Technological nightmares: Frederick S. Pardee distinguished lecture, October 2003

A version of this essay was delivered in October 2003 as the Frederick S. Pardee Distinguished Lecture at Boston University.Paul Streeten, 2003–2004 Pardee Visiting Professor of Future Studies at the Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future, discusses the topic of technological progress—namely, the negative consequences often attributed to such progress. Advancements in technology are unfairly tied to things like pollution and environmental degradation, he says, and for decades, doomsayers have wrongly predicted that the world is coming to an end. Streeten insists that economic progress doesn’t have to have negative results. For starters, it’s important to remember that there are benefits to technological advancements, he says, such as the production of new goods, prolonged life, better health, and more. These advancements improve society. There are also other ways to accomplish economic growth, Streenten says. Our society can opt to produce different kinds of goods, such as hydrogen-fueled cars that don’t pollute the air. Or, quality of goods aside, perhaps we can promote faster production of goods to compensate for negative production effects. Streeten offers several growth options, discussing the merit and practicality of each

Thoughts About Development: Which Are Mere Fads? Which Are Here to Stay?

This repository item contains a single issue of Which Way?, a series of occasional papers published by The Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future at Boston University. Which Way? pamphlets highlight emerging controversies at the crossroads where decisions must be made about choices that will affect the future of humankind through the twenty-first century and into the next. They are intended to illuminate, inform, arouse interest, and inspire debate among opinion-molders, decisionmakers, and an informed and thoughtful public.Paul Streeten outlines the changes in the development discourse, from economic growth as the solution to poverty, to the sustainable development paradigm, to human development, and all the nuances in between. Economic growth became, no longer a solution, but a performance test for development. The Lewis model was a widely accepted view stating that rural migrations to urban centers would decrease inequalities, providing support for the Kuznets Curve, but both of these have been largely discredited. Focus switched from GNP to job distribution and justice, away from industrialized versions of “employment” and “unemployment” and towards “labor utilization.” Insufficiently low utilization of labor is said to come from four major sources: consumption, attitudes, institutions, and policies. The basic needs approach has also been advocated recently, and expanded upon by Amartya Sen. One of the latest and most distinctive measures is the Human Development Index (HDI), which combines different statistics to rate a country’s development. This has also led to a debate on whether freedom should be included in the HDI, and the hopeful notion that with a certain level of human development inevitably comes a demand for greater freedoms

Empowerment, Participation and the Poor

human development, democracy

Global Governance for Human Development

human development, governance

What’s Wrong with Contemporary Economics?

It is argued that in educating economists we should sacrifice some of the more technical aspects of economics (which can be learned later), in favour of the compulsory inclusion of (a) philosophy, (b) political science and (c) economic history. Three reasons for interdisciplinary studies are given. In the discussion of the place of mathematics in economics fuzziness enters when the symbols a, b, c are identified with individuals, firms, or farms. The identification of the precise symbol with the often ambiguous and fuzzy reality, invites lack of precision and blurs the concepts. If the social sciences, including economics, are regarded as a “soft” technology compared with the “hard” technology of the natural sciences, development studies have been regarded as the soft underbelly of “economic science”. In development economics the important question is: what are the springs of development? We must confess that we cannot answer this question, that we do not know what causes successful development.

Governance

The paper argues against the currently fashionable case for “state minimalism”. It argues for a strong, activist state, though operating on a different basis and in different areas from the many recently failed interventionist states and many developing countries. The paper seeks to rescue alternative perspectives, such as the importance of the “civil society” that cuts across national boundaries. Global participation is examined. “Market-friendly” interventions are welcomed only if they are “people-friendly”. The role of the civil society, the problems of the post-socialist countries and the role of the fashionable slogans privatisation, liberalisation, deregulation and decentralisation are analysed. These are seen to call for many qualifications. The links between democracy, capitalism and development are reviewed. The social capital of trust and reciprocity that is invested in norms and networks of civic life is seen as a vital factor of effective government and economic progress. Should economic reform precede political reform in the countries in transition? Some lessons can be learned for the developing countries from the countries in transition. An analysis of the politics and the political economy of development aid follow. Buffers between donors and recipients are suggested, such as mutual monitoring of each other’s performance by recipients, a council of wise men and women, or a secretariat with genuinely global loyalties. A quiet style in aid-giving is also an option, when potential improvers are rewarded, without the imposition of conditionality. The paper then goes on to a presentation of various theories of the state. A non-maximising theory is recommended. It ends with a set of policy conclusions for governments and for aid agencies.

