Governments worldwide choose their concrete developer friends over long-term, beneficial alternatives. How can we, as planners and scientists, approach this problem? What are some of the tools we have at our disposal? In effect - how can we battle such strong opponents? Please tell me your stories and thoughts. Thank you.
I think we are missing a key tool.
Land Development, as it is done today (and really, this may apply to all forms of development), is a process where community wealth is converted to individual wealth. We trust market forces to maximize the gain in individual wealth, and we trust good planning to minimize the loss in community wealth. But there is no calculus (well, that I've heard of and I'm eager to be told I'm wrong) that can compare the two.
If we had a tool that could be used before the fact to show that the development leads to net wealth production (eg, change in individual wealth minus change in community wealth is positive), then we would know that 'growth can be good', even if it screws over a portion of the population. Otherwise, it's a crap shoot, and any misguided or corrupt government (individual, agency, or the whole structure) can sell off community wealth to their friends and family for the promise of economic benefits, and be able to say with a straight face that they were doing it to create growth. The masses are left with the debts, while the few are enjoying the profits.
Note that the 80 richest people on the planet control more wealth than the poorest 50%. I suggest that even if it is just poorly thought out policies (rather than active corruption), it can still lead to poverty for the masses.
Well, first define the concept of sustainability.
Second, define "corruption", since countries employ different definitions of it.
Next, decide which dimensions of corruption to analyze - political, administrative, corporate; at what level - local/community, provincial/regional, country-level?
Then define a time period to look at.
Are you focusing on a single country or a selection of countries?
Be more precise, and the follow-up should become clear.
Dear Sofia,
“Corruption, an ethical and moral problem which varies from place to place, time to time, culture to culture and with the level of economic development, is a global phenomenon that affects developed, developing and underdeveloped nations of the world. Corruption is the major cause of poverty around the world.”
Dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery
The process by which a word or expression is changed from its original state to one regarded as erroneous or debased. “A record of a word's corruption"
It occurs at all levels of governance, that is, local and state. All over the world, the perception of corruption especially in public places is very high. This is because, corruption undermines every aspect of national development among which are, political development, economic development, social development and so on. It should be emphasized here that it is not just only in governance that corruption is found; it is equally noticeable in every human society
Considerable research attention has focused on the potential negative consequence of corruption, the possible economic effects of corruption, the political and social consequences of corruption, and the effects of corruption on sustainable economic development. The effects of public-sector corruption on attitudes related to political support, the consequences of corruption on growth in GDP per capita, and the links among welfare, sustainable development, and corruption.
This long term approach of development does not scare developing countries anymore. Sustainable development is a widely accepted reality. developing countries installed more renewable energy projects than other wealthier nations. There has been a 17% increase in global investment in renewable energies compared to the previous year.
More than $1 billion is paid in bribes annually. Although deeply entrenched in some societies, rooting corruption out seems necessary.
Even if there are countries where corruption is in a way accepted, and that cultural variations exist on the subject, stating this entrenchment should not be an excuse for the phenomenon to take place. Such acknowledgement should be used in order to conduct a better fight against corruption, not adopting one-size-fits-all solutions but noticing cultural and local realities.
Regards,
Prem Baboo
I think we are missing a key tool.
Land Development, as it is done today (and really, this may apply to all forms of development), is a process where community wealth is converted to individual wealth. We trust market forces to maximize the gain in individual wealth, and we trust good planning to minimize the loss in community wealth. But there is no calculus (well, that I've heard of and I'm eager to be told I'm wrong) that can compare the two.
If we had a tool that could be used before the fact to show that the development leads to net wealth production (eg, change in individual wealth minus change in community wealth is positive), then we would know that 'growth can be good', even if it screws over a portion of the population. Otherwise, it's a crap shoot, and any misguided or corrupt government (individual, agency, or the whole structure) can sell off community wealth to their friends and family for the promise of economic benefits, and be able to say with a straight face that they were doing it to create growth. The masses are left with the debts, while the few are enjoying the profits.
Note that the 80 richest people on the planet control more wealth than the poorest 50%. I suggest that even if it is just poorly thought out policies (rather than active corruption), it can still lead to poverty for the masses.
- Badges
- Science topic