118
9.1 Introduction
Conventional analysis on economic development has thus far focused on the conditions and drivers that the developing economies are unable to fulfil. As such, analysis regarding those parameters within the context of least developed or developing
nations will often be incomplete and sometimes counterproductive. Although some
least developed and developing economies seem to break the laws of classical and
neoclassical economics lessons to improve development in their own way – success
using such an approach requires a broader analysis of socio-economic factors.
Recognising this, one could argue that evolutionary economics is useful in the sense
that it accommodates learning and knowledge of individual actors participating
actively in real life economics. However, limitations for a holistic evolutionary analysis of the least developed and developing economies’ realities remain, despite the
contribution of evolutionary theorists in explaining the role of entrepreneurial innovative solutions for existing bottlenecks for development in these countries. Some
of the solutions are from within the market despite not relying solely on market
mechanisms to succeed as a liberalist perspective would sustain.
In the end, there is no complete answer regarding which economic model would
be best suited to analyse least developed, underdeveloped or developing economies.
These terms were proposed by the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme)
when mapping countries according to their score in the Human Development Index.
Recently the term “underdeveloped” was substituted at the UNDP classification for
“least developed countries”. However, “developing” has also been used to differentiate from “developed”. As conventional analysis of the determinants of economic
development appears to fail to embrace the complexity of those countries’ realities,
it follows that conventional solutions for developmental inclusiveness may indeed
also fail. While a theoretical approach is necessary, urgent action is required to overcome deep developmental constraints. The sustainable development goals (SDGs)
work as a call for change to these pressing issues.
Inspired by the words of the managing director of the International Monetary
Fund (IMF), Christine Lagarde, at the 2017 World Economic Forum, any international institution may contribute to address the economies “left behind”. In her
view, globalisation has been incredibly effective and is not going to be stopped;
however it is not working for all (Lagarde 2017) – which needs to be both recognised and addressed. In Lagarde’s view, “globalisation is embedded in the way capital moves around, in the way in which a lot of people around the world work,
transact, move, (…) and are used to getting certain products cheaply” (Lagarde
2017). However, a big part of the world, approximately “3.6 billion people that we
are not talking about enough (…) who constitute 50% of the global economy”
(Lagarde 2017) must be included through effective actions so they too can benefit
from globalisation. According to Lagarde, the “improvement of (their) living standards depends massively on international trade (…) on participating in the global
economy” (Lagarde 2017). As the IMF managing director states: “we cannot go
ahead without them”. Lagarde highlights that “globalisation has to work for all and
A. C. Ribeiro-Duthie
9.1 Introduction
Conventional analysis on economic development has thus far focused on the conditions and drivers that the developing economies are unable to fulfil. As such, analysis regarding those parameters within the context of least developed or developing
nations will often be incomplete and sometimes counterproductive. Although some
least developed and developing economies seem to break the laws of classical and
neoclassical economics lessons to improve development in their own way – success
using such an approach requires a broader analysis of socio-economic factors.
Recognising this, one could argue that evolutionary economics is useful in the sense
that it accommodates learning and knowledge of individual actors participating
actively in real life economics. However, limitations for a holistic evolutionary analysis of the least developed and developing economies’ realities remain, despite the
contribution of evolutionary theorists in explaining the role of entrepreneurial innovative solutions for existing bottlenecks for development in these countries. Some
of the solutions are from within the market despite not relying solely on market
mechanisms to succeed as a liberalist perspective would sustain.
In the end, there is no complete answer regarding which economic model would
be best suited to analyse least developed, underdeveloped or developing economies.
These terms were proposed by the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme)
when mapping countries according to their score in the Human Development Index.
Recently the term “underdeveloped” was substituted at the UNDP classification for
“least developed countries”. However, “developing” has also been used to differentiate from “developed”. As conventional analysis of the determinants of economic
development appears to fail to embrace the complexity of those countries’ realities,
it follows that conventional solutions for developmental inclusiveness may indeed
also fail. While a theoretical approach is necessary, urgent action is required to overcome deep developmental constraints. The sustainable development goals (SDGs)
work as a call for change to these pressing issues.
Inspired by the words of the managing director of the International Monetary
Fund (IMF), Christine Lagarde, at the 2017 World Economic Forum, any international institution may contribute to address the economies “left behind”. In her
view, globalisation has been incredibly effective and is not going to be stopped;
however it is not working for all (Lagarde 2017) – which needs to be both recognised and addressed. In Lagarde’s view, “globalisation is embedded in the way capital moves around, in the way in which a lot of people around the world work,
transact, move, (…) and are used to getting certain products cheaply” (Lagarde
2017). However, a big part of the world, approximately “3.6 billion people that we
are not talking about enough (…) who constitute 50% of the global economy”
(Lagarde 2017) must be included through effective actions so they too can benefit
from globalisation. According to Lagarde, the “improvement of (their) living standards depends massively on international trade (…) on participating in the global
economy” (Lagarde 2017). As the IMF managing director states: “we cannot go
ahead without them”. Lagarde highlights that “globalisation has to work for all and
A. C. Ribeiro-Duthie