{ "id": "RL31662", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "RL31662", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 101455, "date": "2002-12-06", "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:01:57.019941", "title": "Developing Countries: Definitions, Concepts and Comparisons", "summary": "What is a developing country? How does one know whether a country is actually developing\nor not?\nThis report looks at this issue from several perspectives. Using a series of reports by various\norganizations, it shows how countries rank in their levels of development according to different\ncriteria. Countries ranking high according to one measure may rank lower according to another. \nIt was once commonly believed that raising a country's average per capita income level would lead\nto improvements in most other areas. Time and experience have shown, however, that social\nconditions and the general well-being of people may not necessarily improve when a country's\naverage income level increases. Countries with relatively high levels of per capita income may rank\nlower in their social and structural development. By contrast, some poor countries rank with the\nadvanced countries in their governance and levels of individual and economic freedom.\n This report examines four criteria which are often used today to rank and assess countries'\nlevels of development. They are: (1) per capita income; (2) economic and social structure; (3) social\nconditions; and (4) the prevailing level of economic and political freedom. Specific indices or\nquantitative studies are explained and applied to each criteria and the differences among the various\nmeasures are explained.\n Jan Tinbergen, the Dutch economist and Nobel laureate (1969), argued that a separate tool or\ninstrument is needed to achieve individual economic objectives. Two goals cannot be achieved\neffectively with the same policy tool. When applied to the field of development, the Tinbergen rule\nsuggests that one needs a separate program or procedure for each objective if one wants to achieve\nmultiple goals. There is little evidence, despite the claims of some authors, economic growth will\nlead by itself to improvements in social indicators, economic freedom, governance, or political and\ncivil liberty. Likewise, though many argue that strong emphasis needs be placed on improving social\nindicators and basic human needs, there is little evidence that improvements in these areas will lead\nnecessarily to increased economic growth or improved governance. According to Tinbergen's rule,\none likely needs a variety of programs, each targeting a particular objective, if one wants to\nsuccessfully pursue a variety of different goals.\n Balancing the costs of achieving these various goals -- maintaining or increasing expenditures\nfor programs targeting social goals, conserving and improving infrastructure and capital facilities\nand avoiding macroeconomic instability through prudent monetary, fiscal and foreign exchange\npolicies -- is one of the great challenges facing developing countries today.\n Congress will consider major bills dealing with development issues in the coming year. Some\nof the controversy on these issues comes from different views about U.S. interests and goals.\nHowever, much of the debate about the goals and effectiveness of development aid stems from\ndifferent concepts about the development process itself. This report seeks to provide background\nand information which may be of use to Congress in that context.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL31662", "sha1": "e027b76c031d8532c67726eaf62662c27fb8d24b", "filename": "files/20021206_RL31662_e027b76c031d8532c67726eaf62662c27fb8d24b.pdf", "images": null }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20021206_RL31662_e027b76c031d8532c67726eaf62662c27fb8d24b.html" } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [ "Economic Policy", "Foreign Affairs" ] }