No silver bullet in international development

• Author: Fabio Daneri
• Position: University of New York Tirana
• Pages: 32-34

Vol. 2 No. 2

July 2016

Academic Journal of Business, Administration, Law and Social Sciences

IIPCCL Publishing, Tirana-Albania

ISSN 2410-3918

Acces online at www.iipccl.org

32

No silver bullet in international development

Fabio Daneri

University of New York Tirana

Abstract

Development econom ics has started to propose solutions to the problem of development

in underdeveloped countries since the 17th century. Over time, various solutions have been

proposedbymanydierentdevelopmentresearchers and economists Most of these solu-

tionshavethecommoncharacteristicoflookingforasocalledsilverbullettotheproblem

of development, that is to say a single solution to be applied to all underdeveloped countries,

which over time might be freedom, foreign aid, good governance or other single approach.

The purpose of this paper is to argue that, being development generally intended as a sort of

“adequate level of production of goods and services by public and private subjects in a given

countrythesolution tothe problemof developmentcannotbeasingleonegiventhatthe

basic theory of production in economics in based on 4 factors of production (entrepreneurship,

labor, capital and land), so that the level and quality of these 4 factors and all the sub-factors

inuencingthemsuchastheclimateinthecaseoflandorthecultureinthecaseofentrepre-

neurship) will be the real responsible for the development process in a country.

Keywords: International development, development economics, factors of production, for-

eign aid, freedom.

Introduction

The search for a solution to the problem of underdevelopment continues as usual,

probably with even more aention from the public opinion If the rst theories

concerning development economics can be traced back to 17th century, with the

emergingtheories of mercantilismthesubjecthas continued to aracttheinterest

of academics and researchers, up to today’s theories on neoclassical economics and

Amartya Sen’s works on development issues.

Recently, the academic debate has acquired an even higher public relevance. The

United Nations have started to draw peoples aention through the Sustainable

Development Goals and the general debate on developing countries. Star professors

such as Jerey Sachs and William Easterly have published books mainly aimed

at the general public, such as “The end of poverty: economic possibilities for our

timeby Jerey Sachs and The elusive quest for growth economistsadventures

andmisadventuresintheTropicsbyWilliamEasterlyThepublicdebatehasbeen

additionallyenhancedbytheinvolvementinthedevelopmenteldofnewimportant

and emerging philanthropists, such as for example Bill Gates, with the activities

implemented through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which has called the

aentionofbothdonorsandmediaduetothepublicpositionheldbyMrBillGates

and his wife, Melinda.

What do these approaches have in common? Is there any tendency that we may

consider as relevant in the recent debate?

Actually, there is one point that is of great relevance, especially in recent approaches

for the underdevelopment problem, but that have some common characteristics