] Despite the fact that, it does include “ability to access healthcare, safe water, education, lack of shelter and clothes” it does so with the idea that these could or could not be accessed as a result of the purchasing power of the individual, and not of access to the capabilities or as a result of social exclusion. The capabilities approach developed by Amartya Sen, has become the main alternative to the economic frameworks. It rejects the measurement of poverty based purely on income. Instead poverty is seen from a more humanist point of view as the inability to access capabilities. These capabilities are essential for individuals to achieve at least a minimum functioning within their society and thereupon access the freedom to live the lives they most value.[19] The human development approach, developed by the economist Mahbub Ul Haq, is based in Amartya Sen’s work on human capabilities. [20] As GDP, and economic growth emerged as the dominant measure for progress and development, it was lacking the idea that poverty had other dimensions.

The development question shift from an economic approaches to the human development agenda has been of aid to the study of development in a gender perspective. Conjointly, poverty is usually gendered faced. Feminist theorists have established that state institutions have complex and sometimes contradictory agendas. The logic of the developmental projects may be incompatible with the achievement of a gender-equitable society. Acknowledging that states, have competing agendas makes it possible to concede that some forms of state power might be detrimental to women’s interests.

We can take the example of South Korea, which is considered by Evans and by Wade a Developmental State[21]. The Korean society is unequal in terms of gender. In contemporary Korea, women’s position at the workplace is inferior to that of men. All developmental states have achieved the goal of development through export-led industrialization. In turn this lead to the increased access to capital and technology, and the assumption is that therefore women will acquire productive skills and will become more independent (by taking on jobs, and helping with the productivity of the state). However, large numbers of unskilled women working in South Korean industries produce goods which drive Korea’s economic growth. Most women working in these industries do so under ‘flexible conditions’, thus their wages are low and their job security and working conditions are poor.[22]

Yvonne E. Braun, analyses three different women’s life experiences with the developmental reforms applied in Lesotho (Lesotho Highlads Water Project). This project supported by the World Bank, by claiming that the project would increase national income of all the Lesotho population, and that this in turn would lead to poverty reduction, and the development of the state. However, Yvonne reveals that the women’s lived experiences on the implementation of the project has caused burdens and contradicting circumstances. The woman have been “subjected to policies that regulate access to household’s resources in gendered ways, exacerbating gender inequality and food insecurity”. [23]

Finally, as argued by Yvonne Braun and Ruth Pearson, many of the developmental policies in for women are to be applied inside the home, while for men it is mostly to be reinforced outside the home sphere. This perhaps helps women with young children, but it will also serve to reinforce a dominant patriarchal ideology[24]

Therefore, many policies that are applied simply take for granted the impact of the policies implementation in women, assuming that the benefit would be equal for both men and woman, or that the benefits will eventually ramify to the rest of the society. Policies in turn perhaps are able to benefit the women, however it will keep on undermining their status in the society, and sponsoring the dominant male role.

The challenges to de dominant framework surrounding development was recognized by the UN in 2000 with the acceptance of the Millennium Development Goals, and Sustainable Development Goals, were the main aim was not to promote economic growth but rather to improve general health, diminish income poverty and expand educational opportunities for children, and eradicate hunger, and improve environmental harm trough, aid and help of the developed Countries. [25]

The 70 years has only been successful in raising awareness, and improving conditions in several parts of the world, such as purchasing power, economic growth, and infrastructure. (such as the case of Korea). However, despite the many improvements in the market economy. South Korean women remain as a mere shadow in the political realm. In addition, for instance in South Africa Implementations of the neoliberal GEAR (Growth, Employment and Redistribution). “This IMF-informed economic model constituted of a host of neoliberal macro-economic policies, such as market liberalization and fiscal austerity measures that led directly to the abandoning the redistributive nature of RDP and in so doing, contributing to an intensification of economic inequalities.” [26] In addition to this, we can also question the success of the Millennium Developmental Goals. There has clearly been a success of increased income in Bangladesh and China[27], in accordance to the MGDs, and in addition to improving many conditions the MDGs have brought awareness about issues that were not in the Global Political Agenda. In addition, Gender equality and political representation has improved drastically especially in Western countries. It is important to point out that, 70 years is not enough to create a global consensus on development. New, areas concerning development will always emerge, and new solutions will try to override the dominant paradigm. Despite this however, it is a difficult to unstitch the notion of development in terms of only economic and democratic representation, when the world in increasingly depends on a mercantilist judgment, consumption dependency, and were individuals have become commodities that states can purchase trough aid.

Bibliography

  1. Onis and Senses
  2. Baylis, Johnh, The Globalization of World Politics, an introduction to International Relations, pp 248-259
  3. Rostow
  4. McMichael
  5. Edward Shills
  6. Willis, Katie
  7. Wade and Evans
  8. Sounders, Richard, Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (ESAP)'s Fables II, http://www.africafiles.org/article.asp?ID=3876
  9. UNICEF, Zimbabwe Statistics, http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/zimbabwe_statistics.html
  10. World Bank, Poverty headcount ratio at $1.25 a day, http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY
  11. Sen, Amrtya
  12. Human Development Reports, http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev
  13. Roxanne, Kovacs, Developmental States and Gender,http://www.e-ir.info/2013/04/13/developmental-states-and-gender-equity/, 2013
  14. Braunn, Yvonne
  15. Pearson
  16. UNDP, http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/mdgoverview.html
  17. Ward, Alexander, Poltical transformation and inequality case study comparison of Afghanistand and South Africa, http://www.e-ir.info/2011/10/26/political-transformation-and-inequality-case-study-comparision-of-afghanistan-and-south-africa/, 2011
  18. Malcktech, Annie, What the Millienum development Goals have accomplished, https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/news/2014/08/18/95805/what-the-millennium-development-goals-have-accomplished/, 2014

[1] Onis and Senses

[2] Baylis, Johnh, The Globalization of World Politics, an introduction to International Relations, pp 248-259

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] Rostow

[6] McMichael

[7] McMichael

[8] Edward Shills, pp 266

[9] McMichael

[10] Willis, Katie

[11] Willis, Katie

[12] Wade and Evans

[13] Baylis, Johnh, The Globalization of World Politics, an introduction to International Relations, pp 248-259

[14] Ibid

[15]Sounders, Richard, Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (ESAP)'s Fables II, http://www.africafiles.org/article.asp?ID=3876

[16] UNICEF, Zimbabwe Statistics, http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/zimbabwe_statistics.html

[17] Sounders, Richard, Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (ESAP)'s Fables II, http://www.africafiles.org/article.asp?ID=3876

[18] World Bank, Poverty headcount ratio at $1.25 a day, http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY

[19] Sen, Amrtya

[20] Human Development Reports, http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev

[21] Evans, Wade

[22] Roxanne, Kovacs, Developmental States and Gender,http://www.e-ir.info/2013/04/13/developmental-states-and-gender-equity/, 2013

[23] Braunn, Yvonne

[24] Braunn and Pearsons

[25] UNDP, http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/mdgoverview.html

[26] Ward, Alexander, Poltical transformation and inequality case study comparison of Afghanistand and South Africa, http://www.e-ir.info/2011/10/26/political-transformation-and-inequality-case-study-comparision-of-afghanistan-and-south-africa/

[27] Malcktech, Annie, What the Millienum development Goals have accomplished, https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/news/2014/08/18/95805/what-the-millennium-development-goals-have-accomplished/,

上一篇:Rogue & Failed States are the main threats to World Order 下一篇:Global Impact of the September 11 attacks