Beyond Low and Middle Income Countries: What if There Were Five Clusters of Developing Countries?

Sergio Tezanos Vázquez, Andy Sumner
{"title":"Beyond Low and Middle Income Countries: What if There Were Five Clusters of Developing Countries?","authors":"Sergio Tezanos Vázquez,&nbsp;Andy Sumner","doi":"10.1111/j.2040-0209.2012.00404.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Many have challenged the use of income per capita as the primary proxy for development. This paper continues this tradition with a twist. The paper challenges the continuing use of income per capita to classify developing countries as low income or middle income now that most of the world's poor no longer live in low income countries (LICs) and ambiguity over the usefulness of the middle income country (MIC) classification given the diversity in the group of over 100 MICs. We use a cluster analysis to identify five types of developing countries using a set of indicators covering definitions of development based on the history of thinking about ‘development’ over the last 50 years from four conceptual frames: development as structural transformation; development as human development; development as democratic participation and good governance; and development as sustainability. We find that the cluster analysis produces five types of developing country using data for the period 2005–2010. Our development taxonomy differs notably from the usual income classification of GNI per capita (Atlas method) used to classify LICs and MICs. Notably many countries commonly labelled “emerging economies” are not in the two clusters related to emerging economies because they retain characteristics of poorer countries.</p>\n <p>We find that there is no simple “linear” representation of development levels (from low to high development countries). We find that each development cluster has its own and characteristic development issues. There is no group of countries with the best (or worst) indicators in all development dimensions. It thus would be more appropriate to build “complex” development taxonomies on a five-year basis than ranking and grouping countries in terms of per capita incomes, as this will offer a more nuanced image of the diversity of challenges of the developing world and policy responses appropriate to different kinds of countries.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100618,"journal":{"name":"IDS Working Papers","volume":"2012 404","pages":"1-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.2040-0209.2012.00404.x","citationCount":"36","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IDS Working Papers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2040-0209.2012.00404.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

Abstract

Many have challenged the use of income per capita as the primary proxy for development. This paper continues this tradition with a twist. The paper challenges the continuing use of income per capita to classify developing countries as low income or middle income now that most of the world's poor no longer live in low income countries (LICs) and ambiguity over the usefulness of the middle income country (MIC) classification given the diversity in the group of over 100 MICs. We use a cluster analysis to identify five types of developing countries using a set of indicators covering definitions of development based on the history of thinking about ‘development’ over the last 50 years from four conceptual frames: development as structural transformation; development as human development; development as democratic participation and good governance; and development as sustainability. We find that the cluster analysis produces five types of developing country using data for the period 2005–2010. Our development taxonomy differs notably from the usual income classification of GNI per capita (Atlas method) used to classify LICs and MICs. Notably many countries commonly labelled “emerging economies” are not in the two clusters related to emerging economies because they retain characteristics of poorer countries.

We find that there is no simple “linear” representation of development levels (from low to high development countries). We find that each development cluster has its own and characteristic development issues. There is no group of countries with the best (or worst) indicators in all development dimensions. It thus would be more appropriate to build “complex” development taxonomies on a five-year basis than ranking and grouping countries in terms of per capita incomes, as this will offer a more nuanced image of the diversity of challenges of the developing world and policy responses appropriate to different kinds of countries.

超越中低收入国家:如果有五个发展中国家集群会怎样?
许多国家质疑使用人均收入作为发展的主要指标。本文以一种不同的方式延续了这一传统。鉴于世界上大多数穷人不再生活在低收入国家(lic),本文对继续使用人均收入将发展中国家划分为低收入或中等收入国家提出了挑战,并且鉴于100多个中等收入国家的多样性,中等收入国家(MIC)分类的实用性存在模糊性。我们使用聚类分析来识别五种类型的发展中国家,使用了一套指标,这些指标涵盖了基于过去50年来对“发展”的思考历史的发展定义,从四个概念框架:发展作为结构转型;发展是人类的发展;发展是民主参与和善政;发展就是可持续性。我们发现聚类分析使用2005-2010年期间的数据产生了五种类型的发展中国家。我们的发展分类法与用于对低收入国家和中等收入国家进行分类的通常的人均国民总收入收入分类法(Atlas方法)明显不同。值得注意的是,许多通常被称为“新兴经济体”的国家并不在与新兴经济体相关的两个集群中,因为它们保留了较贫穷国家的特征。我们发现发展水平没有简单的“线性”表示(从低发展国家到高发展国家)。我们发现,每个发展集群都有自己的、有特色的发展问题。没有一组国家在所有发展方面的指标都是最好(或最差)的。因此,以五年为基础建立“复杂的”发展分类法比按人均收入对国家进行排名和分组更为合适,因为这将更细致地反映发展中世界挑战的多样性和适合不同类型国家的政策反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信