Hubbry Logo
Developing countryDeveloping countryMain
Open search
Developing country
Community hub
Developing country
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Developing country
Developing country
Developing country
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

  Advanced/developed markets by the IMF
  Emerging/developing markets by the IMF
  Least developed countries by the UN
  Data unavailable

The latest classifications sorted by the IMF[1] and the UN[2]
World map
World map representing Human Development Index categories (based on 2023 data, published in 2025)
  •   Very high
  •   High
  •   Medium
  •   Low
  •   No data

A developing country is a country with a less-developed industrial base and a lower Human Development Index (HDI) relative to developed countries.[3] However, this definition is not universally agreed upon. There is also no clear agreement on which countries fit this category.[4][5] The terms low-and middle-income country (LMIC) and newly emerging economy (NEE) are often used interchangeably but they refer only to the economy of the countries. The World Bank classifies the world's economies into four groups, based on gross national income per capita: high-, upper-middle-, lower-middle-, and low-income countries. Least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, and small island developing states are all sub-groupings of developing countries. Countries on the other end of the spectrum are usually referred to as high-income countries or developed countries.

There are controversies over the terms' use, as some feel that it perpetuates an outdated concept of "us" and "them".[6] In 2015, the World Bank declared that the "developing/developed world categorization" had become less relevant and that they would phase out the use of that descriptor. Instead, their reports will present data aggregations for regions and income groups.[5][7] The term "Global South" is used by some as an alternative term to developing countries.

Developing countries tend to have some characteristics in common, often due to their histories or geographies. These are the characteristics captured by the data and definitions of the World Bank and the United Nations. On the other hand, the IMF classification focuses solely on financial integration and stability and not on the overall level of social and economic development of a country. It is also reflected by the IMF terminology that uses markets/economies and not countries. Moreover, the adoption of the Euro has earned several European countries an immediate upgrade by IMF to being a developed economy (a standard partice by the IMF) based on the larger financial integration without considering any other factors of economic or social development.

Among other characteristics, developing or low and medium income countries (as defined by the World Bank) commonly have lower levels of access to safe drinking water, sanitation and hygiene, energy poverty, higher levels of pollution (e.g. , air pollution, littering, water pollution, open defecation); higher proportions of people with tropical and infectious diseases (neglected tropical diseases); more road traffic accidents; and generally poorer quality infrastructure.

In addition, there are often high unemployment rates, widespread poverty, widespread hunger, extreme poverty, child labour, malnutrition, homelessness, substance abuse, prostitution, overpopulation, civil disorder, human capital flight, a large informal economy, high crime rates (extortion, robbery, burglary, murder, homicide, arms trafficking, sex trafficking, drug trafficking, kidnapping, rape), low education levels, economic inequality, school desertion, inadequate access to family planning services, teenage pregnancy, many informal settlements and slums, corruption at all government levels, and political instability. Unlike developed countries, developing countries lack the rule of law.

Access to healthcare is often low.[8] People in developing countries usually have lower life expectancies than people in developed countries, reflecting both lower income levels and poorer public health.[9][10][11] The burden of infectious diseases,[12] maternal mortality,[13][14] child mortality[15] and infant mortality[16][17] are typically substantially higher in those countries. The effects of climate change are expected to affect developing countries more than high-income countries, as most of them have a high climate vulnerability or low climate resilience.[18] Phrases such as "resource-limited setting" or "low-resource setting" are often used when referring to healthcare in developing countries.[19][20]

Developing countries often have lower median ages than developed countries. Population aging is a global phenomenon, but population age has risen more slowly in developing countries.[21]

Development aid or development cooperation is financial aid given by foreign governments and other agencies to support developing countries' economic, environmental, social, and political development. If the Sustainable Development Goals which were set up by United Nations for the year 2030 are achieved, they would overcome many problems.

Terms used to classify countries

[edit]

There are several terms used to classify countries into rough levels of development.[22] Classification of any given country differs across sources, and sometimes, these classifications or the specific terminology used is considered disparaging.

By income groups

[edit]
A map of World Bank high-income economies in 2023

The World Bank classifies the world's economies into four groups, based on gross national income per capita calculated using the Atlas method, re-set each year on 1 July:[23]

The three groups that are not "high income" are together referred to as "low and middle income countries" (LMICs). For example, for the 2022 fiscal year, a low income country is defined as one with a GNI per capita less than 1,045 in current US$; a lower middle-income country is one with GNI per capita between 1,046 and 4,095 in current US$; an upper middle-income country is one with GNI per capita between 4,096 and 12,695 in current US$, and a high income country is one with GNI per capita of more than 12,696 in current US$.[24] Historical thresholds are documented.

By markets and economic growth

[edit]

The use of the term "market" instead of "country" usually indicates a specific focus on the characteristics of the countries' financial support system as opposed to the overall economy.

Under other criteria, some countries are at an intermediate stage of development, or, as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) put it, following the fall of the Soviet Union, "countries in transition": all those of Central and Eastern Europe (including Central European countries that still belonged to the "Eastern Europe Group" in the UN institutions); the former Soviet Union (USSR) countries in Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan); and Mongolia. By 2009, the IMF's World Economic Outlook classified countries as advanced, emerging, or developing, depending on "(1) per capita income level, (2) export diversification—so oil exporters that have high per capita GDP would not make the advanced classification because around 70% of its exports are oil, and (3) degree of integration into the global financial system".[29]

By geography

[edit]

Developing countries can also be categorized by geography:

By other parameters

[edit]
  • Heavily indebted poor countries, a definition by a program of the IMF and World Bank
  • Transition economy, moving from a centrally planned to market-driven economy
  • Multi-dimensional clustering system: with the understanding that different countries have different development priorities and levels of access to resources and institutional capacities[30] and to offer a more nuanced understanding of developing countries and their characteristics, scholars have categorized them into five distinct groups based on factors such as levels of poverty and inequality, productivity and innovation, political constraints and dependence on external flows.[31][32]

By self declaration

[edit]

In general, the WTO accepts any country's claim of itself being "developing." Certain countries that have become "developed" in the last 20 years by almost all economic metrics, still insist to be classified as "developing country," as it entitles them to a preferential treatment at the WTO, countries such as Brunei, Hong Kong, Kuwait, Macao, Qatar, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates have been cited and criticized for this self-declared status.[33]

Measure and concept of development

[edit]
  Least developed economies according to ECOSOC
  Least developed economies out of scope of the ECOSOC
  Graduated to developing economy

[when?][citation needed]
GDP (PPP) per capita in 2024
  •   >$60,000
  •   $50,000 – $60,000
  •   $40,000 – $50,000
  •   $30,000 – $40,000
  •   $20,000 – $30,000
  •   $10,000 – $20,000
  •   $5,000 – $10,000
  •   $2,500 – $5,000
  •   $1,000 – $2,500
  •   <$1,000
  •   No data

Development can be measured by economic or human factors. Developing countries are, in general, countries that have not achieved a significant degree of industrialization relative to their populations, and have, in most cases, a medium to low standard of living. There is an association between low income and high population growth.[34] The development of a country is measured with statistical indices such as income per capita (per person), gross domestic product per capita, life expectancy, the rate of literacy, freedom index and others. The UN has developed the Human Development Index (HDI), a compound indicator of some of the above statistics, to gauge the level of human development for countries where data is available. The UN had set Millennium Development Goals from a blueprint developed by all of the world's countries and leading development institutions, in order to evaluate growth.[35] These goals ended in 2015, to be superseded by the Sustainable Development Goals.

The concept of the developing nation is found, under one term or another, in numerous theoretical systems having diverse orientations – for example, theories of decolonization, liberation theology, Marxism, anti-imperialism, modernization, social change and political economy.

Another important indicator is the sectoral changes that have occurred since the stage of development of the country. On an average, countries with a 50% contribution from the secondary sector (manufacturing) have grown substantially. Similarly, countries with a tertiary sector stronghold also see a greater rate of economic development.

Associated theories

[edit]

The term "developing countries" has many research theories associated with it (in chronological order):

Criticisms of the term

[edit]
Further information: Development aid

There is criticism for using the term "developing country". The term could imply inferiority of this kind of country compared with a developed country.[36] It could assume a desire to develop along the traditional Western model of economic development which a few countries, such as Cuba and Bhutan, choose not to follow.[clarification needed][37] Alternative measurements such as gross national happiness have been suggested as important indicators.

One of the early criticisms that questioned the use of the terms "developing" and "underdeveloped" countries was voiced in 1973 by prominent historian and academic Walter Rodney who compared the economic, social, and political parameters between the United States and countries in Africa and Asia.[38][clarification needed]

There is "no established convention" for defining "developing country".[39] According to economist Jeffrey Sachs, the current divide between the developed and developing world is largely a phenomenon of the 20th century.[40] The late global health expert Hans Rosling has argued against the terms, calling the concept "outdated" since the terms are used under the prerequisite that the world is divided in rich and poor countries, while the fact is that the vast majority of countries are middle-income.[6] Given the lack of a clear definition, sustainability expert Mathis Wackernagel and founder of Global Footprint Network, emphasizes that the binary labeling of countries is "neither descriptive nor explanatory".[41] Wackernagel identifies these binary terms of "developing" vs. "developed" countries, or "North" vs. "South", as "a thoughtless and destructive endorsement of GDP fetish."[41] Wackernagel and Rosling both argue that in reality, there are not two types of countries, but over 200 countries, all faced with the same laws of nature, yet each with unique features.[41][6]

The term "developing" refers to a current situation and not a changing dynamic or expected direction of development. Additionally, the term "developing world" is increasingly seen as outdated, suggesting a hierarchy and not accurately reflecting the diverse realities of the encompassed countries. This term includes 135 low- or middle-income countries, covering 84% of the global population, and is criticized for its imprecision. Historical and empirical evidence, like the varied infant mortality rates across these nations, underscores the flaws in a uniform classification. Alternatives such as regional or income-based categories (low-income to high-income) are advocated for, as they align better with the specific contexts of countries, supporting more effective policy formulation.[42]

Since the late 1990s, countries identified by the UN as developing countries tended to demonstrate higher growth rates than those in the developed countries category.[43]

To moderate the euphemistic aspect of the word "developing", international organizations have started to use the term less economically developed country for the poorest nations – which can, in no sense, be regarded as developing. This highlights that the standard of living across the entire developing world varies greatly.

In 2015, the World Bank declared that the "developing / developed world categorization" had become less relevant, due to worldwide improvements in indices such as child mortality rates, fertility rates and extreme poverty rates.[5] In the 2016 edition of its World Development Indicators (WDI), the World Bank made a decision to no longer distinguish between "developed" and "developing" countries in the presentation of its data, considering the two-category distinction outdated.[7] Accordingly, World Bank is phasing out use of that descriptor. Instead, the reports by Worldbank (such as the WDI and the Global Monitoring Report) now include data aggregations for the whole world, for regions, and for income groups – but not for the "developing world".[5][7]

[edit]

The term low and middle-income country (LMIC) is often used interchangeably with "developing country" but refers only to the economy of the countries. Least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing states are all sub-groupings of developing countries. Countries on the other end of the spectrum are usually referred to as high-income countries or developed countries.

Global South

[edit]
Main article: Global South

The term "Global South" began to be used more widely since about 2004.[44][45] It can also include poorer "southern" regions of wealthy "northern" countries.[46] The Global South refers to these countries' "interconnected histories of colonialism, neo-imperialism, and differential economic and social change through which large inequalities in living standards, life expectancy, and access to resources are maintained".[47]

This section is an excerpt from Global North and Global South.[edit]
Economic classification of the world's countries and territories by the UNCTAD in 2023: the Global North (i.e., developed countries) is highlighted in blue and the Global South (i.e., developing countries and least developed countries) is highlighted in red.[48][49][50]

Global North and Global South are terms that denote a method of grouping countries based on their defining characteristics with regard to socioeconomics and politics. According to UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the Global South broadly comprises Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia (excluding Israel, Japan, and South Korea), and Oceania (excluding Australia and New Zealand).[48][50][a] Most of the Global South's countries are commonly identified as lacking in their standard of living, which includes having lower incomes, high levels of poverty, high population growth rates, inadequate housing, limited educational opportunities, and deficient health systems, among other issues.[b] Additionally, these countries' cities are characterized by their poor infrastructure.[c] Opposite to the Global South is the Global North, which the UNCTAD describes as broadly comprising Northern America and Europe, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand.[48][50][a] Consequently the two groups do not correspond to the Northern Hemisphere or the Southern Hemisphere, as many of the Global South's countries are geographically located in the north and vice-versa.[51]

More specifically, the Global North consists of the world's developed countries, whereas the Global South consists of the world's developing countries and least developed countries.[50][52] The Global South classification, as used by governmental and developmental organizations, was first introduced as a more open and value-free alternative to Third World,[53] and likewise potentially "valuing" terms such as developed and developing. Countries of the Global South have also been described as being newly industrialized or in the process of industrializing. Many of them are current or former subjects of colonialism.[54]

Third World

[edit]
This section is an excerpt from Third World.[edit]
The term Third World arose during the Cold War to define countries that remained non-aligned with either NATO or the Warsaw Pact. The United States, Canada, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, the Southern Cone, Western European countries and other allies represented the "First World", while the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, and their allies represented the "Second World". This terminology provided a way of broadly categorizing the nations of the Earth into three groups based on political divisions. Due to the complex history of evolving meanings and contexts, there is no clear or agreed-upon definition of the Third World.[55] Strictly speaking, "Third World" was a political, rather than economic, grouping.[56]

