24 Underdevelopment and Development

Dr. Kanwalpreet

Introduction

Every nation in the world aspires to develop. Every country prepares a blue-print so that it can develop. A lot of emphasis is laid on planning so that maximum development can be achieved in the shortest time. Alongwith development, care is taken to see that all the people, irrespective of region or religion, progress together. The word ‘underdeveloped’ was coined for all those countries that won their Independence after the Second World War which lasted from 1939 to 1945. These countries were initially known as ‘The Third World’ or ‘the underdeveloped nations’. These terms were found derogatory so gradually the term , ‘ developing nations’, was used. The path to development is rigorous and has to be planned well in advance by the respective nations. The term, ‘development,’ would mean different to different countries. In general term, development means when a society moves from a comparatively lower form to a more complex form of civilization and where the emphasis is on social change as well as adapting to those changes quickly. ‘Development may be identified as a process in which a system or institution is transformed into stronger, more organized, more efficient and more

effective form and proves to be more satisfying in terms of human wants and aspirations’.1 In development, specific goals are aimed because specific goals are decided and then a conscious effort is made to achieve those goals. It is here that planning assumes significance. Every society moves at its own pace and the deficient stages are known as various levels of development. J. H. Middleman in his book, ‘Out from Underdevelopment: Prospects for the Third World’, says development is the increasing capacity to rationalize the use of national and human resources for social ends. He further says that underdevelopment means that blockade forestalls the rational transformation of the social structure. The change of a society from the traditional to the modern, from a simple to a more complex structure is development. Paul Baran in his book, ‘The Political Economy of Growth’, defines development as a society’s transformation that is far-reaching because it transforms a society’s social, economic and political structure. He further says that transformation is in the process of production, consumption and distribution. The process of development is multi-faceted. Development as a process is not smooth. It is replete with hurdles. The plan is to use the natural resources alongwith human resources in a manner that would benefit the society. But development involves dedication, self-discipline, increased responsibility and also increasing the skills of the people. Only when the natural and human resources are combined can we think of attaining development. When all these are not combined, then we have an underdeveloped country. ‘The events which lead to political development come from the international environment, from the domestic society, or from political elites within the political system itself. A political system may be threatened by a rival nation, or be invaded by it. In confronting this challenge, it may find that it needs more resources and more effective ways organizing and deploying its

resources….2

The strange puzzle

The challenges to the political system are many, especially in the path of development. ‘The impulses for political development consequently involve some significant change in the magnitude and content of the flow of inputs into the political system. Development results when the existing structure and culture of the political system is unable to cope with the problem or challenge which confronts it without further structural differentiation and cultural secularisation.’3 There are some who say that the developing countries have benefitted from the experiments of the developed countries. The successes and failures of the developed world have helped the developing countries which have had the advantage of jumping a few stages of development, though it is not so.

What is development? Some analysts talk about attaining a certain level of material prosperity, there are others who evaluate development of a country according to the per capita income and still others who talk about human development. Amartya Sen is very optimistic when he talked about India’s development , ‘ India has been many years ahead of the West in introducing its own programs of affirmative action and positive discrimination.4 Development also means fulfilling the basic needs of the people, what might mean development for one country might not mean so for another.

Though there is no universal criteria to define development or underdevelopment yet some consensus is there. Underdevelopment means where there is low Human Development Index in comparison to other countries. The other criteria is that people have less income and lower life expectancy. There are plenty of factors that hinder growth like malnutrition, political instability, diseases, narrow parochial ties and traditional social structures. ‘Development is not and cannot be a sample technocratic or a political process. Rather, it is one that relies on and is characterized by changes in income and asset distribution, and therefore depends critically on national and international political configurations’.5 Development is moving ahead, imbibing the changes that the country comes across. On the other hand, progress means that the social change is a way to compare the ongoing changes so that goals are realised. The aim of development is to fight poverty and not to accept misery and injustice. It also means having long as well as short term goals. The term ‘development’ talks about some areas of the world being poor and the other rich. Development is not only concerned with economic growth. The latter does not guarantee, for example, people’s happiness or higher levels of literacy. The environmental costs of development are staggering.

Development means, according to Gunnar Myrdal, the Swedish Nobel Prize-Winner, rationality, planning, better and improved standards of living, decline in social and economic  inequality, efficient and effective institutions increase in production per capita and political democratization. Amartya Sen, the renowned economist talks about development vis-à-vis expansion of freedom. For him, freedom from malnutrition, poverty, access to good health care means development.

