El desarrollo más allá de lo instrumental

Artículo de opinión por: David Ricardo Murcia* (dmurcias@gmail.com) 

Estudiante de Ciencias Políticas, Universidad EAFIT, Colombia

Desarrollo en sí es un concepto que denota instrumentalidad, pues representa un vector: en principio se utilizó en la biología para designar el proceso durante el cual un ser vivo nace, se reproduce y muere. Después el concepto fue tomado por las diferentes ciencias, incluso las sociales (allí en especial después en especial con la Ilustración) donde significó el proceso de evolución de la esencia de una persona, si lo miramos desde una perspectiva teológica o psicológica, o refiriéndose al proceso de organización y mejora de la estructura social de una agrupación sin importar su tamaño, para antropólogos, sociólogos o economistas. 

Sin embargo, en esta trasferencia metafórica-analógica de significado (lo primero, en la comparación del desarrollo de una ser viviente con el desarrollo de cualquiera otra cosa y lo segundo, al utilizarlo en muchas ciencia de manera similar a como en su nicho original) el contexto y la especificidad de lo connotado adolece de obscuridad y polémica. Lo primero es explicado por Chaïm Perelman: algunos conceptos (se puede especificar los conceptos sociales o políticos) son útiles en tanto carecen de una textura definitiva, id est: los concepto sociales no poseen un significado eterno desde el momento en que se postulan, sino que continuamente van cambiando según los cambios correlativos de la estructura social a la que son serviles (Cfr. Perelman, 1958). Por otro, lado Galie sostiene que existen ciertos conceptos que en sí mismos no puede llegar a ser definidos inequívocamente, pues en todo momento en que una definición pretensora intenta imponerse se encuentra con muchas otras que se lo impiden, pues todas tiene igual validez ya que cada una defiende una postura social diferente, el caso tal vez más claro del filósofo inglés sea el de la lucha entre las órdenes católicas por la definición de vida cristiana (Galie, 1998).

Se puede entonces decir que desarrollo, en tanto concepto social, cumple con estas dos características, pues como José Medina Echavarría indica (Vid. Medina, 1976) los diferentes pueblos a lo largo del tiempo van definiendo su propio interés o dirección de desarrollo, como ya habíamos mencionado el concepto implica vector, aunque en ocasiones la mayoría de las intenciones de desarrollo local o regional se vean sepultadas por la hegemonía de los proyectos de actores más poderosos. Pero lo anterior no nos puede llevar a descalificar moralmente a las posturas que han conseguido triunfar, se puede pensar que la hegemonía es resultado de diferentes procesos históricos y se debe recordar que la historia nos demuestra que estas son finitas y mutables, en lo cual Medina concordaría (Vid. Medina, 1976).

Lo importante, y a lo que esta columna quiere llegar, es a la importancia de saber que al hablar de desarrollo se tiene que tener la conciencia de sobre qué tipo de desarrollo se versa: en ello se implica el reconocimiento de haber apostado por una concepción que se ve respaldada por un contexto social y humano mucho más complejo que lo que se diga que es el punto de llegada del proceso de desarrollo. Pues de lo contrario podríamos caer en el error de pensar que desarrollo es mera técnica de ingeniería social y no un compromiso con una concepción espiritual del mundo; ya que nos desarrollamos hacia lo que creemos que es deseable.

Bibliografía

Perelman, CH y Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1989). Tratado de la argumentación. La nueva retórica. (J. Sevilla Muños). Madird, España: Gredos. (El trabajo original fue publicado en 1958).

Gallie, W. B. (1998). Conceptos esencialmente impugnados. (G. Ortiz Milán, Trad.). México D. F., México: Universidad Autónoma de México. (El trabajo original fue publicado en 1965-1966).

Medina, E. (1976). Latin America in the possible scenarios of Détente. CEPAL REVIEW, second half of 1976, 9-92.

Latin America’s paradox: Development

Opinion Article by: Estefanía Tirado* (etirado2@eafit.edu.co)
*Economics and International Business Student at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia.