Common characteristics

[edit]

Government, politics and administration

[edit]

Many developing countries have only attained full self-determination and democracy after the second half of the 20th century. Many were governed by an imperial European power until decolonization. Political systems in developing countries are diverse, but most states had established some form of democratic governments by the early 21st century, with varying degrees of success and political liberty.[57] The inhabitants of developing countries were introduced to democratic systems later and more abruptly than their Northern counterparts and were sometimes targeted by governmental and non-governmental efforts to encourage participation. 'Effective citizenship' is defined by sociologist Patrick Heller as: "closing [the] gap between formal legal rights in the civil and political arena, and the actual capability to meaningfully practice those rights".[58]

Beyond citizenship, the study of the politics of cross-border mobility in developing countries has also shed valuable light in migration debates, seen as a corrective to the traditional focus on developed countries.[59] Some political scientists identify a 'typology of nationalizing, developmental, and neoliberal migration management regimes' across developing countries.[60]

Economy

[edit]
World regions by total wealth (in trillions USD), 2018

Following independence and decolonization, many developing countries have found themselves in periods of significant instability with a dire need for infrastructure, industry, and economic stimulation. This has broadly led to heavy reliance on foreign investment to stabilize the economy. However, the nature of this foreign investment is often highly predatory, leading to systemic exploitation and inequality.[61] In particular, the exportation of raw materials has often benefited developed countries over developing, and policies such as protectionism have had a hand in limiting the agency of resource-rich developing nations.[62] Additionally, many brands and companies based in the Western world, seeking cheaper labor, have taken advantage of the low wages and desperate job markets often found in developing countries, establishing sweatshops and creating highly exploitative employment models. The Global North has benefited significantly from this systemic exploitation whilst leaving developing countries undeveloped, something which continues uninterrupted to the present day.[63]

This arrangement is often referred to as neocolonialism, a system in which less-developed countries are taken advantage of by developed countries. It does not necessarily mean that former colonies are still controlled by their former colonizer; it refers to colonial-like exploitation.[64] Developing countries are often providing resources and labor toward the further development of rich countries, rather than dedicating these resources to their own development.[65] Notable efforts towards ending this systemic injustice on a global scale include the adoption of the "Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order" and accompanying program of action by the United Nations General Assembly in 1974, with the goal of advocating on behalf of developing nations for sovereignty over natural resources and industrialization.[66]

More broadly, coalitions such as the United Nations frequently lobby for parity in global economics, dedicating resources towards issues such as extreme poverty, food insecurity, healthcare, education, and human rights.[67] These issues disproportionately affect the Global South, especially those in Latin America, the Caribbean, and Africa, with current estimates indicating that nearly two-thirds of those in extreme poverty live in Sub-Saharan African countries.[68][69] Some sources speculate that China's growing dominance in the global market may indicate a shift in power for BRICS member nations.[70]

Common challenges

[edit]
Development economics
Economies by region
Economic growth theories
Fields and subfields
Lists

The global issues most often discussed by developing countries include globalisation, global health governance, health, and prevention needs. This is contrasted by issues developed nations tend to address, such as innovations in science and technology.[71]

Most developing countries have these criteria in common:[72][73]

  • High levels of poverty – measured based on GNI per capita averaged over three years. For example, if the GNI per capita is less than US$1,025 (as of 2018) the country is regarded as a least developed country.[73]
  • Human resource weakness (based on indicators of nutrition, health, education and adult literacy).
  • Economic vulnerability (based on instability of agricultural production, instability of exports of goods and services, economic importance of non-traditional activities, merchandise export concentration, handicap of economic smallness, and the percentage of population displaced by natural disasters). Among other challenges, developing countries have a higher risk of suffering a balance of payments crisis.[74]

Urban slums

[edit]
Main article: Slum

According to UN-Habitat, around 33% of the urban population in the developing world in 2012, or about 863 million people, lived in slums.[75] In 2012, the proportion of urban population living in slums was highest in Sub-Saharan Africa (62%), followed by South Asia (35%), Southeast Asia (31%) and East Asia (28%).[75]: 127 

The UN-Habitat reports that 43% of urban population in developing countries and 78% of those in the least developed countries live in slums.[76]

Slums form and grow in different parts of the world for many reasons. Causes include rapid rural-to-urban migration, economic stagnation and depression, high unemployment, poverty, informal economy, forced or manipulated ghettoization, poor planning, politics, natural disasters and social conflicts.[77][78][79] For example, as populations expand in poorer countries, rural people move to cities in extensive urban migration that results in the creation of slums.[80]

In some cities, especially in countries in Southern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, slums are not just marginalized neighborhoods holding a small population; slums are widespread, and are home to a large part of urban population. These are sometimes called "slum cities".[81]

Violence against women

[edit]
Main article: Violence against women
A formation of human chain at India Gate by the women from different walks of life at the launch of a National Campaign on prevention of violence against women, in New Delhi on 2 October 2009

Several forms of violence against women are more prevalent in developing countries than in other parts of the world. Acid throwing is associated with Southeast Asia, including Cambodia. Honor killing is associated with the Middle East and the Indian Subcontinent. Marriage by abduction is found in Ethiopia, Central Asia and the Caucasus. Abuse related to payment of bride price (such as violence, trafficking and forced marriage) is linked to parts of Sub-Saharan Africa and Oceania.[82][83]

Female genital mutilation (FGM) is another form of violence against women which is still occurring in many developing countries. It is found mostly in Africa, and to a lesser extent in the Middle East and some other parts of Asia. Developing countries with the highest rate of women who have been cut are Somalia (with 98% of women affected), Guinea (96%), Djibouti (93%), Egypt (91%), Eritrea (89%), Mali (89%), Sierra Leone (88%), Sudan (88%), Gambia (76%), Burkina Faso (76%), and Ethiopia (74%).[84] Due to globalization and immigration, FGM is spreading beyond the borders of Africa, Asia and the Middle East, and to countries such as Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, New Zealand, the U.S., and UK.[85]

The Istanbul Convention prohibits female genital mutilation (Article 38).[86] As of 2016, FGM has been legally banned in many African countries.[87]

An image showing statistics by percentage of share of women, older than 14 years old who experienced violence by an intimate partner.
Percentage of women older than 14 who have experienced violence by an intimate partner

According to UN Women facts and figures on ending violence against women,[88] it is estimated that 35 percent of women worldwide have experienced either physical and sexual violence by intimate partners or sexual violence by a non-partner (not including sexual harassment) at some point in their lives. Evidence shows women who have had experienced physical or sexual intimate partner violence report higher rates of depression, having an abortion and acquiring HIV, compared to women who have not had experienced any physical or sexual violence.[88]

Data from the Middle East and North Africa shows that men who witnessed their fathers against their mothers, and men who experienced some form of violence as children, more likely have reported perpetrating intimate partner violence in their adult relationships.[88]

Healthcare and public health

[edit]

The status of healthcare that the general public can access is substantially different between developing countries and developed countries.[8] People in developing countries usually have a lower life expectancy than people in developed countries, reflecting both lower income levels and poorer public health.[9][10][11] The burden of infectious diseases,[12] maternal mortality,[13][14] child mortality[15] and infant mortality[16][17] are typically substantially higher in those countries. Developing countries also have less access to medical health services generally,[89] and are less likely to have the resources to purchase, produce and administer vaccines, even though vaccine equity worldwide is important to combatting pandemics, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.[90]

Percentage of people with undernutrition by country, World Food Program, 2020
  Under 2.5%
  2.5% – 5.0%
  5.0% – 14.9%
  15.0% – 24.9%
  25.0% – 34.9%
  Over 35.0%
  No data

Undernutrition is more common in developing countries.[91] Certain groups have higher rates of undernutrition, including women – in particular while pregnant or breastfeeding – children under five years of age, and the elderly. Malnutrition in children and stunted growth of children is the cause for more than 200 million children under five years of age in developing countries not reaching their developmental potential.[92] About 165 million children were estimated to have stunted growth from malnutrition in 2013.[93] In some developing countries, overnutrition in the form of obesity is beginning to present within the same communities as undernutrition.[94]

The following list shows the further significant environmentally-related causes or conditions, as well as certain diseases with a strong environmental component:[95]

Water, sanitation, hygiene (WASH)

[edit]
Further information: WASH and Water issues in developing countries

Access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) services is at very low levels in many developing countries. In 2015 the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that "1 in 3 people, or 2.4 billion, are still without sanitation facilities" while 663 million people still lack access to safe and clean drinking water.[97][98] The estimate in 2017 by JMP states that 4.5 billion people currently do not have safely managed sanitation.[99] The majority of these people live in developing countries.

About 892 million people or 12 percent of the global population, practiced open defecation instead of using toilets in 2016.[99] Seventy-six percent (678 million) of the 892 million people practicing open defecation in the world live in just seven countries.[99] Countries with a high number of people openly defecating are India (348 million), followed by Nigeria (38.1 million), Indonesia (26.4 million), Ethiopia (23.1 million), Pakistan (19.7 million), Niger (14.6 million) and Sudan (9.7 million).[100]

Sustainable Development Goal 6 is one of 17 Sustainable Development Goals established by the UN in 2015. It calls for clean water and sanitation for all people. This is particularly relevant for people in developing countries.

Energy

[edit]
Solar cookers use sunlight as energy source for outdoor cooking.
Main articles: Energy poverty and Renewable energy in developing countries

In 2009, about 1.4 billion of people in the world lived without electricity. 2.7 billion relied on wood, charcoal, and dung (dry animal dung fuel) for home energy requirements. This lack of access to modern energy technology limits income generation, blunts efforts to escape poverty, affects people's health due to indoor air pollution, and contributes to global deforestation and climate change. Small-scale renewable energy technologies and distributed energy options, such as onsite solar power and improved cookstoves, offer rural households modern energy services.[101]

Renewable energy can be particularly suitable for developing countries. In rural and remote areas, transmission and distribution of energy generated from fossil fuels can be difficult and expensive. Producing renewable energy locally can offer a viable alternative.[102]

Renewable energy can directly contribute to poverty alleviation by providing the energy needed for creating businesses and employment. Renewable energy technologies can also make indirect contributions to alleviating poverty by providing energy for cooking, space heating, and lighting.[103]

Kenya is the world leader in the number of solar power systems installed per capita.[104]

Pollution

[edit]

Water pollution

[edit]
Factory in China at Yangtze River causing air pollution
Plastic pollution at a beach near Accra, Ghana

Water pollution is a major problem in many developing countries. It requires ongoing evaluation and revision of water resource policy at all levels (international down to individual aquifers and wells). It has been suggested that water pollution is the leading worldwide cause of death and diseases,[105][106] and that it accounts for the deaths of more than 14,000 people daily.[106]

India and China are two countries with high levels of water pollution: An estimated 580 people in India die of water pollution related illness (including waterborne diseases) every day.[107] About 90 percent of the water in the cities of China is polluted.[108] As of 2007, half a billion Chinese had no access to safe drinking water.[109]

However, after a series of reforms, China's environment began to demonstrate enormous improvements around the 2010s. Under the leadership of CCP general secretary Xi Jinping, a sizable fraction of high-pollution industries have been gradually phased out and many illegally polluting factories were sanctioned or closed. A considerable amount of effort went to enforce environmental regulations at regional levels and holding persons of malpractice accountable, including officials and firm managers. The slogan "clear waters and green mountains are as valuable as gold and silver mountains" proposed by Chinese leader Xi Jinping in 2005[110] signifies China's determination in amending environmental burdens created during industrialization while shifting to more sustainable modes of development and adopting high-end industries. Water bodies around the country are much cleaner than a decade ago and steadily approaching natural levels in pollutants.

In 2021, China introduced the "coal to gas" policy[111] as one of many policies directed towards achieving peak carbon emissions in 2060. Coal combustion in homes, power stations and production industries constitutes 60% of total energy consumption in China and is the main source of water and air pollution. It is speculated that pollution sources will be progressively eliminated as China reaches the upper tiers of developing countries.

Further details of water pollution in several countries, including many developing countries:

Indoor air pollution

[edit]

Indoor air pollution in developing nations is a major health hazard.[112] A major source of indoor air pollution in developing countries is the burning of biomass. Three billion people in developing countries across the globe rely on biomass in the form of wood, charcoal, dung, and crop residue, as their domestic cooking fuel.[113] Because much of the cooking is carried out indoors in environments that lack proper ventilation, millions of people, primarily poor women and children face serious health risks.

