Dima El Hassan

International development as a concept is mainly related to the level of development and the international scope. Originally, it was largely linked to economic development. Gradually, the concept changed to embrace a “holistic multi-disciplinary context of human development” in addition to the quality of life, subjective well-being and competitiveness.

Although international trade and relations have existed hundreds of years ago, international development as a concrete concept came into existence right after the World War II, especially when triggered by the U.S. President Harry Truman.

Truman announced in his inaugurate speech in 1949 that “we [American people] must embark on a bold new program for making the benefits of our scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas ... What we envisage is a program of development based on the concept of democratic dealing.”

And the era of development begun. A lot of agencies and organizations were formed and channeled toward that purpose. Nonetheless, many theorists see that this is all neo-colonial, whereby a rich country imposes its industrial and economic power on poorer countries. Others see it as a new form of Western cultural imperialism. Despite all that, the plan for development is being applied and has continued over time, recording improvements and on many levels, regardless of its disguised drive.

Progress can be seen in many aspects. According to “Our World in data,” the poverty level, for instance, dropped from 75 percent in the ’50s to below 10 percent by 2015. Illiteracy rate that was 82 percent in 1950 fell to 21 percent in 2014. Child mortality dropped from 41 percent in 1950 to 4.3 percent in 2015.

However, we still have poverty, illiteracy, insecurity and health problems, along with other issues accompanying the process of globalization. In addition, the economic and social divide between countries is now vastly enlarged. Aid alone is not a solution.

Development in the 21st century is becoming more and more complex and development issues do not concern one country or one region solely but rather the whole globe, from climate change to food security to armed conflicts. However, what works in one place or situation may not work in another.

Aid as a common recipe cannot be static anymore. It may be doing more harm than good for it’s not solving the issue but instead postponing it and this is aggravating the situation as it spills on new problems along the way.

Many development issues are now at the “edge of chaos,” which is between causal relations and complete disorder.

“Aid on the edge of chaos,” a book on science and international development (2003), written by expert Ben Ramalingam provides fresh ideas about the world of development, putting into questions the ineffective “ready-made” approaches to development. It emphasizes the need to reconsider the way foreign aid is being directed and put an eye on how it should be regarded, analyzed and thus provided.

A lot of criticism was raised, just like Ramalingam’s, on the effectiveness of international aid. They are right and the debate is certain to continue. But in spite of all the abuses and ineffectiveness, development assistance remains a key policy instrument in international relationships.

There is certainly a need for improvement whenever the deficiencies to be corrected are well-known, but what’s more important within the now chaotic world of development, is to reform aid policies rather than oppose or undercut them.

In this regard, no one can stop the chaos in aid and development within the recipient country except for the country itself. And for this to happen, the best thing to do is to have one strategy that is clear, holistic and integrated within the governing system so that international aid is based on it and channeled to feed its purpose.