For the last couple of decades the world has seen Latin American economies, such as Mexico, Chile, Brazil, Panama and Costa Rica, emerge not only trough a major involvement in global trade, but also in the establishment of a national industry, what under a superficial judgment would be considered as an increase on the entire population’s welfare. 

Despite the rapid economic growth, about 80 million people are still living in extreme poverty - half of them in Brazil and Mexico - while a further 40% are at risk of returning to poverty in the event of an economic crisis or because of the effects of climate change in the region (World Bank, 2013). Taking this into account, there is clear evidence that development has not been inclusive and there is a huge portion of the population that does not perceive the benefits of the modern and global economy. 

One of the main causes of this trend of exclusive development has been the extremely low rate of capital accumulation and productivity that has characterized most of the countries in the region. The low rate of accumulation is explained by the misallocation of the resources gained by the growth countries have had until now. There has been a huge portion of these gains directed to consumption, what has made productivity to suffer, employment to decline, and moreover has not strengthened the industrial capacity of the economies. 

In order to recover the rate of capital accumulation and therefore generate a future economic growth that would actually benefit a large portion of society, as more jobs and technology would be available, it is necessary to reduce the rate of consumption, and although making this reduction is the most feasible solution, as it involves no debt, carrying it out has huge social and political challenges. In a context of such a great level of inequality it would be very hard to determine which social groups will have to participate more intensely, and as in Latin American democracies private interests have great influence on political decisions, and applying the policy to the most marginalized portion of society would elevate even more the difference in life quality, there is a conflict of interests goverments have to face and overcome by thinking what would generate the most welfare for the entire society. 

To sum up, it is time for Latin American countries to start thinking about the future and tackle long-term challenges to overcome the paradox and make development a positive process for the entire population. 

References

World Bank (2013). Cae la desigualdad en América Latina, aunque persisten desafíos para lograr una prosperidad compartida. Available online at:  http://www.bancomundial.org/es/news/feature/2013/06/14/latin-america-inequality-shared-prosperity

Prebisch, Raul(1981). Raul Prebisch on Latin American Development. Available online at:http://www.jstor.org/stable/1972587 .

International Institutions in a structural crisis

Opinion article by: Carolina Herrera Cano* (caroherca@gmail.com)
International Business student at Universidad EAFIT

The development concept is one that has drastically changed through the years, different social movements and regulations have shaped its meaning and the way in which governments act in its favor. Raúl Prebisch, founder Secretary General to the UNCTAD defined a structural crisis the global economy was facing in 1981 as a result from the accelerated growth in production that created inequality, poverty, and pollution (Prebisch, 1981). The political and economic scenario has changed since the Cold War period, as the bipolar balance of power was reconsidered, but even if some of the development dynamics remain: the disadvantaged conditions of developing countries (what he calls periphery), and its contrast with the levels of consumption in developed nations suggests the existence of a structural crisis, the emergence of some international actors that are modifying how the global system functions is undeniable.

The context of the 2008 Great Recession is an evidence of this structural problem, the market imperfections that created the financial and economic crisis were described by Prebisch about twenty years before the depression: “Two centuries of belief in the regulatory virtues of the forces of the market have caused us to lose sight of the ethics of development...” (Prebisch, 1981, 568). But as it was mentioned before, there are some actors that have become more important no matter the system stagnation. This is the case of the international institutions that respond to the need of collective decision construction at the national and international levels, also proposed by Raúl Prebisch (Prebisch, 1981).

The emergence of international organisms has created an institutional framework legitimated by different countries because of its capacity for action. The role of the WTO (founded in 1995) is an evidence of this trend, in its Report of the Panel on Defining the Future of Trade convened by Pascal Lamy, Director-General, it is highlighted “the role of trade in contributing to sustainable development, growth, jobs and poverty alleviation”(WTO, 2013). And it also agrees with Prebisch’s proposal: “the challenge is to construct coherent national and international policy frameworks that deliver inclusive growth” (Prebisch, 1981).