Globally, 4.3 million deaths were attributed to exposure to IAP in developing countries in 2012, almost all in low and middle income countries. The South East Asian and Western Pacific regions bear most of the burden with 1.69 and 1.62 million deaths, respectively. Almost 600,000 deaths occur in Africa.[114] An earlier estimate from 2000 put the death toll between 1.5 million and 2 million deaths.[115]

Finding an affordable solution to address the many effects of indoor air pollution is complex. Strategies include improving combustion, reducing smoke exposure, improving safety and reducing labor, reducing fuel costs, and addressing sustainability.[113]

Climate change

[edit]
Further information: Effects of climate change, Climate change in Africa, and Climate change in South Asia

Particular vulnerability to climate change

[edit]
Surface air temperature change over the past 50 years.[116]

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has confirmed that warming of the climate system due to human intervention is 'unequivocal'.[117] The effects of climate change will be felt around the globe and will result in events such as extreme weather events, droughts, floods, biodiversity loss, disease and sea level rise, which are dangerous for societies and the environment.[118]

Although 79% of carbon emissions are produced by developed countries,[119] and developing countries have not been the major cause of climate change,[117] they are the most at risk from the effects of these changes and may face challenges in adapting to climate change due to the intersecting issues of high climate vulnerability, low economic status,[120] restricted access to technology, failing infrastructure and limited access to financial resources. Where a country is particularly vulnerable to climate change they are called "highly climate vulnerable"[citation needed]. This applies to many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, fragile states or failed states like Afghanistan, Haiti, Myanmar, and Somalia, as well as to Small Island Developing States[citation needed]. In the cases where developing countries produce only small quantities of greenhouse gas emissions per capita but are very vulnerable to the negative effects of global warming, the term "forced riders" as opposed to the "free riders" has been used as a descriptor.[18][121] Such countries include Comoros, The Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, São Tomé and Príncipe, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu.[121]

Climate vulnerability has been quantified in the Climate Vulnerability Monitor reports of 2010 and 2012. Climate vulnerability in developing countries occurs in four key areas: health, extreme weather, habitat loss, and economic stress.[118][18] A report by the Climate Vulnerability Monitor in 2012 estimated that climate change causes 400,000 deaths on average each year, mainly due to hunger and communicable diseases in developing countries.[122]: 17  These effects are most severe for the world's poorest countries. Internationally there is recognition of the mismatch between those that have caused climate change and those which will suffer the most from climate change, termed "climate justice". It has been a topic for discussion at some of the United Nations Climate Change Conferences (COP).

"When we think about livelihoods at risk from climate change impacts, we know that people living in developing countries, and especially the least-developed countries and small island states, often have the least financial resources to adapt", says Nancy Saich, the European Investment Bank's chief climate change expert.[123]

Effects

[edit]

A changing climate also results in economic burdens. The economies in Least Developed Countries have lost an average of 7% of their gross domestic product for the year 2010, mainly due to reduced labor productivity.[122]: 14  Rising sea levels cost 1% of GDP to the least developed countries in 2010 – 4% in the Pacific – with 65 billion dollars annually lost from the world economy.[118] Another example is the effect on fisheries: approximately 40 countries are acutely vulnerable to the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on fisheries. Developing countries with large fisheries sectors are particularly affected.[122]: 279  During the Cancún COP16 in 2010, donor countries promised an annual $100 billion by 2020 through the Green Climate Fund for developing countries to adapt to climate change. However, concrete pledges by developed countries have not been forthcoming.[124][125] Emmanuel Macron (President of France) said at the 2017 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bonn (COP 23): "Climate change adds further injustice to an already unfair world".[126] Economic development and climate are inextricably linked, particularly around poverty, gender equality, and energy.[127]

Tackling climate change will only be possible if the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are met, in particular Sustainable Development Goal 13 on climate action.[127]

Climate stress is likely to add to existing migration patterns in developing countries and beyond but is not expected to generate entirely new flows of people.[128]: 110  A report by the World Bank in 2018 estimated that around 143 million people in three regions (Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and Latin America) could be forced to move within their own countries to escape the slow-onset effects of climate change. They will migrate from less viable areas with lower water availability and crop productivity and from areas affected by rising sea level and storm surges.[129]

In spite of the cumulative stressors and challenges faced by developing countries in adapting to the effects of climate change, there are those that are world leaders in the field such as Bangladesh. Bangladesh created a national programme in 2009 focused on how the country would adapt to climate change (the first country to do so).[130][131] It established a fund to support these plans, spending on average $1 billion annually in this regard.[132]

Many corporations have a higher chance of breaking environmental regulations when financial policies are uncertain. In the article "Economic growth and environmental sustainability in developing economies" written by Ahmed Imran Hunjra, Elie Bouri, Muhammad Azam, Rauf I. Azam, and Jiapeng Dai, they make the claim that businesses tend to cut corners during periods of financial uncertainty. "During uncertain economic conditions, businesses are likely to implement cost-cutting measures that compromise environmental standards. As a consequence, pollution increases as eco-friendly practices are replaced by less expensive alternatives" (p. 18). "FPU has additional cascading effects… policy paralysis; governments may be reluctant to enforce existing environmental regulations or implement new ones" (p. 18). We see that in these economic shock periods and recessions, businesses resort to cost cutting measures at the expense of the environment. In doing so, pollution will increase and result in harm to the environment overall. The term for this is Financial Policy Uncertainty (FPU) which is a big reason why many businesses might not always adopt the green way of conducting business. It might not be in their best financial interest and incur more costs to them. Eco-Friendly practices are not always the cheapest option and many businesses may opt for cheaper alternatives which would save them money but cause harm to the environment. Shocks to the economy slows down environmental progress.[133]

Population growth

[edit]
See also: List of sovereign states and dependencies by total fertility rate
Map of countries and territories by fertility rate in 2024

Over the last few decades, global population growth has largely been driven by developing countries, which often have higher birth rates (higher fecundity rate) than developed countries. According to the United Nations, family planning can help to slow population growth and decrease poverty in these countries.[34]

The violent herder–farmer conflicts in Nigeria, the March 2019 attacks against Fulani herders in Mali, the Sudanese nomadic conflicts and other conflicts in the countries of the Sahel region have been exacerbated by climate change, land degradation, and population growth.[134][135][136] Droughts and food shortages have been also linked to the Northern Mali conflict.[137][138]

Poor governance

[edit]

Many developing countries are considered flawed democracies or authoritarian regimes by democracy indices such as the V-Dem Democracy indices and Democracy Index (The Economist). Following decolonization and independence, elites have often had oligarchic control of the government.[citation needed]

The establishment of a healthy democratic state has often been challenged by widespread corruption and nepotism and a low confidence and participation in democratic process. Political instability and political corruption are common problems.[139][140] To fully reach the goal of a low level of corruption, developing countries are usually using special steps for different establishments inside their territories, such as:

  • Development or creation of a fair public administration system that is not partially based on corruption and is entirely based on the values and laws of the country
  • Better investigation towards the sources of the corruption and probable causes of that particular action
  • Publicly informing the residents about the source of corruption and negative influence on the country's economy
  • Regulation of the official positions of an individual to not be the source of abuse for corruption.
  • Creation of special laws dedicated to the corruption itself for specific establishments[141]

Others

[edit]

Other common challenges include: Increased and intensified industrial and agricultural production and emission of toxic chemicals directly into the soil, air, and water, unsustainable use of energy resources; high dependency on natural resources for livelihood, leading to unsustainable exploitation or depletion of those resources; child marriage, indebtedness (see Debt of developing countries) and underperforming civil service (see Civil service reform in developing countries), food insecurity, illiteracy and unemployment. The economies of many developing nations are tried to primary products and a majority of their exports go to advanced nations. When advanced nations encounter economic downturns, they can quickly transmit to their developing country trading partners as seen in global economic downturn of 2008–2009.

Opportunities

[edit]
  • Human Capital
  • Trade Policy: Countries with more restrictive policies have not grown as fast as countries with open and less distorted trade policies.[140][142]
  • Investment: Investment has a positive effect on growth.[140]
  • Education[143]
  • Aid for Trade: Included in Sustainable Development Goal 8 under Target 8.a.1 Increase aid for trade is an initiative to help developing countries practice trade and benefit. Aid for trade is to assist developing countries in trade related programmes, prioritize trade and trade capacity, improve trade performance and reduce poverty.[144]
  • Global partnership: A provision of Sustainable Development Goal 17 which advocates for international investment and support to achieve innovative technological development, access to market, and fair trade for developing countries.[145]

Country lists

[edit]

Emerging and developing economies according to the International Monetary Fund

[edit]

The following are considered emerging and developing economies according to the International Monetary Fund's World Economic Outlook Database, April 2023.[146]

Countries not listed by IMF

Upper middle income countries by World Bank

[edit]
  • Albania[147]
  • Algeria
  • American Samoa
  • Argentina
  • Armenia
  • Azerbaijan
  • Belarus
  • Belize
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Botswana
  • Brazil
  • Brunei
  • China
  • Colombia
  • Costa Rica
  • Cuba
  • Dominica
  • Dominican Republic
  • Ecuador
  • Equatorial Guinea
  • Fiji
  • Gabon
  • Georgia
  • Grenada
  • Guatemala
  • Guyana
  • Indonesia
  • Jamaica
  • Jordan
  • Kazakhstan
  • Kosovo
  • Libya
  • Malaysia
  • Maldives
  • Marshall Islands
  • Mauritius
  • Mexico
  • Moldova
  • Montenegro
  • Mongolia
  • Namibia
  • North Macedonia
  • Palau
  • Paraguay
  • Peru
  • Philippines
  • Serbia
  • South Africa
  • St. Lucia
  • St. Vincent and the Grenadines
  • Suriname
  • Thailand
  • Tonga
  • Türkiye
  • Turkmenistan
  • Tuvalu
  • Vietnam

Lower middle income countries by World Bank

[edit]
  • Angola[148]
  • Bangladesh
  • Benin
  • Bhutan
  • Bolivia
  • Cabo Verde
  • Cambodia
  • Cameroon
  • Comoros
  • Congo, Rep.
  • Côte d'Ivoire
  • Djibouti
  • Egypt, Arab Rep.
  • El Salvador
  • Eswatini
  • Ghana
  • Haiti
  • Honduras
  • India
  • Iraq
  • Iran, Islamic Rep.
  • Kenya
  • Kiribati
  • Kyrgyz Republic
  • Lao PDR
  • Lebanon
  • Lesotho
  • Mauritania
  • Micronesia, Fed. Sts.
  • Morocco
  • Myanmar
  • Nepal
  • Nicaragua
  • Nigeria
  • Pakistan
  • Papua New Guinea
  • Samoa
  • São Tomé and Príncipe
  • Senegal
  • Solomon Islands
  • Sri Lanka
  • Tajikistan
  • Tanzania
  • Timor-Leste
  • Tunisia
  • Ukraine
  • Uzbekistan
  • Vanuatu
  • West Bank and Gaza
  • Zimbabwe

Countries and regions that are graduated developed economies

[edit]

The following list, including the Four Asian Tigers and new Eurozone European Union countries (except for Czech Republic), were historically considered developing countries and regions until the 1990s, and are now listed as advanced economies (developed countries and regions) by the IMF. Time in brackets is the time to be listed as advanced economies.

Three economies lack data before being listed as advanced economies. However, because of the lack of data, it is difficult to judge whether they were advanced economies or developing economies before being listed as advanced economies.


Newly industrialized countries

[edit]

Ten countries belong to the "newly industrialized country" classification. They are countries whose economies have not yet reached a developed country's status but have, in a macroeconomic sense, outpaced their developing counterparts:

BRICS countries

[edit]

Ten countries belong to the "emerging markets" groups and together form the BRICS organisation:

Society and culture

[edit]

Media coverage

[edit]

Western media tends to present a generalized view of developing countries through biased media coverage; mass media outlets tend to focus disproportionately on poverty and other negative imagery. This common coverage has created a dominant stereotype of developing countries: "the 'South' is characterized by socioeconomic and political backwardness, measured against Western values and standards."[165] Mass media's role often compares the Global South to the North and is thought to be an aid in the divide.

Mass media has also played a role in what information the people in developing countries receive. The news often covers developed countries and creates an imbalance of information flow.[166] The people in developing countries do not often receive coverage of the other developing countries but instead gets generous amounts of coverage about developed countries.

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Developing country

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A developing country is a sovereign state exhibiting comparatively low levels of economic output per capita, industrialization, and institutional capacity, often evidenced by gross national income thresholds below $13,845 for upper-middle income and lower classifications as defined annually by the World Bank. These nations, totaling around 152 according to International Monetary Fund delineations between advanced and emerging/developing economies, represent over 85% of global population yet generate disproportionately less wealth due to structural constraints like limited human capital accumulation and inefficient resource allocation. Key empirical markers include elevated poverty incidence, with billions lacking reliable access to sanitation and electricity, alongside high dependency ratios from rapid demographic expansion that strain fiscal resources and impede capital deepening. Classifications vary across institutions—the World Bank's income-based tiers encompass 135 low- and middle-income entities, while the United Nations identifies 44 least developed countries based on income, human assets, and economic vulnerability—reflecting the term's utility for aid allocation despite critiques of oversimplification amid divergent growth paths driven by policy choices and governance efficacy. Notable characteristics encompass agrarian dominance, informal economic prevalence, and susceptibility to commodity price volatility, which perpetuate cycles of underinvestment in productive infrastructure and technology adoption. While some have achieved sustained per capita growth through market-oriented reforms, persistent stagnation in others underscores causal factors such as rent-seeking institutions and demographic pressures exceeding productivity gains.