The Third Word Concept

The countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, which are characterized by low level of political and economic development, are termed as ‘Third World’. A majority of these countries were colonies and got their freedom from the colonial masters after the Second World War. Prior to their attaining freedom, they were underdeveloped. These countries were infested with myriad problems like poverty, backwardness, low per capita income and were largely agrarian. The countries of Asia were caught in a vicious cycle of poverty. India, for example, was a colony of the British and was steeped in superstitions.

The social evils like Sati, child-marriage, witch branding of women, hunting of widows, female infanticide and discrimination on the basis of caste were norms of the day. Women had no voice and were relegated to the backburner. The land was owned by a few and the tiller was exploited. The colonial domination made matters worse for the common people who were exploited by the landlord as well as the colonial masters. With a growing population, which acts as a drain on the resources India, like many other Asian countries, found itself at a low level of development in the last century. Illiteracy was high and a majority of the people were living in the rural areas which were neglected. The educational opportunities were limited, malnutrition was common and high birth rate coupled with lack of medical facilities were detriments in the path of development. Most of the people were engaged in agriculture with a very few involved in the manufacturing sector . Plague and spread of diseases was common which led to people dying in large numbers. Low life expectancy and a high mortality rate, especially among women and children, led to rise in frustration among people. The local elite showed no mercy and exploited the people. This elite was rich, educated and in contact with the colonial masters. They had control over the resources and also participated in politics. In underdeveloped countries, the common people were not involved in politics. ‘Again, in a traditional system, people are not involved in politics; the government only exercises power over them’.6 In India, the government then was concerned only with doing the compulsory functions like collection of taxes, manufacturing law and order, organizing a judiciary etc. One of the reasons of underdevelopment is the colonial masters efforts to wipe away the traditional order, be it the education system or its culture. The loyalty to a group is narrow which is looked down upon by the colonial masters. In Africa, for example, the ‘patron-client’ relationship was the order of the day which was broken by the colonial masters. That led to a lot of upheaval and turmoil among the tribes. The Latin American countries got their independence from their European masters but remained dependent on the United States of America.

The underdevelopment experience of these countries has been a mixed bag. They survived in a traditional order and progress was slow as compared to their counterparts in advanced, industrial countries . The choice was to continue on one’s own path or follow the path dictated by their western counterparts. ‘Poor states were ‘underdeveloped’ and thus needed to ‘develop’, there were intense debates as to whether development was possible under the current world economic system, but the goal itself was less at issue – the consensus in favour of ‘development’ ranged from free-market liberals to dependency theorists via old-style Marxists’.7

The point to note is that the opinion of the third world was not taken into account. The third world had to emulate the development pattern of the developed countries because they had been, over the centuries, told that they were ‘inferior’ and the developed countries were ‘superior’. ‘The contrast between the needs and interests of the world as a whole and those of particular countries seems acute. On the one hand, it is clear that industrial development on the Western model, if generalized to China, the Indian sub-continent, Africa and Latin America would be a disaster for everyone, including the peoples of those regions, but it is equally clear that the governments of the south will wish to go down this route unless they are prevented with sufficient incentives to do otherwise. No such incentive scheme is like to work of the end result is a world in which the peoples and governments of the North are allowed to preserve the undoubted benefits of an industrial civilization denied to the South’.8 It all zeroes down to the fact that the Third world can develop only if their economies as well as political structures were in conformity with the institutions in the Western world, otherwise they would continue to be backward and steeped in poverty and all the problems that accompany it.

The contention is that in the third world countries, people lack social mobility and are organized on the basis of kinship. They are further divided on the basis of caste, religion and language. These societies are organized vertically where authority and hierarchy cannot be questioned. Underdevelopment means when the societies are agriculture dominated and are predominantly, rural. ‘In contrast to the modern, traditional societies are backward-looking (if not primitive) and lack the dynamism required for economic “success”. Traditional social formations are dominated by religious authority, which is frequently linked via a metaphysical cosmology, to a rigid form of social structures, predicated upon status based upon inheritance’.9

Rostow’s model talks about the transition from underdevelopment to development. In the traditional societies there is underdevelopment because of lack of exposure and access to modern science and technology. Gradually, over centuries, the people get exposed to new changes, start taking risk and there is an increase in social mobility which leads to development. In the “take off” stage, people desire higher economic growth so that there can be a higher  standard of living. An increase in urbanization is a sign of moving towards development. The rise of new local elite which is entrepreneurial leads to a major shift in the outlook of the people. Rostow’s model of five stages of growth explains underdevelopment as well as development.