At a national level, Colombian government has lately organized its development agenda in an international basis. Last month the OECD Council accepted the roadmap for the accession of Colombia to the OECD Convention; this organism promotes good practices towards a better society, and has evaluated Colombia in areas of health, education, environment, trade, investment and fight against corruption (Correa C, 2013). This is a great possibility for Colombia to be part of those international actors that seek a better global system. Despite the criticism about the actual effectiveness of these organisms, it is important to highlight the increasing power they are gaining in the global context, the gap between developed and developing countries is truly a structural problem, but a joint development agenda is an effort to increase possibilities for the least developed nations.

References

Correa C, J. (2013). En un mes comienza la adhesión de Colombia a Ocde. Available in: http://www.portafolio.co/economia/adhesion-colombia-la-ocde. [October 10th, 2013].

Presbisch, R. (1981). Raúl Presbisch on Latin American development. On Population and Development Review, 7, 3, 563-568.

World Trade Organization. (2013). The future of trade: The Challenges of Convergence, Report of the Panel on Defining the Future of Trade. Geneva: OMC.

Taking challenges: Absorbing economic benefits derived from trade and raising living standards.

Opinion article by: Catalina Tamayo Posada*(catalinatamayop1@gmail.com)
Economics student at EAFIT University, Medellin-Colombia.

The world, as it is today, is constantly changing in a scarcely imaginable way. New countries are economically emerging and they are changing all the structure of power in the world. An increase in the economical field should suppose an increase in the living standards of the societies. But, as some would argue, it has not been possible because of trade. But, is it?

Trade is a powerful weapon which can be extremely useful for a nation or it can actually destroy it. On the one hand, trade is a main factor in the search of new technologies; this is because companies do not want to be left behind and as a consequence they can increase their productivity. It can also be seen as an opportunity to specialize on what the country is good at, making it competitive in international markets. Adam Smith, the father of the economy, to this concern stated that “If a foreign country can supply us with a commodity cheaper than we ourselves can make it, better buy it of them with some part of the produce of our own industry employed in a way in which we have some advantage”(1776).

But, on the other hand, trade is growing and so is inequality. Most of the people are likely to blame trade for this problem, although trade is not the most important fact. “In general, technological change is found to be an important driver of inequality. It is also the case of other aspects of globalization like migration, FDI and other international capital flows contribute to increased inequality” (WTO, 2013:13).

Furthermore, trade must be followed by exceptionally well-design and coherent policies that lead towards sustainable development. Not to mention the need of a proper administration, free of corruption and focused on growing the living standards; the obligation to reinforce the institutions so that they can optimize all kinds of resources, economic and human resources, in order to make a more efficient and adequate distribution of the incomes resulting in the decrease of unemployment rates and therefore reducing the inequality. From a wider perspective, all of these effects, for the country, could be translated in economic growth, competitiveness, increases in FDI and sustainable development.

However, “Poor countries will usually need to create a range of other conditions before they can benefit from trade. Even the best conceivable trade policies aimed at reaping the benefits from trade are likely to be ineffective if unaccompanied by productive capacity and adequate infrastructure”. (The future of Trade, 2013:12). This means that it takes a huge effort to try to move forward and it also shows us that trade and investment go together and rely on each other.

Briefly, several challenges must be taken in order to truly get the benefits from trade and therefore eradicate poverty and raise living standards of the societies. This has been proved by the emerging economies.

References:

Smith, Adam. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Retrieved October 5, 2013 from the World Wide Web: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN13.html

World Trade Organization (WTO). (2013). The Future of Trade: The Challenges of Convergence. Report of the Panel on Defining the Future of Trade.

Colombia: Los beneficios del comercio y su influencia en el desarrollo

Artículo de Opinión por Juan Gonzalo Perez* (jperezg@eafit.edu.co)
* Estudiante de Negocios Internacionales, Universidad EAFIT, Medellín, Colombia

En las últimas dos décadas Colombia ha orientado su política comercial en la firma de tratados de libre comercio (TLCs) buscando incrementar los intercambios comerciales para fomentar el crecimiento económico y el desarrollo del país. En la actualidad Colombia tiene acceso a mercados en más de 30 países y ha firmado alrededor de 10 tratados de libre comercio incluyendo con Estados Unidos, la Unión Europea y Corea del Sur, sin embargo, ¿Cuáles son los beneficios del incremento en el comercio y como este influye en el desarrollo del país?