Definitions and Classification Systems

Income-Based and Economic Metrics

The World Bank classifies economies into low-income, lower-middle-income, upper-middle-income, and high-income groups primarily using (GNI) , calculated via the Atlas method, which applies a three-year of exchange rates to mitigate short-term volatility in national currencies. Economies below the high-income threshold—typically low- and middle-income countries—are often designated as developing, encompassing approximately 80% of the world's population as of 2025. This metric prioritizes total available to residents, including net receipts from abroad, over (GDP) , which excludes foreign flows and can understate resources in capital-exporting nations. For the fiscal year 2026 (effective July 1, 2025), the World Bank thresholds, in current U.S. dollars, are as follows:
Income GroupGNI Threshold (Atlas method)
Low-income$1,135 or less
Lower-middle-income$1,136–$4,495
Upper-middle-income$4,496–$13,935
High-incomeMore than $13,935
These thresholds are adjusted annually based on global GNI per capita growth; for instance, the low-income cutoff rose from $1,085 in FY2023 to $1,135 in FY2026, reflecting and economic expansion. Countries like (lower-middle-income at approximately $2,540 GNI in 2023) and (upper-middle-income at about $9,790) exemplify developing status under this system, while transitions occur periodically—e.g., graduated to high-income in 2024 after sustained growth. The absence of a unified global definition for developing country status permits variations across institutions, exemplified by , which retains developing classification despite its second-largest global economy by total GDP. This stems from its GNI per capita (Atlas method) of $13,660 in 2024, classifying it as upper-middle-income below the high-income threshold exceeding $13,935, alongside factors like the UN Human Development Index value of 0.797 for 2023 (high category, below the very high ≥0.800 cutoff), self-declaration in the WTO, regional development disparities, innovation gaps relative to advanced economies, and uneven social welfare provision. The (IMF) employs a complementary but less strictly income-threshold-based approach, categorizing economies as advanced or and developing economies (EMDEs), with the latter including most developing countries based on factors like levels below advanced averages (often around $12,000–$15,000 GDP ), limited diversification, and lower . As of the IMF's World Economic Outlook in October 2025, EMDEs comprise 152 countries, representing over 85% of global population but contributing about 40% of world GDP at market exchange rates. IMF highlight EMDE GDP averaging under $5,000 in nominal terms in 2025, contrasted with advanced economies exceeding $50,000, underscoring persistent income gaps driven by structural factors like resource dependence and institutional quality rather than temporary fluctuations. Additional economic metrics reinforce these classifications, such as GDP per capita adjusted for (PPP), which accounts for cost-of-living differences and reveals higher effective incomes in developing countries—e.g., China's GDP per capita PPP reached $21,000 in 2024 versus $12,600 nominal—but remains below advanced thresholds for most. Poverty headcount ratios, derived from national consumption data benchmarked against $2.15 daily PPP for , further delineate developing status, with over 700 million people in low-income countries below this line as of 2023 data. These metrics, while empirical anchors, face criticism for overlooking income inequality (e.g., Gini coefficients often exceeding 0.40 in middle-income developing nations) and non-market factors, yet they provide quantifiable baselines for allocation and policy benchmarking.

Human Development and Composite Indices

The (HDI), developed by the (UNDP), serves as a composite measure assessing countries' achievements in three dimensions: a long and healthy life (measured by at birth), (via mean and expected years of schooling), and a decent (using in terms). HDI values range from 0 to 1, with classifications including very high (0.800 and above), high (0.700–0.799), medium (0.550–0.699), and low (below 0.550) human development; developing countries predominantly fall into the medium and low categories, reflecting persistent gaps in health, education, and income relative to advanced economies. The 2025 , released on May 6, 2025, incorporates data up to 2023 and highlights stalled global progress post-COVID-19, with many developing nations experiencing declines or minimal gains in HDI due to disruptions in schooling and health services. While HDI provides a geometric mean aggregation to balance dimensions without overemphasizing any single factor, critics argue it oversimplifies human well-being by omitting inequalities, environmental , and non-material aspects like personal and political freedoms, potentially masking underlying deprivations in developing contexts. For instance, the index's reliance on averages can understate disparities, as evidenced by comparisons with adjusted metrics showing actual development levels up to 30% lower in unequal societies. The Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI) addresses this limitation by discounting the HDI for inequalities in health, education, and income distribution across the population, revealing that developing countries often suffer greater losses from inequality—sometimes exceeding 40%—compared to high-income nations. Similarly, the (MPI), which tracks deprivations in health, education, and living standards for 109 primarily developing countries, identifies acute poverty affecting over 1.1 billion people as of the latest 2023 data, with higher incidence in and where overlaps in deprivations exacerbate vulnerability. These indices, while data-driven, face methodological critiques for inconsistent national reporting and aggregation choices that may favor certain policy narratives, underscoring the need for of factors like institutional quality and over mere statistical composites.

Industrial, Technological, and Productivity Stages

Developing countries typically occupy early stages of industrial development, characterized by a heavy reliance on primary sectors like agriculture and extractive industries, which account for a larger share of GDP and employment compared to advanced economies. Structural transformation in these nations involves reallocating labor from low-productivity agriculture to higher-productivity manufacturing and services, yet many experience incomplete transitions, with manufacturing value added stagnating at 10-15% of GDP rather than reaching the 20-30% peaks observed in historical industrializers like South Korea. This pattern, evident in sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Latin America, reflects barriers such as inadequate infrastructure, limited access to capital, and policy distortions favoring resource exports over value-added processing. Technological stages in developing economies emphasize adoption over , with firms primarily importing and adapting foreign rather than generating domestic patents or R&D outputs. World Bank surveys indicate that adoption lags due to constraints like low managerial skills, unreliable , and high costs of complementary inputs, resulting in only 20-30% of formal firms in low-income countries using advanced digital tools compared to over 70% in high-income peers. Productivity-enhancing technologies, such as and ICT, diffuse slowly, perpetuating a cycle where economies remain in low-tech, labor-intensive assembly rather than advancing to knowledge-intensive production. UNCTAD highlights that developing countries' low scores on productive capacities indices—averaging below 40 out of 100 in areas like and —underscore this gap, with trailing by 20-30 points relative to middle-income peers. Productivity stages reveal stark disparities, with labor productivity in upper-middle-income developing countries approximately 57.5% lower than in high-income economies, driven by lower capital intensity and inefficient resource allocation across sectors. In emerging market and developing economies, output per worker stands at less than one-fifth of advanced economy levels, a gap widened by post-2008 slowdowns in convergence and persistent informal employment absorbing 50-70% of the workforce in subsistent activities. Total factor productivity growth, key to escaping low-level traps, averages 0.5-1% annually in many developing regions versus 1.5-2% in successful Asian tigers, attributable to institutional weaknesses and limited human capital accumulation rather than mere capital shortages. These stages classify developing countries as pre-maturity phases, where catching up hinges on fostering firm-level upgrading and sectoral reallocation, though empirical evidence from UNIDO shows success correlates more with export orientation and FDI integration than import-substitution policies.

Geographic, Political, and Self-Declared Criteria

Geographic criteria for classifying developing countries are primarily descriptive rather than prescriptive, reflecting empirical patterns of economic underdevelopment correlated with location. Developing economies are disproportionately concentrated in tropical and subtropical latitudes, particularly in , , , and parts of , where factors such as higher disease burdens, variable climates, and historical colonial extraction have impeded sustained industrialization. The delineates developing economies into geographic subgroups including (46 countries as of 2014), Asia and the Pacific (excluding high-income economies like and ), (33 countries), and Western Asia, facilitating targeted while acknowledging regional vulnerabilities like landlocked status or insularity that exacerbate economic fragility. These patterns align with the Brandt Line, a conceptual divide from separating the industrialized Global North (predominantly temperate zones in , , and parts of ) from the resource-dependent Global South. Political criteria play a limited role in formal classifications of developing countries, as major institutions prioritize economic metrics over governance structures. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) incorporates degree of integration into the global financial system as one of three classification factors—alongside per capita income and export diversification—which indirectly assesses institutional and policy frameworks but does not explicitly penalize or favor specific political systems like democracy or authoritarianism. Historical precedents, such as the Non-Aligned Movement during the Cold War, infused political connotations into "Third World" terminology for countries avoiding superpower blocs, yet contemporary definitions eschew overt political litmus tests to maintain analytical neutrality. Organizations like the World Bank occasionally reference governance indicators in operational lending categories (e.g., eligibility for concessional aid via fragility or conflict assessments), but these serve supplementary purposes rather than core developmental status determination. Self-declared status constitutes a key mechanism in certain international regimes, notably the (WTO), where members unilaterally announce themselves as developing to access special and differential treatment (S&DT) provisions, such as longer implementation periods for agreements and technical assistance, without predefined eligibility thresholds. This approach, embedded since the WTO's 1995 inception via the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) legacy, has enabled over 100 members—including advanced economies like , , and —to self-designate, prompting criticisms of inequity as high-growth nations retain benefits amid per capita GDPs exceeding $10,000 in some cases (e.g., 's $12,720 nominal GDP per capita in 2023). The has advocated reforms, arguing in 2019 that undifferentiated self-declaration undermines WTO relevance, leading to executive actions barring recognition of self-declared status for certain countries in U.S. trade policy after 2022 if not graduated. In contrast, categories like (LDCs) reject self-declaration, relying instead on triennial reviews by the Committee for Development Policy using income, human assets, and economic vulnerability indices, with 46 LDCs as of 2024 predominantly self-identifying within broader developing cohorts. This self-declaration flexibility highlights tensions between historical equity aims and current economic realities, where strategic designation can influence access to trillions in global trade concessions annually.

Historical Evolution

Origins in Post-Colonial and Cold War Eras

The acceleration of following led to the independence of over three dozen territories, mainly in and , between 1945 and 1960, establishing sovereign states with economies typically centered on primary commodity production and minimal industrial capacity. These post-colonial nations faced challenges in integrating into the global economy, prompting international recognition of their distinct developmental status separate from established industrial economies. In the geopolitical context of the , which divided the world into the capitalist and communist , these newly independent states coalesced into a third bloc often labeled the Third World or developing countries. The term "developing countries" originated in the 1940s, with peripheral economies self-identifying as pursuing industrialization and modernization, as seen in discussions during the 1944 and subsequent International Trade Organization negotiations from 1946 to 1948. International organizations formalized this classification to address economic disparities and facilitate aid; the World Bank, established in 1944 initially for postwar reconstruction, shifted focus by the 1950s toward supporting growth in these nations through income-based groupings. Similarly, the promoted development agendas, culminating in initiatives like the 1964 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade Part IV, which granted trade concessions to developing countries. Collective self-assertion among these states, exemplified by the 1955 , the 1961 , and the 1964 , solidified the developing country identity as a platform for advocating preferential treatment in global trade and . A 1961 U.S. State Department memorandum endorsed "developing" over "underdeveloped" for its optimistic connotations, reflecting efforts to frame these nations as dynamic actors rather than static inferiors. This categorization not only enabled targeted assistance but also became a arena for superpower rivalry, as the and vied for alliances amid fragile new governments.

Evolution Through International Institutions

The concept of developing countries gained formal structure through post-World War II international institutions established under the in 1944, which created the (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (now the ). Initially focused on stabilizing currencies and rebuilding war-torn , these bodies expanded their mandates in the late 1940s and 1950s to address economic challenges in newly independent and poorer nations, shifting from terms like "underdeveloped" to "developing" to emphasize potential growth rather than inherent deficiency. By the , the IMF began classifying economies into advanced and non-advanced (later and developing) based on , export diversification, and financial integration, a framework that persists with 41 advanced economies as of recent World Economic Outlook reports. The on (UNCTAD), founded in , played a pivotal role by advocating for preferential policies and to integrate developing countries into the global , leading to the formation of the (G77) at its first conference, which amplified the voice of over 130 such nations in international forums. UNCTAD's research influenced the UN General Assembly's creation of the (LDC) category in 1971, identifying 24 initial members—primarily in and —with low (under $90 at the time), weak human assets, and high economic vulnerability, criteria refined over decades to include graduation mechanisms based on sustainable progress. As of 2024, 44 countries remain LDCs, with eight having graduated since 1994, reflecting institutional efforts to target and technical assistance amid persistent structural barriers. The World Bank formalized income-based classifications in the 1970s for operational purposes, evolving into annual groupings by () per using the Atlas method—low (under $1,145 in 2024), lower-middle ($1,146–4,515),upper−middle(4,515), upper-middle (4,516–$14,005), and high—applied to over 200 economies to guide lending and analytics, though thresholds adjust with inflation and exclude non-sovereign entities. These systems, while data-driven, have faced scrutiny for rigidity, as countries like retain developing status despite rapid growth, influencing access to concessional loans and trade exemptions under bodies like the , which defers to UN LDC designations for special treatment.

Shifts in the Post-Cold War and

The in 1991 marked a pivotal shift for many developing countries, particularly those in , , and that had relied on Soviet economic aid, subsidies, and military support, which abruptly ceased, exacerbating debt crises and prompting structural adjustments under IMF and World Bank programs. This end to bipolar competition reduced proxy conflicts but increased pressure for market-oriented reforms, as Western institutions conditioned loans on fiscal discipline, privatization, and trade liberalization—core tenets of the formulated in 1989. While initial implementations often led to short-term contractions due to and weak institutions, adherence in countries like (post-1991 reforms) correlated with sustained GDP growth averaging 6-7% annually through the 2000s, contrasting with stagnation in nations hampered by corruption and . Into the , accelerated convergence, with emerging and developing economies expanding at an average annual GDP growth rate of 4-5% from to , outpacing advanced economies' 1-2%, driven by China's WTO accession in 2001 and commodity demand from Asia. The grouping—Brazil, , , , and , coined in 2001—exemplified this dynamism, with their combined economies growing 356% between 1990 and , challenging binary developed-developing classifications by fostering South-South trade and investment untethered to governance conditionality. Yet empirical outcomes varied: export-led models in and yielded productivity gains, while resource-dependent states faced and volatility, underscoring that institutional quality, not aid volume, drove causal progress. Recent decades have seen further reconfiguration amid multipolarity, with China's extending infrastructure financing to over 140 developing nations since 2013, bypassing traditional Western oversight but raising debt sustainability concerns in cases like Sri Lanka's 2022 default. Meanwhile, UN classifications evolved, with 12 countries graduating from least-developed status by 2024 due to thresholds exceeded via diversification, though the middle-income trap persists for many, where growth stalls absent innovation and investments. Disruptions like the 2020 and 2022 conflict highlighted vulnerabilities, slashing developing-world growth to -2.7% in 2020 before partial recovery, reinforcing that resilient supply chains and domestic reforms, rather than geopolitical alignments, underpin long-term advancement.