The resources in the third world were there but could not be exploited because of various reasons- lack of technical know-how, lack of expert knowledge as well as expertise and sometimes lack of will by the leaders of the respective countries. The local elite which emerged under the colonial masters refused to share the dividends with the common people. This led to corruption, strife, frustration and unemployment. Many states that have not been able to rise above the strife have now been termed as ‘failed states’. These states are the ones who have not been able to look after their people and have been unable to give the basic amenities to their citizens.

Many Third World Nations experience has not been rosy. There are many countries in Asia and Africa that are ruled by dictators and their people are wallowing in squalor and poverty. Political violence and social unrest are a part of underdeveloped countries. Lack of security for the citizens is a major concern. The underdeveloped experience of these countries has been horrifying for they have been subject to rampant greed as well as human rights abuses.

Underdevelopment was characterized by numerous problems. The underdevelopment experience further worsened because of natural calamities like that of earthquake in Haiti in 2010 which pushed the poor country further into a debt running into millions of dollars. Earthquakes, famines, floods, tornadoes have made the experience of underdevelopment even more challenging and arduous. Having national resources in abundance and not having the capability to tap it, led to the bigger powers like France, US, U.K. et c. to interfere in the economy of the underdeveloped countries . This interference means nothing but a process of ‘empire-building’ by the powers. Many of these Third World countries could develop only because they had the will to develop. Isolation from the world also led to underdevelopment. One of the major reasons for underdevelopment was lack of a strong economy. Underdevelopment is also marked by lack of a good infra-structure.

Angola is a country which is being helped by China but the latter dominates the former. Angola would find it difficult to develop if the Chinese would ever withdraw. Underdevelopment is marked by not having a clear idea as to how to draw the line between globalization and protectionism. Underdevelopment is because of low division of labour as also because of the traditional attitude of the population. These and many other internal factors like lack of communication, backwardness and low per capita incomes are responsible for underdevelopment. Lack of motivation is another factor that leads to underdevelopment. The underdeveloped countries have a highly dependent economy which is distorted too. The economy produces primary products and is a needy market for the finished goods manufactured in the developed countries. The experience of underdevelopment is that in such countries the sub-economies are linked to the West and the traditional economies have been disrupted by an alien economy i.e. that of industrial capitalism. This disruption of the traditional society led to underdevelopment. The economies of the Third World countries are equipped to meet the needs of the industrialized economies, so the underdeveloped economies can boast of only a few economic activities that can be termed as ‘modern’, like plantations, mining etc. It is the industrialized countries which are the main buyers and only they decide the prices. The terms of trade are decided by the big powers. The Third World countries can only protest ,that too, meekly. Countries like India played its cards carefully and slowly put itself on the path of development. Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Oman etc. have been able to rise only because of oil export. Forming the OPEC (Organisation of Oil-Producing Countries) helped them to demand a good price for oil. The OPEC is a formidable group because oil is essential for every economy. Chile, Zambia, Zaire and Peru have come together because they want a good price for ‘copper’ that is found these countries. The Bauxite International Association (BIA) was formed in 1974 by Jamaica, Sierra Leone, Guyana, Australia, Guinea, Surinam and Yugoslavia to get a better price for Bauxite. Afghanistan remained underdeveloped because of continuous internal unrest which has led to disruption of trade. A landlocked country, inefficient trade led to its being underdeveloped for a long time. The countries in Latin America are infested with the problem of overpopulation and poverty. People are homeless as well as unemployed. Malnutrition, high infant mortality rates and low per capita income makes this area underdeveloped. Many countries in South Africa are underdeveloped because of resources not being properly managed. Apartheid practice further worsened the problem of underdevelopment in this region. Growth in this area has not been pro-poor; rather it has helped the local elite to retain power. The growth of traditional economies under the Colonial masters was growth but a dependent growth which kept these countries underdeveloped. Corruption is said to be the biggest factor that has kept Africa underdeveloped despite the immense resources.

Paul Baran says that capitalism because of its inherent nature exploits the Third World. He says it is in the interest of the developed countries to keep the Third world dependent on them as the latter are sources of raw material. These countries at the periphery, producing agrarian goods, thus, remained underdeveloped.

