1. Why is economics central to an understanding of the problems of development?

I think because the development of a country depends upon economic factors and so you can only
understand how a country is developing if you know about how the economic factors are and how
the factors change. Many problems of development stem from a lack of money and economics is all
about money so the two areas of development and economics are related. Problems of development
are like not having enough money, which means too much poverty and high unemployment rates and
these aspects of the problems are central issues in economics and so economics teaches us about
problems in development and so we can better understand these problems principally by looking at
economic factors that define the problems. Its mainly money at the centre of economic problems or
a lack of money and so it is effected largely by how money is distributed among people and for what
purposes money uses which are central issues in economics. I suppose you can’t understand
unemployment as well as an economist understands unemployment because economists look at
unemployment all the time and pay very close attention to it so economists are very good at
understanding economic development problems for this reason and probably other reasons.
Furthermore economics is a social science and is concerned with people and economic development
problems also stem from people so these fields are related and understanding the one helps you
better understand the other because you can build up a bigger picture.
Economics is the governing philosophy of a monetary based system, which promotes competition
for and the constant acquisition of wealth thru scarcity, or the reduction of resources available to
consumers. A monetary based system can only progress in one direction: an ever-widening gap
between the corrupt, wealthiest elite and the subservient slave class over which they dominate.

2. Is the concept of the developing world a useful one? Why or why not?
A developing country, also called a less-developed country, is a nation with a lower standard of
living, underdeveloped industrial base, and low Human Development Index (HDI) relative to
other countries. On the other hand, since the late 1990s developing countries tended to
demonstrate higher growth rates than the developed ones. There is no universal, agreed-upon
criterion for what makes a country developing versus developed and which countries fit these
two categories, although there are general reference points such as a nation's GDP per capita
compared to other nations. Also, the general term less-developed country should not be
confused with the specific least developed country.
There is criticism of the use of the term developing country. The term implies inferiority of a
developing country or undeveloped country compared to a developed country, which many
countries dislike. It assumes a desire to develop along the traditional Western model of
economic development which a few countries, such as Cuba and Bhutan, choose not to follow.
An alternative measurement that has been suggested is that of gross national happiness,
measuring the actual satisfaction of people as opposed to how industrialized a country is.
There is some criticism of the use of the term "developing country". The term implies inferiority
of a "developing country" or "undeveloped country" compared to a "developed country", which
many countries dislike.
It assumes a desire to "develop" along the traditional Western model of economic development,
which a few countries, such as Cuba and Bhutan, choose not to follow.
The term "developing" implies mobility and does not acknowledge that development may be in
decline or static in some countries, particularly in southern African states worst affected by
HIV/AIDS. In such cases, the term "developing country" may be considered a euphemism. The
term implies homogeneity between such countries, which vary widely. The term also implies
homogeneity within such countries when wealth (and health) of the most and least affluent
groups varies widely. Similarly, the term "developed country" incorrectly implies a lack of
continuing economic development/growth in more-developed countries.
In general, development entails a modern infrastructure (both physical and institutional), and a
move away from low value added sectors such as agriculture and natural resource extraction.
Developed countries, in comparison, usually have economic systems based on continuous, self-
 sustaining economic growth in the tertiary sector of the economy and quaternary sector of the
economy and high material standards of living. However, there are notable exceptions, as some
countries considered developed have a significant component of primary industries in their
national economies, e.g., Norway, Canada, Australia. The USA and Western Europe have a very
important agricultural sector, and are major players in international agricultural markets. Also,
natural resource extraction can be a very profitable industry (high value added), e.g., oil
extraction.
An alternative measurement that has been suggested is that of gross national happiness,
measuring the actual satisfaction of people as opposed to how fiscally wealthy a country is.

3. What do you hope to gain from this course on development economics?

I courage to gain more knowledge of the resources available from our Region, as well as the State, for improving
our communities through job growth. I also look forward to networking with local professionals who are working
toward the same goal of promoting our Region. I am excited about this leadership program and appreciate the
opportunity. I hope to gain a deeper understanding on the methods of promoting economic development,
structural change and economic growth.