Theoretical Foundations

Classical Modernization and Growth Models

Classical , as articulated by economist in his 1960 book The Stages of Economic Growth, posits that follows a linear progression through five sequential stages applicable to all societies transitioning from underdevelopment to advanced economies. The first stage, , features , limited due to low technology and rigid social structures, and output dominated by primary sectors with stagnant around subsistence levels. The second stage, preconditions for take-off, involves initial investments in , , and external , often spurred by external stimuli like or resource discovery, laying the groundwork for . In the third stage, take-off, sustained growth accelerates to 5-10% annually for 20-30 years, driven by high rates (10-20% of national income) in leading sectors such as textiles or railways, enabling self-reinforcing industrialization and ; historical examples cited include Britain's (1783-1802) and post-war Japan. The fourth stage, drive to maturity, sees diversification into mature industries, technological diffusion, and welfare improvements, with growth rates stabilizing as capital deepens. Finally, the age of high mass consumption emerges, characterized by service-sector dominance, rising consumer durables, and per capita incomes exceeding $1,000 (in dollars), as observed in the United States by the mid-20th century. Rostow's framework, influenced by historical analysis of and , implied that developing countries could emulate this path through deliberate policies fostering and , rejecting notions of inherent cultural or structural barriers to progress. Complementing Rostow's stages, classical growth models like Harrod-Domar provided quantitative underpinnings for development strategies in low-income nations. The Harrod-Domar model, developed independently by Roy Harrod (1939) and Evsey Domar (1946), equates the economy's growth rate to the savings rate divided by the (ICOR), typically assuming fixed capital coefficients and ; for developing countries, it prescribed boosting domestic savings to 15-20% of GDP to achieve 3-5% annual growth, assuming an ICOR of 3-4. This informed "" theories, advocating coordinated investments in bottlenecks like to overcome low equilibrium traps, as applied in India's Second Five-Year Plan (1956-1961), which targeted but yielded mixed results due to inefficient capital allocation. The Solow-Swan model (1956), a neoclassical extension, incorporated diminishing marginal returns to capital, predicting where poorer economies grow faster than richer ones if they maintain similar savings rates and technological access, with steady-state growth driven by exogenous technological progress rather than alone. In application to developing countries, Solow implied catch-up potential through capital inflows and , but empirical convergence has been uneven; for instance, East Asian economies like achieved per capita GDP growth from $1,500 in 1960 to over $30,000 by 2020 by combining high savings (averaging 25-30% of GDP) with export-oriented policies, aligning partially with model predictions, whereas sub-Saharan African nations stagnated with savings below 15% and growth under 2% annually, highlighting the necessity of institutional factors like secure property rights for effective capital deployment. These models collectively emphasized investment-led industrialization as the causal engine for escaping underdevelopment, with post-colonial policies in demonstrating empirical feasibility when paired with market incentives, though failures in import-substitution regimes underscored the limits of state-directed efforts without productivity gains.

Structuralist, Dependency, and Marxist Perspectives

Structuralist perspectives on developing countries emerged in the mid-20th century through the work of the Economic Commission for (ECLAC, or CEPAL), led by , who argued that global trade structures inherently disadvantaged primary commodity exporters in the periphery by causing a secular deterioration in relative to manufactured goods from industrialized centers. This view, formalized in Prebisch's 1950 report The Economic Development of and Its Principal Problems, posited that developing economies faced structural heterogeneity—marked by dualistic sectors of modern industry and backward agriculture—requiring state-led (ISI) to foster domestic manufacturing and reduce reliance on volatile commodity exports. Proponents emphasized historical-structural analysis, integrating economic, social, and institutional factors unique to , contrasting with neoclassical assumptions of universal market efficiencies. Dependency theory built on but radicalized it, with André Gunder Frank asserting in works like Capitalism and Underdevelopment in (1967) that integration into the global capitalist system actively caused in peripheral nations, as surplus extraction by metropolitan cores perpetuated satellite economies' stagnation—a process Frank termed "the development of ." This framework rejected modernization theory's linear progression, viewing foreign investment and trade not as aids but as mechanisms of exploitation that reinforced and internal class alliances between local elites and external powers. Empirical applications focused on and , where colonial legacies and post-independence trade patterns allegedly locked countries into raw material dependence, though critics noted the theory's deterministic external focus overlooked endogenous factors like policy choices and institutional quality. Marxist perspectives framed developing countries' conditions through the lens of as the monopolistic phase of , per Vladimir Lenin's 1917 analysis, where advanced economies extracted value from colonies and semi-colonies via , finance capital, and political domination to sustain accumulation amid domestic contradictions. In postcolonial contexts, theorists like those in the school extended this to , arguing that formal masked continued exploitation through multinational corporations and , fueling class polarization and potential revolutionary dynamics in the global South. These views influenced anti-imperialist movements but faced empirical challenges: ISI policies inspired by structuralist and dependency ideas led to inefficiencies, fiscal imbalances, and the 1980s , with growth averaging under 2% annually from 1980- amid protectionist distortions. Conversely, export-oriented strategies in East Asian Tigers like —achieving GDP growth from $1,500 in to over $10,000 by —demonstrated that outward integration could drive rapid industrialization, undermining claims of inevitable peripheral stagnation when internal reforms prioritized and over delinking. Such outcomes highlight how these theories, while highlighting real asymmetries, often undervalued causal roles of domestic and incentives in perpetuating .

Neoliberal, Institutional, and First-Principles Approaches

The neoliberal approach to development emphasizes market , reduced state intervention, and integration into global trade as pathways for growth in developing countries. Originating in the framework articulated by John Williamson in 1989, it advocates policies such as fiscal discipline, of state enterprises, trade openness, and to foster efficiency and investment. Empirical analyses indicate that sustained implementation of these reforms correlates with higher GDP ; for instance, countries pursuing comprehensive neoliberal adjustments experienced approximately 16% greater real GDP after a compared to non-reformers, based on from 1970–2005 across diverse economies. Successes are evident in East Asian export-led models, where combined with selective industrial policies propelled rapid industrialization in and from the 1960s onward, achieving average annual growth rates exceeding 7% through the 1990s. However, outcomes varied: in , initial post-1980s reforms stabilized inflation but often led to uneven growth and crises, such as Argentina's 2001 default amid incomplete and fiscal slippage, underscoring that neoliberal prescriptions alone falter without complementary institutional safeguards. In , partial adoption yielded macroeconomic stability but modest growth averaging under 2% annually from 1990–2010, partly due to external shocks and weak enforcement. The perspective posits that formal and informal rules shaping incentives—such as secure property rights, impartial contract enforcement, and constraints on executive power—are the primary determinants of sustained development, rather than geography or culture alone. , Simon Johnson, and James Robinson argue that inclusive institutions, which enable broad participation in economic gains, drive prosperity, while extractive ones concentrate rents among elites, perpetuating stagnation; this framework explains why former colonies with high settler mortality rates inherited weaker institutions and lower incomes today. Cross-country regressions from their work show that institutional quality accounts for over 75% of variation in log GDP differences, with examples like Botswana's post-independence emphasis on and resource revenue sharing yielding 5–6% annual growth from 1966–1990, contrasting Zimbabwe's under Mugabe, which halved by 2008. Critiques note potential endogeneity, as growth may reinforce institutions, yet instrumental variable approaches using colonial settler patterns confirm . This view tempers neoliberal optimism by highlighting that market reforms amplify growth only under robust institutions; for developing nations, prioritizing and —evident in Singapore's trajectory from 1965—precedes . First-principles reasoning in development derives explanations from elemental human behaviors, resource constraints, and incentive structures, eschewing layered ideologies for causal chains rooted in individual action. At core, economic progress stems from voluntary exchange under scarcity, where secure expectations of retaining fruits of labor incentivize investment and innovation; absent predation risks, agents allocate resources toward productive ends, as modeled in basic principal-agent frameworks. Applied to developing contexts, this reveals why weak enforcement of contracts—prevalent in 70% of low-income countries per data—stifles capital accumulation, as potential investors anticipate expropriation, mirroring historical transitions like England's of 1688, which clarified property rights and preceded industrialization. Causal realism here demands tracing underdevelopment to misaligned incentives, such as subsidies distorting (costing 2–3% of GDP annually in inefficiencies) or tribal hindering commercialization in , rather than attributing lags to immutable factors. Integrating with prior approaches, it posits institutions as emergent solutions to coordination problems, while neoliberal tools function as mechanisms to align incentives when foundational rules exist; empirical validation comes from micro-level studies, like randomized property titling in boosting household investment by 25–30%. This method exposes policy pitfalls, such as aid inflows eroding accountability in recipient states, fostering dependency observed in post-colonial where per capita aid exceeded 10% of GDP yet growth lagged.

Observable Characteristics

Economic Structures and Production Patterns

In developing countries, economic structures are predominantly agrarian and resource-based, with and primary commodity production forming the backbone of output and . typically contributes 15-25% to GDP in low- and lower-middle-income economies but employs 50-70% of the workforce, reflecting low and subsistence-oriented farming practices. This sectoral imbalance stems from limited , inadequate , and reliance on rain-fed cultivation, which exposes production to climatic variability and yields per often one-tenth those in high-income countries. Industrial activity remains underdeveloped, averaging 20-30% of GDP across low- and middle-income groups, concentrated in extractive industries like and oil in resource-endowed nations such as and , where it can exceed 40%. Manufacturing subsectors, when present, emphasize labor-intensive assembly and low-value processing, such as textiles or , hampered by high costs, poor , and skill shortages that limit scaling to higher-tech production. Services, including trade and informal retail, comprise 40-60% of GDP but are largely unproductive, with formal financial and minimal outside urban hubs. A defining feature is the dominance of the informal economy, which encompasses unregistered enterprises and self-employment outside regulatory frameworks, accounting for 60-85% of total employment in most developing countries as of 2022. This sector drives short-term survival through street vending, artisanal work, and micro-farming but perpetuates low wages, tax evasion, and vulnerability to shocks, as informal workers lack access to credit or social protections. Production patterns exhibit dualism: a small formal enclave oriented toward exports or urban markets coexists with vast informal subsistence activities, resulting in fragmented supply chains and inefficient resource allocation. Export profiles underscore commodity dependence, with primary products—fuels, minerals, and agricultural goods—comprising over 60% of merchandise exports for 80% of in 2021-2023, exposing economies to price volatility and terms-of-trade deterioration. For instance, sub-Saharan African nations derive 70-90% of exports from commodities like or cocoa, while diversification into manufactures stalls due to comparative disadvantages in and institutions. This pattern reinforces enclave economies, where rents from resource booms fail to spill over into broad-based industrialization, as evidenced by stagnant manufacturing shares below 15% of GDP in many commodity-reliant states.

Demographic Dynamics and Human Capital

Developing countries exhibit distinct demographic patterns characterized by relatively high population growth rates compared to advanced economies, driven primarily by elevated total fertility rates (TFRs) and a youthful age structure. As of 2024, the global TFR stands at approximately 2.25 children per woman, but in low-income and least-developed countries—predominantly in and parts of —it remains above 4, contrasting sharply with rates below 1.6 in high-income and . This disparity sustains annual rates of 2-3% in many developing regions, versus under 0.5% in developed ones, projecting that alone will account for over half of global population increase through 2050. These trends stem from factors including limited access to contraception, cultural preferences for larger families as economic security, and high prompting compensatory births, though has declined from peaks of 5-6 in the mid-20th century due to and modest improvements in . A prominent feature is the "youth bulge," where individuals aged 15-24 constitute 20-40% of the in countries like those in and the , far exceeding the 10-15% in aging developed nations. This structure offers a potential ""—a temporary boost to the working-age —if falls before widespread aging, enabling higher savings and ; realized this in the 1980s-2000s through export-led growth. However, in many developing contexts, it manifests as a "demographic bomb" due to insufficient job creation, with rates often exceeding 20-30%, fostering social unrest, migration pressures, and brain drain as skilled youth emigrate. exacerbates these dynamics, with rural-to-urban migration swelling megacities like and , straining infrastructure and amplifying informal employment. Human capital in developing countries lags significantly, as measured by the World Bank's Human Capital Index (HCI), which estimates the productivity of a child born today relative to one in a fully optimized environment; low-income countries average HCI scores of 0.38-0.45, implying workers achieve only 38-45% of potential output due to deficits in survival, schooling, and health. Educational attainment remains low, with secondary school completion rates below 50% in much of sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia as of 2023, hampered by underfunded systems, teacher shortages, and opportunity costs of child labor in agrarian economies. Health metrics compound this: stunting affects 25-40% of children under five in these regions, reducing cognitive development and adult earnings by 10-20%, while infectious diseases like malaria and HIV claim millions of productive years annually.
Region/GroupAvg. TFR (2024)Youth (15-24) % of Pop.HCI Score (2020 est.)
~4.520-25%0.40
~2.515-20%0.45
High-Income (Global Avg.)~1.610-12%0.75
Causal linkages reveal that rapid demographic expansion dilutes per-capita investments in and health, perpetuating low and trapping economies in subsistence cycles, while weak often prioritizes short-term consumption over long-term skill-building. Realizing the requires deliberate policies to lower via economic incentives and , alongside vocational training to match youth skills to labor demands; failures here, as in parts of the and , heighten vulnerability to conflict and stalled growth.