Underdevelopment is a matter of perspective. It does not mean absence of development rather it means that societies are at different levels of development. It also means that some economies, when compared, lag behind because of domination by a few. Countries like Spain and Portugal among other Latin American countries could not transform themselves into modern industrialized nations because of lack of efficient management of resources. Andre Frank contends strongly that the West could develop only at the expense of the exploitation of the countries, now called the periphery. The developing countries are , presently, called the countries at the periphery. The West has a different take on the blue-print they have for the developing countries. ‘They (Japan and United States of America) insist that it is illogical to assume that the present environmental degradation is linked to the consumerist capitalist society of the West. Nor is it related, they argue to the disappearance of ethnic minority, indigenous cultures. Rather, it is argued that this loss is due to the ‘uneducated tribal and ignorant governments in the developing states’.10

Development in practice

Development is when there is an increase in social mobility and the life of the citizens improves to embrace a higher level of living. Development occurs when underdevelopment is pushed back because of efforts of the government and people alike. ‘In contrast, modern societies emerged from such traditional formations after going through a complex process of development that was said to include the decline of magic as a basis of political authority (the demise of the “divine right of kings” for instance) and a concomitant secularization of wider society.’11 The development experience of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America has been similar yet deficient in various aspects. But certainly certain traits are common for development to take place. ‘With the rise of reason, associated with the Enlightment, came an intense spur for science and technology and an attempt to “explain” the world. At the same time, reward systems based on merit rather than intolerance fostered a climate of incentives for innovation and efficiency’.12 India has managed to call itself ‘developing’ because it has used ‘planning’ as a major tool. India had an agricultural economy and it graduated into the industrial sector but jumped into the services sector. China has graduated from an agricultural economy to an industrial economy. The latter has helped it to produce in great quantity to cater to mass consumption. In China, the economy is strong but lack of political democracy questions development. The developing countries only have the developed industrialized economies as their role model and the endeavour is to reach this model as quickly as possible. Development can be observed when there is an increase in production as well as in the per capita income  which would be accompanied by better living conditions of the citizens. One of the pre-requisites for development is that capital-intensive industries are sought after. High division of labour and high risk-taking by the population leads to development. China’s development is an example to prove that economies move through different stages. ‘Keen observers of China are agreed that China’s leadership remains focused on two issues. The first is to maintain the absolute control of the Communist Party of China (CPC) over all organs of the state and all entities in the country and the second is to promote rapid economic growth and become the world’s largest economy. In the pursuit of the latter goal, China’s economy has gone through many ‘transitions’ and is undergoing one today. It has to transit from manufacturing to services, investment-driven to consumption-driven economy and to export-led to domestic demand-led growth’.13 Development comes after a lot of pain and struggle. The third world countries have gradually moved ahead by balancing the various spheres. These countries have managed to shrug off the foreign control to a great extent and have planted themselves firmly on the path of development. André G Frank believes that development process occurred in the periphery after the First and the Second World Wars, when the metropolis or the mother country’s control weakened and the periphery associated its freedom through a revolutionary break from dependency. The process has to now continue. ‘India’s economy must transit from consumption-driven to investment-driven and from services-led to manufacturing-led. We will also experience pain’.14 The development experience of all these countries has been full of challenges. These countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America have been walking a tight-rope balancing their sovereignty as well as the waves of globalization, liberalization and privatization. These countries have gone through various challenges yet some like India have emerged victorious. India’s non-aligned, democratic and a secular stance helped us develop ….a militaristic Pakistan broke up. Sri Lanka became a Buddhist majoritarian country under Bandaranaike and suffered 25 years of a bloody civil war. India has remained a secular, democratic Republic, undivided, a rarity in the region. It may have stumbled and struggled under separatist challenges from Khalistan and Nagaland. But it is still united. Lately, it has managed to grow at a decent rate after 40 years of povertarian socialism.15