De acuerdo con el reporte “El futuro del comercio: los retos de la convergencia”, presentado por Pascal Lamy, Ex Director de la Organización Mundial del Comercio (OMC), el comercio es parte de un círculo virtuoso de crecimiento y mejoramiento de oportunidades. La apertura de mercados permite que los consumidores tengan más acceso a productos y servicios a mejores precios. Así mismo, la importación de productos promueve la innovación de las empresas nacionales y exige el mejoramiento de las instituciones y las regulaciones del país (OMC, 2013).

Con base en estadísticas del 2008 al 2012 del DANE, los intercambios comerciales en Colombia se han incrementado de forma significativa. Las importaciones han crecido en un 67% mientras las exportaciones corresponden a un 62%. Los beneficios del crecimiento en el comercio se logran percibir desde el punto de vista del consumidor de clase media y alta, ya que puede acceder a una gran variedad de productos y servicios a precios más asequibles. El problema se presenta en que los productores nacionales en su mayoría no son competitivos en mercados internacionales, esto debido a la falta de innovación, regulaciones para proteger sus industrias frente a productos importados, apoyo institucional, y creación de valor agregado. Con base en lo anterior, es preciso decir que los beneficios del crecimiento del comercio no se están viendo reflejados en el mejoramiento de la industria pero parece ser que ha fomentado el desarrollo del país (DANE, 2013).

Según el reporte presentado por la OMC, ninguna nación se ha desarrollado y crecido sin los beneficios del comercio ya que son muchos los factores que determinan cuando y como el comercio puede tener los efectos beneficiosos. Además, los beneficios del comercio dependen del estado de desarrollo de los países. (OMC, 2013) Colombia es considerado un país en desarrollo, su ingreso per cápita, según base en cifras del DANE 2013, es de $6´151,668 pesos anuales, lo que equivale a un ingreso mensual de $512,539 pesos. Igualmente, la economía del país se considera estable con un crecimiento promedio, según Banco de la Republica, del 4,9% en los últimos tres años.

Por consiguiente, se podría considerar que Colombia puede aprovechar el intercambio comercio para acelerar su crecimiento, ya que se extiende el mercado de productos locales como también asegura mejores prácticas de producción y oportunidades de consumo (OMC, 2013).

En resumidas cuentas el reto está en que el país debe alinear los recursos y las actividades con las fortalezas relativas y comenzar a exportar con base en la especialización en sectores. Ahora, según la OMC, para que Colombia pueda beneficiarse verdaderamente del comercio debe buscar apoyo externo para la construcción de capacidad productiva, infraestructura y desarrollo de políticas e instituciones incluyendo sistemas sociales que permitan la inclusión y la redistribución de la riqueza.

Referencias:

World Trade Organization (2013). The future of trade: The Challenges of Convergence, Report of the Panel on Defining the Future of Trade. Ginebra: OMC.

DANE (2013). Anexos estadísticos Colombia. Bogotá: DANE.

Bando de la República (2013). Informe de la Junta Directiva al Congreso de la República. Bogotá.

The impact of trade on development

Opinion article by: Manuela Ramírez Cárdenas (mramir67@eafit.edu.co) *
International Business and Political Science Student at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia

After the Director-General of the WTO, Pascal Lamy, suggested at the organization’s 8th Ministerial Conference in 2011 the importance of the discussion of the world economy and trade related issues by the WTO and members of the multilateral trade system, the Panel on Defining the Future of Trade was created in 2012.

The panel met officially three times and held several meeting with different stakeholders to discuss issues such as the transformations of the world economy, the challenges of global trade opening during the 21st century, trade patterns, the current and future drivers of trade, and how trade can contribute to economic growth, sustainable development, poverty relief and job creation. The report of the panel titled The Future of Trade: The Challenges of Convergence was published earlier in 2013..