Governance, Institutions, and Rule of Law

Developing countries frequently exhibit weaker governance structures, characterized by limited accountability, ineffective public service delivery, and pervasive corruption, which undermine economic stability and growth. According to the World Bank's Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI), which aggregate perceptions from multiple sources across six dimensions including rule of law and control of corruption, low- and middle-income economies consistently score below global averages, often in the negative range on a -2.5 to +2.5 scale, reflecting poorer institutional performance compared to high-income counterparts. These disparities arise from historical legacies such as post-colonial power concentrations and elite capture, perpetuating systems where informal networks supplant formal rules. Rule of law remains a core institutional shortfall, with inadequate protection of property rights, contract enforcement, and judicial impartiality deterring investment and fostering uncertainty. The World Justice Project's 2024 Rule of Law Index, based on surveys of over 214,000 households and 3,500 experts across 142 countries, ranks most developing nations below the median, with scores averaging around 0.4-0.5 on a 0-1 scale for factors like constraints on government powers and absence of , far below the 0.8+ averages in advanced economies. Empirical analyses confirm that such weaknesses causally impede development; for instance, from emerging economies over 2002-2015 demonstrate that higher institutional quality—measured via composite indices of governance—positively correlates with GDP growth rates exceeding 1-2 percentage points annually in reformers. In contexts like and , judicial delays averaging 2-5 years for commercial disputes exacerbate these issues, as documented in cross-country enterprise surveys. Corruption further erodes institutional integrity, with public officials often extracting rents through and , diverting resources from productive uses. Transparency International's 2024 (CPI) assigns low- and lower-middle-income countries an average score of approximately 34 out of 100, signaling endemic public-sector graft, compared to 70+ for high-income states; for example, over two-thirds of such nations fall below the midpoint, correlating with reduced by up to 50% in highly corrupt regimes. efforts, such as those in post-1994, have yielded gains—elevating its CPI score from 23 in 2005 to 51 in 2023—through centralized enforcement and , but sustainability hinges on broader checks like independent judiciaries, which remain rare. Evidence from randomized audits in developing contexts indicates that exposure of petty reduces it by 15-20% short-term, yet elite-level persists due to weak mechanisms. Empirical studies underscore that institutional reforms, rather than external aid alone, drive transitions; cross-country regressions show that a one-standard-deviation improvement in rule-of-law metrics boosts long-term growth by 0.5-1.5% annually, as seen in East Asian cases like South Korea's post-1960s bureaucratic overhaul. However, entrenched challenges like political instability—evident in WGI scores averaging -0.5 for developing regions—often revert gains, as coups or electoral manipulations in over 20 African and Latin American states since 2000 have demonstrated. While international indices like WGI and CPI draw from diverse sources to mitigate single-outlier bias, their reliance on perceptions necessitates caution against overgeneralization, though convergent from household-level reinforces the causal primacy of domestic institutional over exogenous factors in perpetuating .

Internal Challenges and Causal Factors

Policy Failures and Economic Distortions

Policies in many developing countries have frequently involved heavy state intervention, such as (ISI), which aimed to foster domestic by protecting local industries from foreign through tariffs and subsidies. Implemented widely in from the 1950s to the 1980s, ISI led to inefficiencies, including over-reliance on uncompetitive state-supported firms, chronic balance-of-payments deficits, and high rates often exceeding 100% annually in countries like and by the late 1970s. These distortions stifled export-oriented growth and encouraged , as protected sectors captured resources without productivity gains, ultimately requiring market-oriented reforms in the 1990s to reverse stagnation. Price controls, intended to ensure affordability of essentials like food and fuel, have generated severe market distortions by suppressing signals for supply adjustments, resulting in shortages and black markets across numerous developing economies. In Venezuela during the 2010s, government-imposed price caps on basic goods contributed to acute scarcity, with empty shelves reported for over 80% of staple items by 2016, exacerbating hyperinflation that peaked at over 1 million percent annually in 2018 due to suppressed production incentives. Similarly, in Zimbabwe, price controls in the early 2000s compounded agricultural collapse following land expropriations, leading to food production drops of up to 60% and reliance on imports amid hyperinflation reaching 89.7 sextillion percent in November 2008. These policies misallocate resources, deter investment, and reduce overall welfare by prioritizing short-term political gains over efficient allocation. Subsidies for , , and industry, while aimed at promoting access and growth, often create fiscal burdens and inefficient resource use in developing nations. in countries like and totaled over $200 billion globally in 2022 for low- and middle-income economies, distorting energy markets by encouraging overuse and discouraging renewables, while straining budgets equivalent to 2-4% of GDP in some cases. Inefficient targeting—benefiting higher-income groups disproportionately—amplifies inequality and crowds out productive investments, as seen in Egypt's pre-2014 energy subsidies that fueled and black-market premiums up to 50% above official prices. Such interventions, rooted in anti-market biases, hinder long-term competitiveness by shielding unproductive sectors from adjustment pressures. Fiscal and monetary mismanagement, including excessive money printing to finance deficits, has precipitated hyperinflationary spirals that erode savings and . Zimbabwe's 2000 land reforms, which seized commercial farms without compensation, destroyed agricultural output—accounting for 40% of exports pre-reform—prompting unchecked deficit monetization and currency collapse. In , nationalizations under from 2007 onward, coupled with spending surges exceeding 50% of GDP by 2014, overwhelmed oil revenues, leading to policy-induced shortages and a GDP contraction of over 75% from 2013 to 2021. These failures underscore how ignoring fiscal discipline and property rights distorts incentives, perpetuating poverty traps despite resource endowments.

Corruption, Cronyism, and Weak Institutions

Corruption remains pervasive in many developing countries, where graft diverts resources from and . According to the 2023 (CPI) by , the global average score stagnated at 43 out of 100, with over two-thirds of countries scoring below 50, and developing economies disproportionately clustered at the lower end due to systemic , , and . In , for instance, regional averages hover around 33, reflecting impunity for high-level officials and weak judicial oversight that enable of state revenues. Empirical studies confirm that such imposes direct economic costs, with estimates indicating that a one-unit increase in perceived corruption correlates with a 0.15% to 1.5% reduction in per capita GDP growth, primarily by deterring and inflating public procurement costs. Cronyism exacerbates these issues by intertwining political power with private enterprise, fostering inefficient resource allocation in developing contexts where is common. In economies reliant on natural resources or state-led industrialization, such as those in parts of and , business elites secure subsidies, licenses, and contracts through personal ties to ruling regimes rather than competitive merit, leading to monopolistic practices and suppressed . This form of , akin to , undermines market signals and long-term growth; research shows it correlates with lower scores and higher inequality, as politically connected firms crowd out productive entrants. While some theoretical arguments posit that crony payments might expedite bureaucratic processes in highly regulated environments—a "greasing the wheels" —cross-country from developing nations largely refute this, demonstrating net negative effects on and due to distorted incentives. Weak institutions perpetuate both and by failing to enforce property rights, contracts, and mechanisms, creating a vicious cycle of development stagnation. In many low-income states, understaffed judiciaries and politicized bureaucracies prolong economic slumps, with evidence from crisis episodes indicating that institutional frailty extends downturns by 20-30% through inconsistent policy application and elite predation. reveals that such weaknesses stem from historical legacies like colonial extractive systems or post-independence power consolidations, which prioritize loyalty over competence, resulting in volatile growth and vulnerability to shocks. Greater , including secure tenure and impartial regulation, has been empirically linked to reduced levels in panels of developing countries from 1995-2021, underscoring institutions' role as a foundational barrier to sustained .

Education, Health, and Productivity Gaps

Developing countries exhibit significant deficiencies in , with enrollment rates approaching universality in many regions but secondary completion rates averaging below 50% in low-income nations as of 2023, compared to over 90% in high-income economies. Learning poverty remains acute, affecting approximately 80% of children in low- and middle-income countries who fail to achieve basic reading proficiency by age 10, despite global enrollment gains. Meanwhile, an estimated 251 million children and youth remain out of school worldwide, with stagnation in reducing this figure by only 1% over the past decade, concentrated in and . These gaps stem from inadequate , teacher shortages, and low public spending, often below 4% of GDP, limiting skill acquisition essential for modern economies. Health outcomes in developing countries lag markedly, with life expectancy at birth averaging 64 years in least developed nations versus 78 years in advanced economies as of recent global estimates. The disease burden is disproportionately high, dominated by communicable illnesses like malaria and tuberculosis, alongside malnutrition affecting over 800 million people, which impairs physical and cognitive development from early childhood. Healthy life expectancy gaps exacerbate this, with individuals in low-income settings losing 10-15 years to disability or poor health, as evidenced by Global Burden of Disease analyses showing persistent restructuring of morbidity toward non-communicable diseases amid incomplete transitions from infectious threats. Undernutrition and inadequate sanitation contribute causally, reducing workforce participation and efficiency through chronic conditions that correlate with lower caloric intake and higher infant mortality rates exceeding 40 per 1,000 births in vulnerable regions. These education and health shortfalls directly constrain labor , where output per hour worked in developing economies averages 10-20% of levels in developed countries, reflecting limited rather than just capital stock differences. Empirical studies confirm bidirectional causality: improved schooling and investments yield higher growth via enhanced worker skills and reduced absenteeism, with econometric analyses across low- and middle-income panels showing that a one-year increase in average schooling correlates with 0.5-1% annual GDP gains. In turn, low perpetuates underinvestment in through fiscal constraints, forming a self-reinforcing cycle where cognitive and physical limitations hinder technological adoption and innovation, as observed in cross-country regressions controlling for institutional factors. Data from sources like the World Bank underscore that closing these gaps requires prioritizing measurable outcomes over mere access, given the weak translation of enrollment into functional literacy or robust metrics in many aid-dependent contexts.

Resource Allocation and Environmental Mismanagement

Resource misallocation in developing countries often stems from government policies such as subsidies and regulations that distort market signals, preventing capital and labor from flowing to their most productive uses. In 's manufacturing sector, for instance, shortages and illicit payments contribute to significant misallocation, potentially reducing by up to 65% if addressed. Similarly, in , structural distortions like credit and labor market frictions explain much of the weak growth through the misallocation channel. In , cross-state variations in labor market rigidities exacerbate misallocation in manufacturing, with less rigid markets showing reduced distortions. Subsidies in agriculture and energy sectors amplify these inefficiencies, encouraging overuse of inputs and favoring less productive activities. Globally, governments spend trillions annually on such subsidies, which promote environmental harm and fiscal burdens while locking resources away from higher-value investments; redirecting them could free up at least $500 billion for more productive ends. In developing contexts, subsidized fertilizers lead to excessive application, diminishing yields and contributing to soil degradation and . , prevalent in many low-income nations, similarly distort energy markets, increasing consumption beyond efficient levels and straining public finances. Environmental mismanagement frequently arises from the , where weak property rights and enforcement allow open-access resources like forests and fisheries to be . In tropical developing regions, for cropland and pasture remains a primary driver, with losing approximately 22% of its forested area since 1900. This , unchecked by secure tenure or regulatory capacity, results in , , and heightened vulnerability to climate variability, as individuals prioritize short-term gains over long-term . In nations like , rapid growth coupled with poor forest governance has linked and fires to elevated levels. Such patterns underscore how institutional weaknesses, including insecure property rights and inadequate regulatory frameworks, causally link resource misallocation to , perpetuating cycles of low productivity and ecological strain in developing economies. Addressing these requires strengthening and reducing policy distortions to enable efficient, sustainable resource use.

External Pressures and Vulnerabilities

Trade Barriers and Global Dependencies

Developing countries encounter significant trade barriers erected by advanced economies, particularly in sectors where they hold comparative advantages, such as and labor-intensive manufactures. These include tariffs, non-tariff measures like sanitary standards, and domestic subsidies that distort global prices. For instance, tariff escalation—wherein developed nations impose higher duties on processed goods than on raw materials—discourages value-added processing in exporting countries, limiting industrial upgrading and job creation; UNCTAD reports that this affects commodities like textiles and food products from . According to WTO data, while overall bound tariffs have declined multilaterally, applied tariffs on developing country exports to high-income markets average 5-10% in sensitive sectors, compared to near-zero for intra-developed trade. Agricultural subsidies in the United States and exemplify these barriers' distortive effects. The U.S. provides over $20 billion annually in farm supports, much of which enables exports of commodities like and grains at below-market prices, depressing global benchmarks and undercutting unsubsidized producers in , where accounts for up to 40% of some nations' export earnings. Similarly, policies, including export refunds until their 2013 phase-out, have flooded markets with subsidized dairy, sugar, and cereals, reducing prices by 10-20% in affected developing regions and eroding rural livelihoods; estimates this has cost poor farmers billions in lost income since the . These interventions, justified domestically as measures, effectively transfer wealth from developing to developed economies, hindering export-led growth that propelled East Asian transitions. Beyond barriers, developing countries exhibit acute global dependencies that amplify vulnerabilities. Over 60% of rely on primary commodities for more than 70% of merchandise exports, exposing them to volatile ; UNCTAD's 2025 report notes that price shocks, as in 2022's , can slash revenues by 20-30%, fueling and instability. Reliance on a narrow set of trading partners—often 3-5 advanced economies for over half of exports—creates leverage risks, with low-income states most susceptible to sanctions or disruptions, as evidenced by historical cases like commodity embargoes. dependencies compound this: many require foreign , capital goods, and even food staples, with small island states facing costs 50-100% above global averages due to remoteness, perpetuating current account deficits averaging 5% of GDP. Such asymmetries, rooted in institutional and infrastructural gaps, underscore how external integration, while essential for accessing markets and inputs, often entrenches without complementary domestic reforms.