Human Development: Means and Ends

Sometimes the change in the fashions of thinking about development appears like a comedy of errors, a lurching from one fad to another. Economic growth, employment creation, jobs and justice, redistribution with growth, basic needs, bottom-up development, participatory development, sustainable development, market-friendly development, liberation, liberalisation, human development; thus goes the carousel of the slogans. But this would not be a correct record. There has been an evolution in our thinking about development. Both internal logic and new evidence have led to the revision of our views. Previous and partly discarded approaches have taught us much that is still valuable, and our current approach will surely be subject to criticisms. A brief survey of the evolution of our thinking may be helpful. The discussion started in the 1950s, influenced by Arthur Lewis (1955) and others, who emphasised economic growth as the key to poverty eradication. Even at this early stage, sensible economists and development planners were quite clear (in spite of what is now often said in caricature of past thought) that economic growth is not an end in itself, but a performance test of development. Arthur Lewis defined the purpose of development as widening our range of choice, exactly as the Human Development Reports of the United Nations Development Programme do today. Three justifications were given for the emphasis on growth as the principal performance test. One justification assumed that through market forces–such as the rising demand for labour, rising productivity, rising wages, lower prices of the goods bought by the people–economic growth would spread its benefits widely and speedily, and that these benefits are best achieved through growth. Even in the early days some sceptics said that growth is not necessarily so benign. They maintained that in certain conditions (such as increasing returns, restrictions to entry, monopoly power, unequal distribution of income and assets), growth gives to those who already have; it tends to concentrate income and wealth in the hands of the few.

Islands and sustainable development

Includes Notes on Contributors, Index, and Summary on back cover.The first Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) convened in Barbados in 1994. The purpose of the gathering was to examine national and international strategies, and adopt plans and programmes intended to enable these territories and their limited resources to undergo development in a sustainable manner, while enhancing in them the coping mechanisms and human skills necessary to pursue sustainable development. The Barbados Conference was a spinoff from the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development - known as the Earth Summit - which met in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The purpose of the Summit was to debate a challenging list of pressing environmental issues known as Agenda 21, and follow this up with the implementation of an action plan.peer-reviewe

Basic Needs in the Year 2000

The paper distills the main lessons of recent country and sector work on Basic needs approaches to development. It argues that, drawing on this experience and adopting appropriate policies, the basic needs of the world's poor can be met in a shorter period of time, and with fewer resources i.e. by the year 2000-than if the more conventional approach of relying solely on rising incomes is chosen. Raising the earning opportunities of the poor remains a central thrust of the strategy, but it has to be supplemented by actions in the public sector and within households

A 21st Century British Comics Community that Ensures Gender Balance

Dans cet article, je montre comment il y a eu, depuis 2000, une forte augmentation de l'activité de construction d’une communauté féminine et féministe au sein du monde de la bande dessinée alternative au Royaume-Uni. Cette nouvelle donne a un impact positif sur la situation des femmes en tant que créatrices de bandes dessinées et en tant que contributrices à l'industrie de la bande dessinée. Une raison de ce changement tient à une volonté de rééquilibrage des genres au sein de la bande dessinée alternative ; pour cela, je m’appuie notamment sur le travail de Laydeez do Comics. Une autre piste que j’explore afin d’expliquer ce phénomène est la place prise par l'autobiographique et la vie quotidienne, deux sujets qui attirent les lecteurs et les créateurs au-delà des milieux habituels de la bande dessinée traditionnelle. L’article s’ouvre sur une discussion de l'influence des œuvres d’Art Spiegelman, Marjane Satrapi, Alison Bechdel et Chris Ware dans la popularité du « roman graphique », plus particulièrement de « l’autobiographie graphique » au Royaume-Uni. Il se poursuit par la description de l'activité au sein de la communauté des auteurs de bande dessinée au début des années 2000 pour établir le contexte dans lequel Laydeez do Comics et Graphic Medicine ont émergé.In this paper I show how since 2000 there has been a surge of community building activity within the alternative comics “world” in the UK. This, I argue, has positively impacted the position of women as comics creators and as contributors to the comics industry. I maintain that the reason for the surge has been an increasing regard for gender balance in the activity. I focus on the work of Laydeez do Comics and Graphic Medicine to support this. Another cause I propose has been the focus on the autobiographical and/or everyday, domestic subject matter, which has attracted readers and creators from a variety of backgrounds, beyond a traditional comics readership. I begin by considering the influence of works by Art Spiegelman, Marjane Satrapi, Alison Bechdel and Chris Ware in the popularity of the “graphic novel”, more specifically the “graphic memoir” in the UK. I continue by outlining the activity within the comics community in the early 2000s to establish the context in which Laydeez do Comics and Graphic Medicine emerged