4. Briefly describe the various definitions of the term development encountered in the text. What are
the strengths and weaknesses of each approach? Do you think that there are other dimensions of
development not mentioned in the text? If so, describe them. If not, explain why you believe that
the text description of development is adequate.

In 1960 the American economic history W.W. Robstown suggested that any countries past five
stat age in economic development.

Stage 1 : Traditional society , Stage 2 Transitional stage , Stage 3 Take off , Stage 4 Drive to
maturity , stage 5 High mass consumption . In Brazil economic development stage is drive to
maturity stage. This stage the economy is diversifying in a new area. Technological invention is
providing a diverse range of investment opportunity. Brazil is one of the newly industrializing
countries. Industry has been greatest contribution to Brazil economic growth and its contribution
to 32% of GNP and 54% of exports. In Brazil GDP is growth 2.7% (2011 ). GDP is $2.517
trillion (nominal). Labor force is 103.6 million. Labor force by occupation agriculture: 20%,
industry: 14% and services: 66%. Exports are $256.0 billion.

I think that economic development dimension is differing to various countries. In Brazil

economy is mixed economy. A major problem is income inequality. Some people make huge
profit thanks to low industry wages, while urban workers are left on the margin of poverty.

I think that China economic system is must be ideal economy growth of any other country. China
economic development system is communist economic system. In economic development stage
China is situated in high mass consumption. GDP growth is 9.5%, GDP per is capita $5,184
(nominal). Main industries mining and ore processing, iron, steel, aluminum, and other metals,
coal; machine building; armaments; textiles and apparel; petroleum; cement; chemicals;
fertilizers; consumer products, including footwear, toys, and electronics; food processing;
transportation equipment, including automobiles, rail cars and locomotives, ships, and aircraft;
telecommunications equipment, commercial space launch vehicles, satellites. Exports are US
$1.897 trillion. In recent situation, Brazil economic approach is now followed by China
economic plan. Brazil is now going to the high mass consumption in fifth stage of development.

5. Why is an understanding of development crucial to policy formulation in developing nations? Do you

think it is possible for a nation to agree on a rough definition of development and orient it strategies
accordingly?

The word "development" has a number of meanings. Depending on which meaning one adopts, there
are a number of policy issues which could be adopted to achieve the goal. First, one must ask
"development for whom." If a country only wishes to secure development for the wealthiest members
of its society, then it may spend a great deal for nothing more than law enforcement and projects in
politically connected parts of the country. If a state wants to gain broad based development, then you
should pursue programs of public health, education, microfinance, etc.

Is it possible for an entire nation to agree 100% on development? Nope. It's impossible to get an entire
group to agree on anything political! That being said, it isn't that hard to get the leaders of a country to
agree on a program.

6. Why is a strictly economic definition of development inadequate? What

do you understand economic development to mean? Can you give
hypothetical or real examples of situations in which a country may be
developing economically but still be underdeveloped?

Economic development is overall improvement of living standards. Hence it

is much more complex than economic growth which is basically increase in
real GDP. Economic development would take health conditions, education,
security, infrustracture etc into account. While increase in GDP may help
achieve the means to these developments, it doesn't mean it will. For
instance I'd say Turkey is economically doing well, there is definitely
economic growth however there are many journalists arrested for being
opposed to the government, there is high level of corruption evident from
the recent events. So I'd say increase in GDP does not reflect the
development.

7. How does the concept of “capabilities to function” help us gain insight

into development goals and achievements? Is money enough? Why or why
not?

I would like to explain this answer with an example. Suppose

that a person has a bike and does not know how to drive it. its
means his functions abilities are very low. Amartiya Sen wants to tell
 us that we should use the commodities by knowing all the functions
related to it.As Amartya Sen said, "Economic growth cannot be
sensibly treated as an end in itself. Development has to be more
concerned with enhancing the lives we lead and the freedom we
enjoy.and in the next question, money is really not enough. Freedom
and self-esteem and equality to lead life and enjoy life and use the
life in the best way is also a part of development.Money is enough
only to enhance the freedom of choice but not the development. In
development, your function abilities should be increases as much as
possible.
8. What forces may be at work in giving the Millennium Development Goals such a high profile in international economic
relations?