Aid Ineffectiveness and Debt Traps

Empirical analyses indicate that foreign has frequently failed to catalyze sustained in developing countries, with trillions of dollars disbursed since the yielding limited developmental outcomes. For instance, received over $1 trillion in aid between the 1970s and early 2000s, yet stagnated or declined in many nations during this period, contradicting expectations of aid-driven . Critics attribute this to aid's , where funds intended for specific projects are diverted to consumption or by recipient governments, undermining incentives for domestic generation and institutional . In , aid inflows correlated with rising poverty and dependency, as leaders prioritized short-term spending over productive investments, illustrating how aid can entrench rather than broad-based development. Further evidence highlights mechanisms like , where aid inflows appreciate currencies and erode export competitiveness, and , where donors prop up inefficient regimes, delaying necessary governance improvements. William Easterly's assessments reveal persistent donor fragmentation and over-reliance on technical assistance, with little selectivity toward well-governed recipients, resulting in aid primarily financing consumption rather than . Econometric studies corroborate these patterns, showing aid's positive growth effects are negligible or absent in low-institutional-quality environments, and may even exacerbate by providing unearned resources that weaken accountability. While some analyses claim conditional aid works under ideal conditions, broader data from diverse contexts affirm that systemic flaws—such as donor political motives and recipient —dominate, rendering aid a net drag on self-reliant growth. Debt traps exacerbate aid's pitfalls, as concessional loans from multilateral institutions and bilateral lenders accumulate into unsustainable burdens, compelling concessions or asset cessions. Developing countries serviced $1.4 in foreign in 2023, with payments hitting a 20-year high amid rising global rates, straining fiscal space for . Low-income nations face acute risks, with 15% in outright distress and 45% at high , evidenced by 18 defaults across 10 countries from 2020 to 2023. China's exemplifies predatory dynamics, channeling 80% of its loans to debt-distressed borrowers by 2023; defaulted in 2022 after borrowing heavily for like Hambantota Port, leasing it to for 99 years in 2017 to avert collapse, granting strategic access without outright seizure but fostering dependency. similarly defaulted in 2020 on Chinese-held debt exceeding $6 billion, prioritizing opaque loans over transparent alternatives, which critics link to geopolitical leverage rather than mutual benefit. These cases underscore causal pathways where initial aid-like loans, lacking rigorous viability assessments, evolve into traps that prioritize lender interests over borrower , perpetuating cycles of renegotiation and .

Geopolitical Instability and Conflict

Developing countries experience a disproportionate share of global armed conflicts, with the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) recording 61 active state-involved conflicts worldwide in 2024, the highest number since systematic tracking began in 1946, many concentrated in low- and middle-income nations across sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia. These conflicts, often civil wars or insurgencies, stem from internal factors such as ethnic fragmentation, resource disputes, and governance breakdowns, exacerbated by external geopolitical rivalries including proxy engagements by major powers like Russia, China, and Iran. For instance, in the Sahel region, jihadist insurgencies in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger have displaced over 2.5 million people since 2019, fueled by state fragility and cross-border arms flows from Libya's 2011 collapse. Geopolitical instability manifests in interstate tensions and hybrid threats, where developing states become arenas for great-power competition; Yemen's civil war, ongoing since 2014, involves Saudi-led coalitions against Houthi rebels backed by , resulting in over 377,000 deaths by 2021 and continued fighting into 2025, crippling infrastructure and . Similarly, the of Congo (DRC) faces multiple armed groups in the east, including the Rwanda-supported M23 rebels, with violence escalating in early 2025 to seize mineral-rich territories, contributing to 6.9 million internally displaced persons as of mid-2024. Such conflicts deter and destroy capital stock, with severe violence reducing GDP per capita by approximately 15% after five years in affected low-income economies. The economic toll extends beyond borders, as instability spills over via flows and disrupted ; sub-Saharan Africa's conflicts alone accounted for heightened events, with a 25% year-on-year increase reported in 2024, mirroring trends since 2020 amid weakening multilateral interventions. In , post-2021 military coup insurgencies have fragmented the country into ethnic fiefdoms, displacing 3 million and slashing GDP growth projections to near zero in 2025, underscoring how internal power vacuums invite external actors like to secure border interests. These patterns reveal a causal link between unresolved colonial-era borders, resource curses in commodity-dependent economies, and modern proxy dynamics, perpetuating where institutional weakness fails to mediate disputes. Empirical analyses indicate that countries with productive modern sectors are less prone to escalation, highlighting the role of economic diversification in mitigating recurrence.

Empirical Successes and Transitions

Market Liberalization and Property Rights Reforms

Market liberalization entails the reduction of state interventions in pricing, production, and , while property rights reforms establish secure, enforceable private ownership to incentivize and efficient resource use. Empirical studies indicate that these reforms have driven economic acceleration in various transition and developing economies by enabling market signals to guide allocation and fostering . For instance, analyses of structural reforms show positive associations with medium-term growth rates, particularly when combined with openness to and privatization of state assets. In , Deng Xiaoping's 1978 reforms initiated decollectivization of agriculture through the , granting farmers rights over land, which boosted output and laid foundations for industrial liberalization. This was followed by special economic zones allowing private enterprise and foreign investment, leading to average annual real GDP growth of nearly 10% from 1979 to 2017, lifting over 800 million out of . Property rights enhancements, though initially ambiguous, encouraged entrepreneurial activity, with of small state firms contributing to gains estimated at 10-20% in reformed sectors. India's 1991 liberalization dismantled the "License Raj," slashing industrial licensing requirements from over 1,000 items to 18 and reducing import tariffs from averaging 80% to below 30% by the mid-1990s, spurring private investment and GDP growth averaging 6-7% annually thereafter. Accompanying property rights improvements, including land titling reforms in some states, correlated with increased and urban real estate development. Poverty rates fell from 45% in 1993 to around 22% by 2011, with trade openness accounting for a significant portion of the decline through expanded employment in export-oriented sectors. Chile's market-oriented reforms from 1975 onward, including of over 200 state enterprises and reductions to a 10% uniform rate, strengthened property rights via constitutional protections and judicial enforcement, resulting in sustained GDP growth of 5% annually from 1985 to 1998 after initial adjustments. These changes attracted , rising from negligible levels to 7% of GDP by the 1990s, and diversified the economy beyond dependence. In post-communist , rapid in countries like and established regimes, with mass voucher schemes transferring ownership to citizens and correlating with GDP per capita recoveries exceeding 4% annual growth in the for reformers prioritizing institutional safeguards. Slower or insider-dominated privatizations elsewhere yielded weaker outcomes, underscoring the causal role of credible enforcement in translating ownership into growth via reduced uncertainty and enhanced incentives.

Case Studies of High-Growth Economies

South Korea exemplifies rapid development through following the military coup led by Park Chung-hee. Real GDP expanded at an average annual rate exceeding 8 percent from 1962 to 1989, transforming the economy from $2.3 billion to $204 billion, driven by private sector responses to incentives including subsidized credit for exporters and infrastructure investments. Land reforms in the 1950s redistributed assets, fostering agricultural productivity, while heavy emphasis on elevated and technical skills, enabling labor-intensive shifts to and automobiles. Per capita GDP growth averaged 6.6 percent during peak decades, outpacing global averages through disciplined fiscal policies and gradual trade liberalization, though initial state-directed conglomerates (chaebols) concentrated economic power. Singapore's trajectory under from 1965 onward demonstrates the efficacy of attracting (FDI) and fostering a business-friendly environment in a resource-scarce . GDP surged from approximately $500 in 1965 to $14,500 by 1991, a 2,800 percent increase, supported by average annual GDP growth of 8.5 percent through policies prioritizing low , merit-based governance, and infrastructure like the . Strict labor laws, combined with openness to multinational corporations in electronics and finance, diversified the beyond entrepôt trade, while and provident funds enhanced domestic savings rates exceeding 40 percent of GDP, channeling capital into productive investments. This model emphasized and measures, yielding near-zero and positioning Singapore as a high-income by the 1990s. China's post-1978 reforms initiated by marked a pivot from central planning to market mechanisms, achieving average annual GDP growth over 9 percent, lifting more than 800 million people out of . responsibility systems devolved to farmers, boosting agricultural output by 50 percent in the early , while special economic zones like attracted FDI through tax incentives and lax regulations, propelling export-led . Gradual of state-owned enterprises and integration into global trade via WTO accession in 2001 sustained momentum, with GDP rising from 367.9 billion yuan in 1978 to trillions in subsequent decades, though state intervention persisted in strategic sectors. These cases highlight common threads of secure property , outward orientation, and investment as accelerators of sustained high growth in formerly developing contexts.

Key Causal Mechanisms in Development Acceleration

Secure property rights emerge as a foundational mechanism for development acceleration by incentivizing long-term , agricultural productivity, and (FDI). In , property rights reforms have increased agricultural yields by enabling secure , expanded access to , and attracted FDI, with empirical reviews showing positive impacts on output growth. Similarly, formalizing property rights correlates with higher resource allocation efficiency and wealth expansion in developing economies, as stronger enforcement reduces expropriation risks and encourages . Historical evidence from underscores this: post-World War II land reforms in and redistributed assets under secure tenure, spurring rural productivity and initial that fueled industrial takeoff. Market liberalization, including , , and trade openness, drives growth by reallocating resources from inefficient state-controlled sectors to productive private enterprise. China's economic reforms initiated in 1978, which dismantled central planning and permitted private enterprise alongside FDI inflows, resulted in average annual GDP growth of 9.8% through 1998, outpacing pre-reform stagnation. Vietnam's reforms from 1986 liberalized prices, encouraged private business, and integrated into global trade, yielding consistent 6-7% growth and export surges equivalent to those of larger economies by 2018. India's 1991 liberalization dismantled the "License Raj," reduced tariffs, and boosted FDI, accelerating average growth to 7.2% over recent fiscal years and enabling sustained gains. These reforms facilitated exploitation, with empirical studies linking trade openness to productivity spillovers in . Investment in human capital, particularly quality education emphasizing cognitive skills, amplifies productivity and innovation adoption. In the East Asian "miracle" economies—South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong—superior accumulation of skilled labor through rigorous schooling systems explained up to 79% of growth variance from 1961-2000, outperforming mere years-of-schooling metrics. This mechanism interacts with markets: educated workforces absorbed foreign technology via export-oriented industries, enabling rapid catch-up to advanced economies. High domestic savings rates, often exceeding 30% of GDP in these cases, funded physical capital alongside human investments, creating a virtuous cycle of accumulation. Macroeconomic stability and institutional quality reinforce these channels by mitigating risks that deter investment. Rule of law and anti-corruption measures enhance the credibility of reforms, with cross-country evidence showing that improved governance boosts growth by protecting contracts and reducing elite capture. In acceleration episodes—defined as GDP per capita growth above 3.5% for eight or more years—80% worldwide from 1962-2002 involved policy shifts toward openness and stability, underscoring causal primacy over exogenous factors like commodity booms. However, reverse causality debates persist: while growth can strengthen institutions, sustained acceleration typically requires prior or concurrent institutional deepening to prevent reversals, as seen in post-reform trajectories of China and Vietnam. These mechanisms are interdependent; isolated application yields limited results, but bundled reforms have repeatedly catalyzed transitions from low- to high-growth equilibria.

Criticisms and Conceptual Debates

Heterogeneity and Obsolescence of the Term

The term "developing country" encompasses a broad spectrum of economies exhibiting substantial heterogeneity in income levels, institutional frameworks, and growth trajectories, rendering it analytically imprecise. World Bank data for 2023 illustrates this variance, with GNI per capita in low-income economies such as at $370, contrasting sharply with upper-middle-income countries like at approximately $13,000, both often grouped under the developing label in non-income-based classifications. This disparity extends beyond metrics to structural differences, including resource endowments and integration into global value chains, where participation varies widely across sectors and nations. Such heterogeneity complicates uniform policy prescriptions, as interventions effective in export-oriented economies like may falter in agrarian, conflict-affected states like . Originating in the post-World War II era amid and early development economics, the term initially captured nations transitioning from agrarian to industrial bases, influenced by theories positing linear stages of growth. By the late , however, empirical realities diverged: rapid industrializers like ascended to high-income status by 1997, while others stagnated due to failures or commodity dependence, challenging the implied uniformity. The label's obsolescence stems from its failure to reflect these divergences, fostering a that overlooks causal factors such as property rights enforcement and trade openness, which drive differential outcomes. In response to these limitations, major institutions have shifted away from the binary developed/developing dichotomy. The World Bank, in its 2016 World Development Indicators, ceased distinguishing between the categories, opting instead for granular income groupings to better account for heterogeneity exemplified by disparities between upper-middle-income and low-income . Similarly, frameworks like UNCTAD's classifications subdivide economies by development levels and structural features, highlighting subgroups such as versus emerging markets. Despite analytical critiques, the term endures in political arenas, such as WTO self-designations for special treatment, where over 100 members retain developing status for negotiation leverage, even as aggregate GDP in claimants like surpasses many developed economies. This persistence underscores a tension between empirical precision and strategic utility, with more nuanced metrics like HDI or income bands increasingly favored for causal analysis.

