Globalisation:International Policy Network: Views on development

Return to Globalisation:International Policy Network

Views on development

IPN produced the statement “that free enterprise and its supporting institutions ... are able to harness human potential better ... and are the best way to address the poverty and tragedy faced by many people in the world". We believe this because it is true. Those places that provide an institutional and cultural environment conducive to free enterprise, from Botswana to South Korea, have experienced more rapid economic development and more rapid improvements in health than those countries, from the Democratic Republic of Congo to North Korea, that have an institutional and cultural environment not conducive to free enterprise. Merely asserting that individuals have a "right" to health is no substitute for providing an environment in which people at all levels of society have the opportunity and incentive to generate wealth, improve their health, and develop new technologies that improve the health of others” This provides one of their key views on development, that free enterprise and free trade is key.

Strategies

The IPN use terms such as “pro-growth policies” and “streamlined system of investment” when discussing the benefits of free trade, particularly in developing countries. Being widely regarded as anti-climate change, the IPN promotes the idea of complete free trade, allowing maximum investment in order to fully promote development. Their website lists several of the benefits, although none of the problems, that large-scale investment could bring to certain countries, in this case Nigeria: “ The World Bank reports that it currently takes over a month to satisfy the eight procedures in order to start a business at a cost of three quarters of a year’s average wages. In the new free trade zone this procedure is expected to take less than a week.” From their website, it can be seen that IPN’s future development projects are mainly focused on Africa’s developing nations. Nigeria and Zimbabwe are both mentioned, with trade plans being discussed. One article in particular calls for Britain to stop giving aid that it can “ill afford” and abolish trade policies, allowing Africa access to the European markets. Timothy Cox states that “A real offer from the British people to help our development would consist of the abolition of the Common Agricultural Policy, which keeps African agricultural exports out of the European marketplace.” One of the major ideas for development that IPN has, is the use of Genetically modified crops, particularly in developing countries. IPN published an article on their website highlighting the benefits of such crops with a slightly patronising tone against those who object to these crops. “Genetically modified crops mean higher crop yields, lower costs, cheaper food and reduced chemical use, according to the US National Research Council. Trust some to ignore all that and focus on the finding that some weeds and insects have become resistant to GM crops. Proof that “Mother Nature” is smarter? Not really – proof that we need to lift the huge restrictions on the use of GM technology, allow farmers and consumers around the world to benefit and give companies an incentive to develop newer and better strains” In one of Morris’ articles, he attacks George Osbournes plan to increase ODA (official development assistance) sent overseas each year as much of it ends up in the hands of corrupt officials. Morris implies that, much like welfare payments, this should be lowered so that developing countries learn to look after themselves. He jokes that ODA should be stopped altogether as it “would concentrate the minds of the political elite in poor countries”