There are several aspects that are important to highlight about this report. The first one is that trade is without a doubt a positive practice that if implemented well can lead to growth, sustainable development, cooperation among states, and can have a direct positive impact on civil society. However, there is also the indisputable fact that some developing countries, since the opening of trade, have been negatively impacted and the gap of inequality between the rich and the poor grows wider every day.

The root of that problem is not trade itself; it is the fact that some developing countries lack certain conditions that are fundamental if a country wants to take advantage of the benefits of trade, among them: infrastructure, an educated population that can adapt to the changes and needs of the labor market, access to electricity, etc. Also, these countries face several local challenges, the first being that in most cases the local economy and industry is often precarious, and when faced with competitors that have a strong economic and productive system, then the outcome will unsurprisingly be negative. Additionally, some of these countries are plagued by corruption and governments that apply short-term policies that won´t be efficient in the long-term.

In the global scenario of open trade, the actions of governments become fundamental for a country that seeks to take advantage of the benefits offered by the multilateral trade system. Governments must create long term policies (perhaps adapt strategies that have been successful for other countries) that will allow them to create capacity building, educational opportunities, job creation, infrastructure, but most importantly they must implement policies that will allow them to develop locally first, so they can eventually become competitive in the global market and hopefully alleviate poverty and improve the living standards of the civil society.

Reference:

World Trade Organization. (2013). The Future of Trade: The Challenges of Convergence. Report of the Panel on Defining the Future of Trade.

Preferential Trade Agreements: Benefits and Risks

Opinion article by: Manuela Ramírez Cardenas* (mramir67@eafit.edu.co)
International Business and Political Sciences student at Universidad EAFIT, Colombia

The World Trade Organization’s report on the Future ofTrade (2013)  states that one of the dominant policy trends regarding that issue is the rising number of preferential trade agreements (PTAs). A PTA is an agreement between two or more countries, where they pact to reduce tariffs on specific goods during trade with one another. As stated in the report, there are currently an estimated 300 PTAs in operation, while several others are in negotiation; almost half of them are cross regional, two thirds are between developing and developed countries, and half of them are bilateral.

According to the WTO, preferential trade agreements offer several advantages that benefit not only their signatories but also other countries by the promotion of growth. PTA’s also facilitate a deeper integration at a multilateral level, are often more time efficient, and can reach consensus more easily between countries, a process that is otherwise difficult and time consuming at the WTO.

Not only that, but PTAs can have a positive impact in a country not purely in an economic sense. Other aspects of civil life can also benefit from them, ranging from issues such as the regulation of the environment to the protection of the labor force, for example: Professor Emilie M. Hafner-Burton, PhD, found that the commitment to PTA’s with hard human rights standards could effectively help reduce government repression and lead to better practices, as a state that participates in this type of agreement must comply with some basic international human rights principles.

Although the increasing number of PTAs is a trend that probably won’t slow down in the upcoming years, and that the benefits of this type of agreements cannot be denied, it is important to understand that there are risks inherent to them. According to the report, PTAs can have a negative impact as they might increase trade costs, lead to the segmentation of the economy due to regulatory divergence, they can be exclusionary as they might ignore smaller countries in a discriminatory way, they could fracture trade relations and ultimately they could corrupt the non-discriminating principle that is a core principle of the WTO.

To actually take advantage of the possible benefits of PTAs, the WTO recommends their members to engage in the exploration and ways of consolidation of PTAs within a multilateral trading system. By consolidating PTAS within the multilateral trading system, it is possible to regulate these types of agreements, mitigate the risks inherent to them and prevent the use of discriminatory practices regarding the exercise of trade.

References

World Trade Organization. (2013). The Future of Trade: The Challenges of Convergence. Report of the Panelon Defining the Future of Trade.

Hafner-Burton, Emilie M. (2005). Trading Human Rights: How Preferential Trade Agreements Influence Government Repression. Cambridge University Press on behalf of the International Organization Foundation, 59 (3), 593-629.