To Whom It May Really Be Needed

I have received some e-mails each containing question regarding one or two from the terms pertaining to economic development. The sender of one of these e-mails has ingenuously mentioned that he wanted to know my personal view regarding a certain term. Going through these e-mails I came to infer that the senders are from India and they have gone through my article ‘Rural Development in India’.

However, the economic literature is rich enough as regards to the meaning and definition of the terms in question and I have nothing as notion of having an authority to redefine the terminology. All the same, as per the semblance emerging from the way they have put questions in their e-mails, the senders seem to be not well versed with the terminology of theoretical economics, Therefore, I would like to make efforts hereby for making them clear the meaning of the questioned terms in a language which I think suitable and understandable to a layman for the theory of economics.  

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT v/s ECONOMIC GROWTH

The terms ‘Economic Development’ and ‘Economic Growth’ are in general used interchangeably, as synonymous to each other, by many writers in economic literature pertaining to development. However, a layman finds no difference between economic development and economic growth but, all the same, some economists, like Mrs. U. Hicks, Prof. Maddison and Prof. J. A. Schumpeter, have differentiated between these terms. According to them, the economic development refers to the problems of under developing economies and the economic growth refers to those of developed economies.

In under developed countries different economic forces (economic organs) in the economy are to be generated and the unused natural resources are started to be used. On the other hand, in developed countries, all economic forces (economic organs) stand already generated and there is required only the maintaining and further strengthening of these forces (organs). A very good example to make rather clear the difference between the two terms is to compare an economy with a child. The developing or under developed economy presents the semblance of a child in his latent phase where the generation of different parts (organs) of the child’s body betides and this is termed as development of the latent child. Similarly, a developed economy (the economy that has passed the stage of its being under developed) resembles to the child who has already taken birth after completing his latent phase where almost all parts (organs) of his body have been developed and, thereafter, not generation but maintenance and strengthening of these parts (organs) is coming about. If the child gets his body parts being strengthened well, the child is said to be growing well.

However, during the organ generating phase (the development phase) there runs also the process of maintenance and strengthening the developing organs (growth process) simultaneously to some extent in both, the case of the child and the case of an economy similarly as during the phase of the organ maintenance and strengthening (the growth phase) traces of the process of new organ generation (development process) also are found simultaneously. That is why, there can be drawn no demarcation line between economic development and economic growth despite the fact that there are separate meanings assigned to them. To conclude, irrespective of whether the economy is under developed or developed, ‘exploring new natural resource and starting production of new products’ comes under economic development while ‘increasing natural resources exploitation and improving quality of national products’ relates to economic growth.

RURAL DEVELOPMENT:

Rural development means the social and the economic development of rural areas. In other words, rural development is to increase economic opportunity and improve the quality of life for the rural mass. However, the old rural development paradigm is being replaced by a new one. The range of new quality products, services and forms of cost reduction that together comprise rural development are understood as a response by farm families to both the eroding economic base of their enterprises and to the new needs and expectations. Rural development therefore is largely an autonomous, self-driven process and in its further unfolding agriculture will continue to play a key role. Agricultural development was thus deemed to be essential for rural development not only in old paradigm but in the new paradigm also it is referred to as playing a key role. Moreover, agricultural development has importance not only for rural development but it is indispensable for the overall economic development, too, especially in an agriculture based economy, Agricultural development had contributed a lot in paving the way for economic development of US economy and the miraculous development of Japanese economy had opened eyes in the morning of agricultural development initiated with the break of the Mizi Revolution. Therefore, if we want to develop a rural economy we should develop land and agriculture. The land and agricultural development would increase income of the rural people whereby they would tend to raise their living standard by letting urban amenities, facilities and traditions enter in their life. Whatever the high level of living standard is achieved there on the basis of increased income generated on account of land and agriculture development, the economy, all the same, remains rural. It becomes developed but is not converted into an urban economy. In other words, rural development is a process different from both the transforming a rural economy into an urban economy (referred to as urban transformation) and the shaping a rural economy as an urban economy (referred to as urbanization). The rural villages in United States of America look far better than Indian cities but those are still the part of U.S. rural sector because the economy of those villages is still land and agriculture based. This course of strengthening a rural economy is “Rural Development’.

URBANISATION:

Urbanization is the process whereby the amenities and the facilities of urban life are provided to the inhabitants of a rural area. If the urban way of living is made available to the rural mass without raising their income through land and agriculture development, their consumption, traditions and living become urban. This is urbanization and not rural development. Urbanization is enjoyed by rural people till it is at a subsidised cost or is free of cost for them. As soon as it starts costing to them fully, either they revert to their pre-urbanization living standard or, if they have become habitual, they indulge in illegal activities to earn more income to maintain the enjoyed living standard. That is why the rural youths in India are day by day advancing towards taking resort to illegal unethical and socially unacceptable means like theft, dacoity, drugs, killing, cheating, narrow politics and what not. Therefore, urbanization can pay nothing positive to rural mass in real sense. Urbanization of a rural area is just like beautifying a girl by putting a beautiful mask on her face or artificially decorating her face. She can so look disguising beautiful due to the mask or the decoration and not due to her original lineaments, natural facial hue and real facial glow. If the mask or the decoration start costing beyond her paying capacity, she would either choose to live without mask/decoration and look as before putting on the mask/decoration; or she would try to get the mask/decoration by hook and crook. However, she can better be made look beautiful by developing her facial hue and facial glow by beauty treatment, therapy, make-up, etc. This latter process is beauty development and the former is beautification similarly as raising living standard of rural people through agricultural and land development is rural development while providing them free amenities and facilities of urban life is urbanization.

URBAN TRANSFORMATION:

If the full dependence of a rural area or the partial dependence of a suburban area on land and agriculture is ended and the economies of these areas are made dependant on trade, commerce and industry, the amenities and facilities of life, the way of livelihood and the culture of these areas are all changed to those prevailing in urban cities. The economies of these areas are thus transformed from rural/semi-urban to urban and the areas become urban. This process of transformation is ‘urban transformation’ and not urbanization or rural development. The urban transformation is just like the making a girl beautiful by changing and developing her lineaments through plastic surgery. Actually, this way of making a girl beautiful is beauty transformation and not beautification or beauty development.

URBAN EXTENSION:

When the boundary of an urban area (urban city or town) is extended towards its suburban area taking thereby partially or fully the suburban area in its domain, it adds to the domain of that urban area. This process is ‘urban extension’. However, whenever there is an urban extension a suburban extension will always occur there because both inner and outer boundaries of the surrounding suburban area will be broadened whereby some area of the neighbouring rural area will become added to the suburban area.

URBAN DEVELOPMENT:

There are some writers using the term ‘urban development’ even when there is urban extension. I am unable to understand why they don’t differentiate between the increase in area and the economic improvement within the domain of an urban area (urban city or town). Urban development is a process of either improving the amenities, the facilities and way of living or creating new amenities, facilities and way of living for the people living in an urban area without taking any account of any increase in its domain. The process of urban development of an urban area is similar to the process of economic development of a country while the process of urban extension is just like the process of extending the boundaries of a nation through amalgamation of a neighbouring nation either by conquering or otherwise.

_____________________________________________________________