My question is can we agree on what types of social change need to take place? Moss is very cautious when he outlines the goals of development. He writes that this approach assumes "more income is better than less, living longer is preferable to early death, and education is superior to ignorance." Should we agree with these assumptions? or are they relative? Are there any other absolutes that we should be guaranteeing to the human family? What should we be doing to "get beyond the bricks?"
we can view these same questions in light of the current tragedy in Haiti. In one year from now, is Haiti going to be any better off than it was six months ago? Here we are dumping hundreds of millions of Dollars (and Euros) into Haiti in the wake of a horrendous natural disaster. But after all the bricks have been laid, will they be any better off? What else needs to happen?
I guess my core question is what are the minimum conditions that need to exist in order for a population to be able to pull itself out of poverty and experience a satisfactory quality of life? What, if anything, should the developed world provide? Is it just educational opportunities? help with political reform? Or do you think we should be providing health care, infrastructure (roads and stuff), clean water, and solar powered ovens? why? (obviously our answers to these questions are going to evolve over the course of the semester, but I'm looking for your initial reactions)
I, along with a few others in the course, am in a Third World Development class this semester, in which the professor posed to us the same question about Haiti. My initial response would be to educate, educate, educate! But after gentle reprimand from our professor, he pointed out that what it takes--in the beginning--for a society to survive and survive well is infrastructure. Meaning roads, sewers, water purification plants, dams (where necessary), electricity, and waste management, among other public services we often overlook in our own lives. Of course, this is not to say that once some degree of infrastructure is established you're good to go. But that these things need to happen before you're to go on to more specialized forms of development (and obviously this is in a case of emergency and natural disaster).
ReplyDeleteWhat I think is most important that we realize is that we are able to provide the necessities, and should, especially in such crisis. But we need to find a way to bolster the people of Haiti's self confidence. I'm not talking individual insecurities, but as a nation they'll need to recognize their abilities to develop themselves. If we continue in constant development of every aspect of the Haitian societies they'll soon resent their dependence on the U.S. (and other nations). This is primarily the reason for independence in Sub-Saharan Africa; the peoples resented their dependence on European nations. Without trying to be too repetitive, the same professor previously mentioned also pointed out that people wont develop themselves unless they do it themselves.
The idea here isn't to micro-manage a country and mold it into everything we see fit for it. But rather to provide the raw materials (infrastructure, education) to help them create a society they want to live in and can contribute to.