When the temporary leader of Afghanistan, Hamnid Karzai, looked to the developed nations to rebuild his country, he received pledges of around $4.5 billion.  The money is to come over the following few years with about $1.5 coming in 2002.  Most economists have called the restoration funds larger than expected.  But I find myself asking what exactly is expected?  Are developed countries really doing their fair share for a nation in which the vast majority of the population, are suffering hardship for a conflict in which they fall into a category of "innocent bystanders."  The United Nations in late December had released a "tentative estimate" of the estimated recovery costs in Afghanistan, a country which they noted has been engaged in war for the past 20 years.  Their estimate: $9 billion.

     Failing to do enough to support developing nations abroad, particularly those ravaged by war or diseases such as HIV, has been a common criticism lauded on the developing countries.  Rather than argue for or against this, I'd just like to bring some economic indices to your attention.  It's common to assess a country's development in measures other than income.  There are many reasons for this, the most common is that income doesn't necessary reflect a country's purchasing power.  Others argue against money for a range of moral reasons that could and do fill texts.  Money simply isn't feasible either.  According to the UN, of the 4.6 billion people living in developing countries, more than half live on less than $2 a day in income (PPP$).  Looking solely at income is weaker still because it doesn't even address the issue of whether or not development is desirable.  Perhaps one of the early economic scholars, Arthur Lewis, put it best in 1995 when he wrote an essay on whether economic growth was desirable when he noted that indeed "the advantage of economic growth is not that wealth increases happiness, but that it increases the range of human choice.  It is very hard to correlate wealth and happiness." 

      There are better ways of comparing a country's relative level of development.  It is much easier to argue that development is desirable when we talk of access to an education, to clean water, and to freedom from famine and disease.  The UN has formulated its own development indices, the most prominent of which is the HDP, or human development index which takes into account a range of educational factors, life expectancy, and more.  The index is extremely important for several reasons.  Mainly, it has helped to identify several troubling issues and can be useful in assessing any development activities such as foreign aid.  Perhaps the most disturbing trend which has become evident is that in many countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, where HIV and Aids are rampant, life expectancy has been falling over the past 20 years.  People in the region are expected to live on average to a little under 50 years of age.

     What is to be done for developing countries, especially those recovering like Afghanistan?  Indeed, some argue that increased aid is a strong first step.  There are dangers however.  Too much aid, can result in situations like we have seen in Argentina.  Some economists have argued that in developing countries some developed businesses have even "pushed" more loans on an economy.  The pace of economic development and growth is something that is constantly debated by economists.  How fast can an economy move to provide education to its huddled masses?  Others argue that the giant population growth rates in many (not all) developing countries exacerbates the problem, which it does.  Unfortunately, methods for controlling the increases have largely been unsuccessful.  Countries such as India, China, and Peru have instituted programs to control or limit population growth.  The downsides are enormous however.  China's one-child policy reaped criticism and finally failed due in part to its ability to raise infanticide rates.  Peru's policy, which the government claims was developed following US recommendations to control its population growth, has been criticized on the grounds that it's workers push women into becoming sterilized often despite low levels of health care and without providing information on the dangers.