Dependent Development

1976 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 379-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Galal A. Amin
Keyword(s):  
International Economic ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Economic Order ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
The West ◽  
Dependent Development ◽  
Self Reliance ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Cost

The paper is a critique of the development philosophy underlying the United Nations Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order. The author examines its postulates, including the proposed goal and the strategy, and comes to the conclusion, on general grounds as well as on the basis of experience, that ‘underdeveloped’ (or ‘developing’, to use the current euphemism) countries would be accepting them at the cost of their autonomy and the real welfare of their peoples; they would be deflected from pursuing goals which, even if modest in comparison, are both realizable and in their best interests. Developing countries, the author argues, would be ill-advised to be lured into a race with the West (in the name of ‘eliminating the gap’) which, even if worthwhile, they will inevitably lose. He advocates the strategy of self-reliance, and the concomitant temporary detachment from the international economic system, so that the developing countries may freely decide their destiny and work it out with their own efforts.

scholarly journals New International Economic Order (NIEO): Origin, Elements and Criticisms

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 22
Author(s):  
Fesseha Mulu Gebremariam
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
International Economic ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
International Economic Order ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Economic Order ◽  
Poor Countries ◽  
Secondary Sources ◽  
The Cost ◽  
New System

Employing secondary sources of data this paper aims to assess the history, elements, and criticisms against New International Economic Order (NIEO). NIEO is mainly an economic movement happened after WWII with the aim of empowering developing countries politically through economic growth. It also criticizes the existing political and economic system as benefiting developed countries at the cost of developing countries so that a new system is needed that benefits poor countries. However, many criticize NIEO as hypothetical and unorganized movement. Clear division and disagreements among its members is evident. Developing countries failed to form unity, committed to meet the objectives of NIEO, and unable to compete in the market.

scholarly journals Business and Human Rights: The Evolving International Agenda

2007 ◽  
Vol 101 (4) ◽  
pp. 819-840 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Gerard Ruggie
Keyword(s):  
International Economic ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
International Economic Order ◽  
Transnational Corporations ◽  
Soviet Bloc ◽  
Industrialized Countries ◽  
Business And Human Rights

The state-based system of global governance has struggled for more than a generation to adjust to the expanding reach and growing influence of transnational corporations. The United Nations first attempted to establish binding international rules to govern the activities of transnationals in the 1970s. That endeavor was initiated by developing countries as part of a broader regulatory program with redistributive aims known as the New International Economic Order. Human rights did not feature in this initiative. The Soviet bloc supported it while most industrialized countries were opposed. Negotiations ground to a halt after more than a decade, though they were not formally abandoned until 1992.

On Giving Substance to Collective Self-Reliance

1983 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 310-316
Author(s):  
Tarlok Singh
Keyword(s):  
International Economic ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
International System ◽  
International Economic Order ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Military Alliances ◽  
Self Reliance ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
Oil Crisis

The central inspirations of non-alignment were political in nature. Nonaligned countries had sought to be independent of the great powers and of their military alliances and blocs. The concept of peaceful co-existence was designed to leave them free to pursue their own economic and social development. For many years, non-aligned countries thought of development primarily in national terms. Each country, acting alone, found itself in a condition of growing dependence on the richer countries. Therefore, it was natural that after the oil crisis of 1973 and the Declaration of the United Nations on the New International Economic Order, collective self-reliance should begin to be seen as the key element in the economic content of non-alignment. While non-aligned countries have continued to stress the dominance of politics above economics, they have increasingly acknowledged that their political goals will only be achieved to the extent economic aims are realized equally by individual countries, by groups of countries, and by all of them together. In this process, the distinction between the economic objectives of non-aligned countries and of “developing countries” in general has virtually disappeared and resolutions of the non-aligned countries have stressed their own role, not separately, but together with “other developing countries.” In considering ways of achieving greater collective self-reliance, therefore, the two combinations, described respectively as the Non-aligned Movement and the Group of 77, can be viewed as one, representing the deeply felt need of all less developed countries both for a more equitable international system and for greater economic and technical co-operation amongst themselves.

OPEC: Still an ‘Instrument of Change’?

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-352
Author(s):  
John Gault ◽  
Nordine Ait-Laoussine
Keyword(s):  
International Economic ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
International Economic Order ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
Leadership Role ◽  
Global Changes ◽  
60Th Anniversary ◽  
Oil Market ◽  
Market Management ◽  
20Th Anniversary

Abstract The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) marks its 60th anniversary in 2020. At the time of OPEC’s 20th anniversary in 1980, the organization could celebrate its role as an “instrument of change” that promoted not only members’ interests but also the interests of broad constituencies, including especially developing countries. OPEC and its members had demonstrated how to overcome the negative economic consequences of colonialism, and sought to extend their success to others through the New International Economic Order adopted by the United Nations in 1974. But from the late 1970s onward, the Organization became focused on internal issues of oil market management and, despite its noble expressions and intentions, was unable to bring about the global changes it sought. Today, on OPEC’s 60th anniversary, the central challenge is no longer how to overcome the colonial economic legacy. Instead, the organization has an opportunity to resume its leadership role by adopting policies that defend not only its own members but also broad constituencies—and especially developing countries—against the consequences of global warming. This article suggests how OPEC could rise to the occasion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document