Explain why it is difficult to measure development. (10 marks)

Due to the complexities of the world it is very difficult to measure development. When measuring development you have to take into account many different factors that contribute to the shape and formation of a country e.g. social, political, environment and economic factors. However, human and economic development indicators are typically used to measure development therefore, can perhaps give a very limited insight into the overall development of a country or state. Social and economic indicators, such as income per capita, can be used to measure development. They can provide categories to measure and scale varying levels of ‘development’ making it easier to compare on an international landscape. However, these indicators are limited. For example, typically subsistence farming generates no money hence, it is not contributed towards the ‘income per capita’. This is the same scenario for the informal sector as it declares no economic profit. Nevertheless, approximately 40% of Kenya’s population rely on subsistence farming and 10million people were employed in the informal sector in 2012. Hence, their income per capita seems diversely low compared to other countries but it may not be an accurate portrayal due to missing out potential incomes of some form. Furthermore, economic indicators generally only highlight what a country produces and pays for on a whole; nevertheless, it does not take into account environmental and social costs of such produce, who gains the money and what they spend it on. For example, the US is often accounted as one of the highest ‘income per capita’ nations nevertheless, in 2010 the USA had a CO2 emissions per capita of 17.6 metric tons in comparison to Kenya’s 0.3metric tons per capita in the same year. Hence, one can argue that although economic indicators highlight important trends within a country e.g. how stable and progressive their economic is however, these indicators can perhaps shadow and cloud other important trends which contribute to a country’s development. For instance, it is difficult to argue that the USA is a ‘developed country’ when their sustainable future is evidently under threat.

Moreover, these indicators are a ‘western approach’ to measuring development; generally assume there is one pathway to development and dismiss other possible methods. We cannot argue that one ‘development indicator’ can suffice; it is unable to accurately portray the development of a country. For example, a country may have very high income per capita however, the Purchasing Power Parity may suggest that their incomes do not allow them to afford the cost of living in the local area. For instance, China’s income per capita is commonly regarded as ‘average’ however, it is ranked 86 on the global PPP rank suggesting that although incomes per capita are moderately good, the population are still not economically able to afford the cost of living. On the other hand, the multiple composite indices such as HDI typically portray a more accurate and helpful insight to a country’s development as they identify a variety of factors to give a score. Nonetheless, social development generally lags behind economic development therefore, it can be unjust to compare countries, especially LEDCs, using indicators that again are not a realistic portrayal of the country. Development is individual for each country and the ‘goals and means’ of development can be very diverse; in order for a country to reach their overall ‘goal’ of development e.g. social equality and harmony, there are undergoing ‘means of development’ such as trying to increase income per capita in order to raise standard of living within a country. Therefore, measuring ‘development’ is a very complex and challenging task as it involves categorising and simplifying something very multifaceted. Therefore, one must be very cautious when handling data about development as it cannot always provide an accurate portrayal of a country.