Many underdeveloped countries in these three continents, Asia, Africa and Latin America have allowed Multi-National Corporations (henceforth MNC’s) to enter their territories. But the experience of some of these countries has been mixed. No doubt, these countries have developed in the modern sense, yet the feeling that exploitation continues by the developed countries through MNC’s persists. It is true that the MNC’s provide employment and growth opportunities to the people, yet the wages paid to their employees is less than those they pay in the developed countries. MNC’s are still thought to be an instrument of the developed countries to exploit the developing countries. This is probably because they owe their origin to these countries. But one cannot wipe away the fact that the Third World Countries can boast of having better living standard because of the entry of the MNC’s. Thus, it would be wrong to label MNC’s as predators. In this age of mass-consumption, the underdeveloped have become developed because of industrialization accompanied by urbanization. MNC’s have helped in the transfer of skills from the developed countries to the underdeveloped. Yet, these MNC’s have scant regard for the environment and human rights. The United States of America buys from China though there are gross human rights violations reported in the latter. Development means westernization and the Third world countries have adopted it by leaps and bounds. But the fact is that the developing countries continue to lag behind and are still dependent on the big, western powers. The example of Brazil’s development which is termed as ‘dependent development’ because of the country’s progress which was due to the connivance between the foreign enterprises and the state and the domestic firms speaks volumes. Japan was never a colony, so it developed but Taiwan and South Korea showed that even former colonies could develop. If Japan helped them to develop because they were it’s colonies it wanted to maintain its influence in the region. Most of these countries were at the ‘take-off’ stage in the last century. Presently, they are at a point where they are ready to talk international.

Conclusion

The experience of the Third World of moving from Underdeveloped to the developed has only one explanation – these economies have been consistent to work towards progress. Despite the hiccups, they have surged ahead. Underdevelopment only led to an increase in frustration, poverty and more exploitation. There are countries like Bhutan (Myanmar) that refuse to follow the traditional definition of development. They talk about development in terms of Gross National Happiness. The term ‘development’ rests on the contention that the only way to develop is to follow the developed western-states. Many developing countries do not seem to agree.

‘Development’ term implies ‘mobility’, ‘a will to move’ and a positive process that would help the people improve their standard of living and be at par in this competitive world. It envisions a modern, useful infrastructure and a move from the agricultural sector to the industrial sector and then to the tertiary sector. It also hopes that the economy would be self-sustaining. Development is a matter of perspective. Development comes with a price. There are many who point out that it is because of the developed states that the blame has always been thrown on the developing states.

‘On the issue of environmental conservation and international trade, specialists have drawn attention to the constant attempts of the developed states to undermine the developing states.16 The developed states refuse to take the blame. ‘It is also necessary to point out that international environmentalism have been feulled by active non-government organizations. These organizations have a different set of priorities that has little room for the poor and the marginalized. In India, the issue of protecting tigers occupied the attention of media, but little attention was paid to the tribals in Sunderbans.’17 The development process is irreversible and it has to be undertaken responsibly. The traditional societies, living in harmony with nature goes for toss. Lots of local handicrafts, professions are lost. Global warming, climate changes force us to think about the costs of development. But when one looks at malnourished children, outbreak of diseases, lack of fulfillment of basic needs one is forced to think otherwise. The only  way is to tread carefully- develop and yet keep the Malthusian view in mind which says that continuous economic growth would lead to ecological catastrophes as the balance of nature would be disturbed.

Suggested Readings

• Bertsche, Gary K., Clark, Robert P., Wood David, M., Comparing Political Systems: Power and Policy in Three Wolds, 1978, John Wiley and Sons.
• Bhadur, Kalini, and Uma Singh (eds.), Pakistan’s Transition to Democracy, Joint Study of Indian and Pakistani Schools, 1989, South Asia Books, New Delhi.
• Brass, Paul. The New Cambridge History of India, Vol. (rev.). The Politics of India since Independence, 1994, Cambridge University Press, New York.
• Brown, Louis T., The Challenge to Democracy in Nepal: A Political History, 1996, Routledge, London.
• Caramani, David, Comparative Politics, 2011, Oxford University Press.
• Chadda, Maya, Building Democracy in South Asia India, Nepal, Pakistan, 2000, Vistaar, New Delhi.
• Hague, Rod, Martin Harrop, Comparative Government and Politics, An Introduction, 2015, Palgrave Macmillan, Replika, New Delhi.
• Jayal, Niraja Gopal, Mehta, Pratap Basu, The Oxford Comparison to Politics in India, 2015, Oxford University Press.
• Palmer, Norman D., Perkins, Howard C., International Relations, The Word Community in Transition, 1997, A.I.T.B.S., New Delhi.
• Weiner, Myron, The Indian Paradox, 1989, New York.