Advertisement

Modelling Development in the Global South

  • Justin van der Merwe
  • Nicole Dodd
Chapter
Part of the International Political Economy Series book series (IPES)

Abstract

Assessing the relationship between aid, trade, investment, and development in the Global South, this paper argues that these relationships are mediated by three factors: the intentions of the foreign actor and type of economic input; the robustness of a country or bloc’s government-business-media (GBM) complex; and, finally, the spatiotemporal make-up of a country or bloc. In terms of stimulating human development, the findings suggest that how inputs are used is more operative than what is received, with a robust GBM providing optimal conditions for human development. Overall, aid, foreign direct investment and being landlocked have a negative relationship with development in the Global South, while trade has a small, but statistically significant positive relationship. Contrary to what most argue, resource richness positively impacts on development in the Global South. Countries displaying several of these factors should be particularly cautious as landlocked countries with dysfunctional GBMs, limited resources, and who receive large amounts of aid and investment, are likely to remain underdeveloped.

References

  1. Anand, S., & Sen, A. (1994). Human Development Index: Methodology and measurement. New York: Human Development Report Office.Google Scholar
  2. Behzadan, N., Chisik, R., Onder, H., & Battaile, B. (2017). Does inequality drive the Dutch disease? Theory and evidence. Journal of International Economics, 106, 104–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Collier, P. (2003). Ethnicity, politics and economic performance. Economics and Politics, 12(3), 225–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fearon, J. (2003). Ethnic and cultural diversity by country. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(2), 195–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. International Monetary Fund. (2012). Macroeconomic policy frameworks for resource-rich developing countries. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from https://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2012/082412.pdf
  6. Sen, A. (2005). Human rights and capabilities. Journal of Human Development, 6(2), 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2018). List of land-locked developing countries. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from http://unctad.org/en/pages/aldc/Landlocked%20Developing%20Countries/List-of-land-locked-developing-countries.aspx
  8. United Nations Development Programme. (2016). Technical notes. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr2016_technical_notes_0.pdf
  9. United Nations Development Programme. (2018). Human development data (1990–2015). Retrieved May 22, 2018, from http://hdr.undp.org/en/data
  10. Uppsala Conflict Data Program. (2018). UCDP downloads. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from http://ucdp.uu.se/downloads/
  11. World Bank. (2018). Worldwide Governance Indicators. Retrieved May 22, 2018, from https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/worldwide-governance-indicators

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Justin van der Merwe
    • 1
  • Nicole Dodd
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Military StudiesUniversity of StellenboschSaldanhaSouth Africa
  2. 2.School for Human and Organisational DevelopmentUniversity of StellenboschSaldanhaSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations