Culture and development
A persistent theme in the study of modernization has been the treatment of “modern” and
“traditional” cultures as polar types. In this way, modernization becomes a problem of changing
traditional societies into modern ones. In this sense modernization or development is the process
of social change whereby less developed societies acquire the characteristics common to
developed societies. Accordingly, development is seen as an economic component of
modernization. Therefore, development of sophisticated culture, which western society
represents, is a prerequisite for modernization. Thus according to modernization theory, a society
is developed when traditional values are relegated to the background and replaced by modern
values.
However, modernization theory has been variously criticized as largely ethnocentric, Eurocentric
and imperialistic. The last decade marked a turning point in acknowledging the importance of
culture in the development process. Since the beginning of the 1970s a number of voices at
UNESCO have been raised regularly that stressed the relevance of the cultural factor in the
social, economic and political evolution of contemporary societies.
Capitalist economists see development as economic growth measured in aggregate terms of
growth in per capital income, Gross National Product (GNP), Gross Product (GP) and so on to
the neglect of the individuals involved in production growth in terms of attitudinal, institutional
and technological changes which the people must undergo to produce wealth. From the capitalist
economists’ conception of development in the 1950s and 1960s, development was seen as an
economic phenomenon. However, the experience of a number of developing countries in these
periods, indicate that the narrow economic conception of development was inappropriate as such,
there was the need for a redefinition of the term.
As observed by Salim (1998), development is a global undertaking with multiple dimensions –
economic, social and cultural; that influence one another. He argued that the cultural dimension
is a long-neglected aspect of development. The challenge, therefore, lies in fostering a
synergistic development between science and technology and cultural values. People do not
commit itself to a development undertaking unless that undertaking corresponds to its deeply felt
needs. People should be able to derive the means and motivation for their development from
their own cultural roots.
A clear understanding of the relationships between culture and development will therefore bring
about an appreciation of the fact that any step towards development should of necessity start with
the examination of the people’s popular culture and the values inherent therein, for these inform
people’s choices in life and their general well-being. Development should be seen as the
actualization and popularization of these values either collectively or individually. Here, any
development process which is based on the values of an alien culture is bound to be problematic.
Culture is by its essence, the foundation on which all societies build and as such, the foundation
of the prevailing social order.
Central to the process of socio-economic development is culture. Thus, if a people’s culture
determines their values, norms and general world view, then the role of culture in development
cannot be overemphasized. Development is therefore the realization of the full potentials of that
society as dictated by it values. The more indigenously based such culture is, the better for the
society in achieving and sustaining a high tempo of development.
Trade, Aid and Development Agenda
Trade and development
At the most basic level, trade promotes prosperity and reduces poverty. More than that, however,
free trade has also been seen as the agency that would foster internationalism and end war. Trade
was believed to promote interdependence and a sense of international community, building links
between peoples and nations and rendering conflict less likely.
As well as forging direct links between countries, trade creates a situation of mutual dependence
that conflict may menace. Trade liberalization can also help to expose and reduce inequitable
privileges, elite rent-seeking, and corruption. Furthermore, international institutions provide for
ums for international dispute resolution, and may enable the use of alternative forms of pressure
to military force, including trade sanctions, financial coercion and diplomatic and public
pressure.
Similarly, international trade may help to enhance security within as well as between states. The
economic prosperity that should result can help to reduce poverty-driven conflicts. Resource
wealth can in the right circumstances be translated into capital for more broadly based
development and distribution. Finances can be harnessed to improve the protection and
sustainable exploitation of the natural resource base.
Although trade does bring all these benefits, there can be major negative impacts too. The
process of trade liberalization has been deeply uneven, benefiting rich economies more than the
poorest, and the gains from trade have not been distributed evenly throughout the global
economy. Industrialized countries still maintain higher trade barriers against many developing-
country exports than they do against each others.
Trade may also contribute directly to conflict and insecurity by providing export and earnings
opportunities for groups engaged in conflict – as we saw above. Export markets very seldom
discriminate between products produced under the rule of legitimate governments and those
whose revenues fund armed groups – or between products produced and exported in accordance
with national laws, and those which are illegal.
Transnational corporations, particularly those in the extractive industries, can often prove
resistant to regulation by their host-state governments, with negative social and environmental
consequences. Applied insensitively, trade policy can increase inequality and weaken
government structures, causing instability and increasing the chance of conflict. Trade can open
up markets to conflict resources, funding rebellions and prolonging wars. Aid can also increase
instability and contribute to corruption, mismanagement and failures of governance. Withdrawn
too soon, or used in the wrong way, it can hinder recover y from conflict.
In short, the current system of international trade is fundamentally unfair and biased towards rich
countries and the corporations based in those states. Restrictions on market access and
continuing domestic subsidies by rich countries consign many developing countries to reliance
on the export of primary commodities.
At the same time, developing countries are being pushed to adapt to an increasingly liberalized
global trading system, from which many barely benefit and some are losing out, often reducing
government revenues and undermining livelihoods – serving to increase the prospects for
political instability and competition over scarce resources.
Generally, various trade policies promoted by the OECD states have the following severe
impacts on people in poor countries:
1. The tariff and non-tariff barriers, escalating tariffs for processed goods and stringent
technical/scientific standards that restrict the access of developing country products to rich
developed world markets and inhibit developing country efforts to diversify their economies;
2. The use by northern states of domestic and export subsidies that regularly result in the
dumping of subsidized produce, often below the costs of product ion, undermining industries and
food security in developing countries;
3. The continuing dependence of many developing countries on the export of a small number of
commodities, which have suffered falling and volatile prices;
4. The aggressive promotion of an increasingly globalized trading system, often for the benefits
of northern states, in which developing countries are being required to implement trade
liberalization commitments that reduce their policy ‘space’ to promote policies suited to their
national or local circumstances.
Aid, development and security
For the poorest countries, aid has a vital role to play. Poor countries enjoy least access to FDI
primarily because of structural problems in their economies: a shortage of skills needed to
convert the capital, political risk and restrictions on capital inflows. Aid can help in tackling all
of these problems, and thereby enabling poor countries to benefit from inward investment.
Similarly, as we have seen, many poor countries lack the capacity fully to benefit from trade
liberalization, which needs effective governance structures such as a lack of corruption, trade-
friendly customs agencies, an independent judiciary, a tax system that does not need to rely on
import and export duties, and so on. Once again, aid can assist a country in preparing for the
opening up of its markets, in diversifying its economy, and in improving infrastructure, including
transport, power and telecommunications. This can in turn help to lower business costs and
improve the international competitiveness of activities.
Crucially, aid can also assist in supporting good governance, including developing efficient and
incorrupt bureaucracies, improving the democratic nature of institutions of government, and
introducing policies designed to ensure that local communities benefit from economic activity
such as mineral or fossil fuel extraction. An important element is revenue transparency, which
can help to build the legitimacy of governments and reduce support for rebel movements where
this feeds on perceived corruption or misappropriation of revenues. Independent monitoring,
supported by donor governments, is likely to be an important element in this, as is support for the
development of civil society groups that can use the information thus made available.
Finally, aid can be specifically used to prevent conflict and to improve post-conflict recovery.
If used properly, then, aid should be able to weaken or remove the underlying causes of conflict
and insecurity. Yet often it can be misused. Aid has been accused of contributing to the conflict
dynamic in Sudan, of propping up the Mobutu regime in Zaire and the Marcos regime in the
Philippines. Aid can also be appropriated by armed groups; in Sudan, for example, rebel
movements have looted and taxed aid deliveries, and established ‘humanitarian’ front
organizations to interface directly with the aid community.
Moreover, aid is still often used as a weapon of foreign policy by donors, irrespective of its
impact on poor people. Similarly, aid can be used to impose donor-country moral positions
regardless of the development consequences.
Most commonly now, the conditions imposed on their economies by the international financial
institutions often exacerbate instability in poor countries. The structural adjustment policies
promoted by the IMF and World Bank, and the liberalizing approach of the WTO, though they
may well have positive impacts in the long term, often entail significant economic, social and
environmental shocks in the short term, including loss of government revenues, cuts in
government services, increased price competition in domestic markets and rising unemployment.
Al l these can undermine government authority and increase support for insurgencies and rebel
movements.
Welfare State: It entails government responsibility for social welfare: a political system in
which a government assumes the primary responsibility for assuring the basic health, education,
and financial well-being of all its citizens through programs and direct assistance. It is a
contemporary state understanding that undertakes the duty to ensure a fair income distribution,
protect the groups and classes in need of protection, direct the social security practices and
employment policies, practice the politicize to meet the basic requirements of society such as
education, health, and housing and takes measures for regulating the working life. It is a kind of
state in which consciously organized public power is used to reduce the role of market forces.” It
is accepted within the scope of the role of the welfare state to provide a minimum income
guarantee to individuals and families, to facilitate the prevention of certain social risks, and to
offer good living conditions to individuals in society through social welfare.
The welfare state aims at redistributing income and thus plays an interventionist and regulatory
role. It takes measures to eliminate negativity in working life. It determines the minimum wage,
undertakes social security and welfare services, and intervenes by taxes and other expenditures to
eliminate injustices in income distribution.
All of the definitions regarding welfare state include the mentality to protect those who have
poor economic and social conditions. This protection can be done through social policies.
Therefore, welfare state’s intervention for the sake of eliminating the negative conditions, which
is required to be done by the welfare state and achieve the goals of social policies, is appropriate
and required.
Although the duties and scope of each welfare state change based on each country’s social,
cultural, economic and demographic conditions; basically, they include ensuring the protection
of children, the disabled, families, the elders and women, creating jobs, providing education and
vocational training, struggling against poverty and low income, and improving the working
conditions.
