Indices of development and the wealth of a nation
BESIDES the gross domestic product (GDP) and per capita income, a country's progress or lack thereof is traditionally measured by indices of ranging from infant mortality rates to consumption of fuel and use of steel. Trends that are considered positive would generally include low maternal and infant mortality rates, longer life spans, a ratio of professionals such as doctors, teachers and dentists for each thousand citizens, medical facilities, schools, pure water supply and electricity consumption. For the more advanced societies, progress is measured by youths' access to tertiary education and by available university places. And in this age of dazzling information technology, countries are now classified by the number of cellular telephones and personal computers and the numbers of on-line users. Naturally, the wealthiest and most industrialised countries would have the highest figures of gross domestic product and per capita income. The United Kingdom, for instance, with a population of 59.5M has a gross domestic product of US$1,423.8Bln and a per capita income of US$23,947, while Switzerland with a population of 7.26M has a gross domestic product of US$262.6Bln and a per capita income of US$36,166. Another European country, the Republic of Portugal, has a population of over 9.9bln, a GDP of US$116.2Bln, and a per capita income of US$11,000. Closer home, Ecuador with 12.1M people, boasts a GDP of US$44.6Bln, and a per capita of US$4,100; Barbados has more than 257,000 people, a GDP of US$2.5Bln and a per capita income of US$9,800; Haiti with 6.6M people, has a GDP of US$6.5Bln and per capita of US$1,000; and Guyana with a population of 706,116 has a gross domestic product of US$1.6Bln and a per capita income of US$2,200. Of course, development theorists have long argued that the index of per capita income is likely to be an inaccurate yardstick, since at best, it merely indicates what each person of a country hypothetically earns when the gross domestic product is roughly divided by the number of citizens. Very often, they point out, the monetary wealth of a nation is concentrated in the hands of a class of persons or a group of companies. Some four years ago, there was a Reuters story about Luxembourg, a European nation which was suffering from an embarrassment of riches. The story was based on a World Bank report which placed Luxembourg with a per capita income of US$39,850 above Switzerland with a per capita of US$37,180. On the same scale, the United States with a per capita of US$25,860 was accorded the place of the sixth richest country; Britain was placed below the first 15 countries; Ethiopia with US$130, and Mozambique with US$80, were at the very bottom of the scale. There are many lessons that can be drawn from studying the various economic features of countries. While there are the societies which are advanced because they exploited their natural resources intelligently, the small countries, which in spite of a lack of marketable indigenous resources, have managed to become prosperous, are still more impressive. Such countries as the `Asian tigers', Israel and European nations such as Switzerland have powerful economies because they have successfully mobilised to the best possible advantage their human and natural resources and the most efficient technologies.
|