1. Not assume one pattern of development
2. Not be value reflective
3. Measure results, not inputs
4. Reflect levels and distribution
5. Be easy to construct
6. Be comparable internationally
From this, the Physical Quality of Life Index (PQLI) was born [a composite of life expectancy at age one, infant mortality, and adult literacy], and later the Human Development Index (HDI) [a composite of life expectancy at birth, literacy and school enrollment rates, and GNI].
The Human Development Index philosophizes a bit, believing that Sustenance, self esteem, and freedom are what define human development, and therefore the development of nations.
Sustenance: satisfaction of basic needs without which life would be impossible; food, shelter, health and protection.
Self-esteem: a sense of worth and self-respect. More than material wealth and prosperity. Modern world confuses self-respect, honor with material wealth.
Freedom: increasing the range of human choice. One may choose to work less to get higher level of leisure.
Currently, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are most commonly cited when referring to the development of a country. The MDGs are outlined as follows:
1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
2. Achieve universal primary education
3. Promote gender equality and empower women
4. Reduce child mortality
5. Improve maternal health
6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases
7. Ensure environmental sustainability
8. Develop a global partnership for development
All three of these measures share one major defining assumption in common: the measurement of development cannot be determined by money alone. Ranking nations based on economic indicators does not reflect development in the holistic sense, and is therefore not good enough.
Unfortunately (or conveniently) none of these 3 frameworks address development in any practical way (accept maybe the MDGs, although they don't necessarily dictate the pathways). What does development look like in practice, on the ground, in the field? Money, programs, construction, infrastructure, political will, job creation, peace keeping/building, economic empowerments, education, and (sometimes) free t-shirts. That's what I have seen, anyway.
In Uganda, I have a lot of time to think about development, what it means, who defines it, and the type of power construct that it assumes. I appreciate the theory behind PQLI and HDI and the simplicity and goal orientation of the MDGs. I am critical, however, of the notion that measuring development is possible or useful for those whom the measures do not privilege. I am skeptical of the way that development continues to be approached in the global south and wonder what voices are heard at the collective development table.
Development should be a conversation--priorities determined by those who are impacted in their communities. Those who have been most marginalized by globalization (and previous development efforts) should be empowered to envision societies where their needs are met and their rights protected. Dependency should be discouraged--not because it might make the donors feel bad, but because those who are dependent have human rights that must be respected and protected. Development must be critically examined through a human rights framework and that may mean throwing away some of our previous assumptions, measurements, and ideas about what development means.
I'd like to say that those who live in countries deemed 'less developed' are victims of a global conspiracy for western countries to retain power at all costs. I'd like to say that the concept of development, in general, is a ploy of the west to impose some neo-colonialist ideology. I don't know if either of those things are actually true, or maybe they just sound good and convenient. Meanwhile, people are dying of curable diseases, millions don't have access to basic health care (in the US too), women are marginalized in unimaginable ways, inequalities are perpetuated by the very structures of societies, and the human rights of billions of women, men, and children are ignored.
But, hey, development might fix that.
(thanks to my notes from Tulane's Health and Economic Development class in the SPH&TM)
No comments:
Post a Comment