Ideological Biases and Political Exploitation

The classification of countries as "developing" often relies on self-declaration rather than rigorous, objective criteria in organizations like the World Trade Organization (WTO), enabling politically motivated retention of privileges intended for economically disadvantaged nations. For instance, China self-identified as a developing country upon joining the WTO in 2001, securing special and differential treatment (SDT) such as extended timelines for policy compliance, higher agricultural subsidies, and exemptions from certain trade disciplines, despite its rapid industrialization and status as the world's second-largest economy by nominal GDP. This has drawn criticism for undermining the WTO's rules-based system, as China's exploitation of SDT allowed it to maintain non-market practices like state subsidies while restricting market access for foreign competitors. Such exploitation extends beyond China; countries like India and Brazil, with per capita GDPs exceeding $2,000 and significant industrial bases, continue to invoke developing status for tariff flexibilities and aid preferences, diluting benefits for genuinely low-income nations. In climate negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the label exempts major emitters classified as developing—such as , which accounted for 30% of global CO2 emissions in 2023—from binding reduction targets imposed on developed economies, facilitating political leverage to demand technology transfers and without reciprocal commitments. This binary framework, inherited from 1970s decolonization discourses, perpetuates a North-South ideological divide that prioritizes historical grievances over current economic realities, as evidenced by joint statements from G77+ blocs resisting graduation criteria. Ideologically, the persistence of the "developing country" label reflects biases in international institutions toward dependency narratives, often amplified by academic and UN sources that attribute underdevelopment primarily to external factors like rather than internal failures or choices. For example, critiques framing the as a "racist, colonialist construct" overlook of post-colonial growth accelerations in through market-oriented reforms, instead favoring redistributionist agendas that sustain aid bureaucracies. Politically, authoritarian regimes exploit the label to consolidate domestic support by portraying their nations as perpetual victims of Western dominance, as seen in China's narratives justifying SDT retention until 2025, when it voluntarily forwent new WTO benefits amid U.S. pressures, without relinquishing the status outright. This strategic ambiguity allows continued access to UN voting alliances that block reforms, such as proposals for income-based graduation from LDC lists, entrenching ideological blocs over merit-based progress.

Empirical Shortcomings and Alternative Frameworks

Empirical analyses of foreign reveal consistent shortcomings in achieving sustained in developing countries. Multiple cross-country regressions, such as those reviewed in studies spanning 1960–2000, indicate no robust positive between aid inflows and GDP growth, with aid often exacerbating and dependency rather than fostering productivity. For instance, in , where aid averaged over 10% of GDP annually from 1970 to 2010, incomes stagnated or declined in many nations despite billions in transfers, attributable to misaligned incentives where aid reduces government to taxpayers. These patterns challenge neoclassical models assuming aid complements domestic savings and , as rigid donor conditions overlook local political distortions that divert funds from to patronage. Standard frameworks, including Solow-style growth models, underperform empirically by prioritizing and technology diffusion while downplaying institutional barriers. Evidence from firm-level data in poor economies shows access to modern technologies but persistent low due to weak contract enforcement and property rights, contradicting assumptions of frictionless markets. Latitude-based geographic explanations, positing tropical climates hinder and , explain only marginal variance in outcomes once institutional is accounted for; for example, post-colonial settler mortality rates correlate more strongly with extractive institutions than inherent endowments. Such models fail to predict divergences like Botswana's resource-driven growth under strong versus Zambia's stagnation, highlighting overreliance on exogenous factors. Alternative frameworks rooted in better capture causal mechanisms of development disparities. These emphasize inclusive institutions—secure property rights, impartial judiciary, and checks on —as prerequisites for investment and innovation, explaining why geography's indirect effects (e.g., via ) operate through policy choices rather than . Instrumental variable analyses using colonial reversal points, where European settlement patterns induced differing institutional legacies, attribute up to 75% of variation across former colonies to these factors over natural resources or openness. This approach integrates transaction costs and theory, revealing how autocratic regimes in aid-dependent states perpetuate low growth equilibria, unlike market-oriented reforms that unlocked East Asian transitions. Empirical tests confirm institutions' primacy: countries with post-1990s improvements saw 1–2% annual GDP gains, independent of geographic controls.

Global Interconnections

Trade, Investment, and Comparative Advantage

Developing countries frequently exhibit in sectors requiring abundant unskilled labor, agricultural production, or natural resource extraction, stemming from factor endowments that differ from those in capital- and technology-rich advanced economies. This allows specialization in goods like textiles, apparel, or commodities, where opportunity costs are lower relative to high-skill manufactures or services produced more efficiently elsewhere. based on such advantages enables mutual gains, as theorized by , by permitting countries to exchange outputs at terms more favorable than autarkic production ratios. Empirical analyses consistently link trade —often proxied by total trade as a share of GDP—to accelerated in developing contexts, with coefficients indicating positive elasticities in long-run models. For example, from diverse low-income economies show that a 10% increase in openness correlates with 0.5-1% higher annual GDP growth, conditional on initial levels and institutional . Export-led strategies, emphasizing manufactured exports over primary commodities, have empirically driven transitions, as seen in East Asia's "tiger" economies (, , , ), where export shares surged from under 10% of GDP in the to over 40% by the , coinciding with average growth rates exceeding 7% annually. China's post-1978 reforms similarly leveraged labor-intensive exports, propelling GDP per capita from $156 in 1978 to over $12,000 by 2023 via integration into global supply chains. Foreign direct investment (FDI) complements by injecting capital and , facilitating and upgrading comparative advantages toward higher-value activities. Inflows to developing countries foster job creation—estimated at 10-20 million annually in hubs—and productivity spillovers, particularly when host levels enable absorption. Aggregate FDI to rose 9% to $37 billion in 2024, supporting and export capacity, though comprising just 2% of global totals amid broader declines. Benefits accrue most where property rights and mitigate risks like expropriation or crowding out domestic investment, as weak institutions can trap FDI in enclaves with minimal linkages. Challenges persist, including vulnerability to terms-of-trade shocks in commodity-dependent exporters and potential effects from resource FDI, which appreciate currencies and erode competitiveness. Protectionist policies, justified by infant industry arguments, have often prolonged inefficiencies, with empirical reviews showing sustained openness outperforms import substitution in fostering sustained acceleration. Recent evidence suggests services exports—leveraging advantages in IT or —offer diversification pathways, though remains pivotal for scaling employment in labor-surplus economies.

Migration, Remittances, and Brain Drain

Migration from developing countries to higher-income nations has accelerated since the 1990s, driven by wage disparities, political instability, and limited domestic opportunities, with over 150 million people from low- and middle-income countries residing abroad as of 2020. This outflow includes both low-skilled laborers seeking in sectors like and , and high-skilled professionals attracted by better facilities and salaries in developed economies. Empirical data indicate that contributes to alleviation for individual households through income diversification, though aggregate economic impacts vary by country context. Remittances, defined as personal transfers from migrants to their home countries, represent a major financial inflow for many developing economies, totaling $656 billion to low- and middle-income countries in 2023, exceeding and combined. These funds, often used for consumption, , and , have reduced rates in recipient households by 5-10% in countries like and the , according to household surveys, and supported foreign exchange reserves during crises such as the . However, reliance on remittances can foster dependency, crowding out domestic investment and exposing economies to external shocks like migrant unemployment in host countries, as evidenced by a 20% drop in flows to during the . Brain drain refers to the emigration of highly skilled workers, such as physicians, engineers, and academics, which depletes in origin countries; by 2000, OECD nations hosted 20 million high-skilled immigrants from developing regions, with rates exceeding 10% of tertiary-educated populations in small island states and parts of . For instance, loses approximately 23,000 qualified professionals annually, exacerbating shortages in critical sectors like healthcare, where the physician density in many countries remains below 1 per 1,000 people partly due to migration to and . This loss hinders long-term development by reducing and institutional capacity, with studies estimating fiscal costs equivalent to 0.5-2% of GDP in affected nations through forgone tax revenues and training investments. The net effects of migration, remittances, and brain drain remain contested in empirical , with remittances providing short-term macroeconomic stabilization—evidenced by positive shocks to migrant incomes boosting provincial GDP in the by sustained margins—but failing to fully offset skill losses over medium terms. Some analyses highlight "brain gain" mechanisms, such as increased investments motivated by migration prospects and knowledge transfers, which have elevated accumulation in countries with moderate rates around 10%. Yet, causal evidence from across developing economies suggests that high-skilled outflows predominantly constrain growth in low-institutional-quality settings, where return migration and network effects are insufficient to compensate for the departure of talent essential for structural transformation. Policies like skill-matching bilateral agreements or targeted incentives for returnees have shown limited success, underscoring the challenge of retaining capabilities amid global labor market incentives.

Implications for Developed Economies

The integration of developing economies into global markets has led to significant trade imbalances favoring exporters from those nations, with developed economies like the and members of the running substantial deficits. For instance, developing countries collectively achieved a merchandise and services surplus of $177.6 billion in 2013, a trend that has persisted amid rising exports of manufactured goods from and other regions. These deficits reflect developed countries' consumption exceeding domestic production, allowing for higher imports of low-cost goods that reduce consumer prices and support economic activity, though they can signal underlying savings-investment gaps. Empirical analyses indicate that such trade patterns have displaced jobs in import-competing sectors, particularly , with U.S. to countries like contributing to an estimated 2-2.4 million job losses between 1999 and 2011, concentrated among non-college-educated workers. Offshoring of production and services to developing economies generates mixed labor market effects in developed nations. While firms benefit from cost savings—often 30-50% lower labor expenses in destinations like or —this has accelerated , with U.S. declining from 17.2 million in 2000 to 12.4 million by 2010 amid surges in imports from low-wage competitors. gains in sectors can offset some losses by enabling reinvestment in higher-value activities, yielding net economic benefits estimated at 0.5-1% of GDP annually for the U.S., but these are unevenly distributed, exacerbating stagnation and inequality for displaced workers who face search frictions and skill mismatches. Studies reviewing 's impacts highlight that while aggregate may stabilize through service sector expansion, sectoral rises in affected industries, prompting policy responses like trade adjustment assistance, though evidence of their efficacy remains limited. Migration from developing to developed economies influences labor supplies and fiscal balances, often filling shortages in low- and high-skilled roles. Immigrants contribute to GDP growth by increasing the workforce and consumer base, with data showing migrants boosting host-country productivity through complementary skills and entrepreneurship, particularly in aging populations like those in and . However, low-skilled inflows can depress wages in specific segments by 1-3% for native workers without high school diplomas, while remittances totaling over $800 billion globally in 2022 primarily benefit sending countries but indirectly support developed economies via sustained trade demand. Brain drain from developing nations supplies talent to developed tech and healthcare sectors, yet it raises dependency risks if global mobility reverses amid geopolitical tensions. Broader supply chain entanglements expose developed economies to vulnerabilities, as reliance on developing countries for critical inputs—such as 80% of global rare earths from —has amplified disruptions, as seen in shortages during the 2020-2022 period that cost the U.S. economy up to $240 billion. This interdependence fosters efficiency through but heightens geopolitical risks, prompting reshoring initiatives that could raise costs by 10-20% without equivalent offsets. Overall, while developing economies' growth expands export markets for developed nations—projected to drive 60% of global demand increases by 2030—these dynamics challenge domestic cohesion by widening regional disparities between export-oriented hubs and declining industrial areas.

References

  1. https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/378834-how-does-the-world-bank-classify-countries
  2. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2023/April/groups-and-aggregates
  3. https://www.worlddata.info/developing-countries.php
  4. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/social-sciences/developing-countries
  5. https://study.com/academy/lesson/developing-countries-definition-examples.html
  6. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/time-stop-referring-developing-world
  7. https://unctad.org/topic/least-developed-countries/list
  8. https://academic.oup.com/book/57738/chapter/470549822
  9. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384398874_STRUCTURAL_FEATURES_AND_COMMON_CHARACTERISTICS_OF_DEVELOPING_COUNTRIES
  10. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7487265/
  11. https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups
  12. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/world-bank-country-classifications-by-income-level-for-2024-2025
  13. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/gni-per-capita-vs-gdp-per-capita
  14. https://ourworldindata.org/world-bank-income-groups-explained
  15. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/opendata/understanding-country-income--world-bank-group-income-classifica
  16. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD
  17. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD?locations=CN
  18. https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/specific-country-data
  19. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2025/april/groups-and-aggregates
  20. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2025/10/14/world-economic-outlook-october-2025
  21. https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index
  22. https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2025
  23. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800997001687
  24. https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/composite-indices
  25. https://hdr.undp.org/inequality-adjusted-human-development-index
  26. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11658712/
  27. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09737030241288695
  28. https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/download-manager-files/Structural%2520Transformation%2520in%2520Developing%2520Countries-FINAL.pdf
  29. https://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/publications/industrial_development/1_1.pdf
  30. https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2021/september/industrialization-development-africa
  31. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/competitiveness/publication/technology-adoption-by-firms-in-developing-countries
  32. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/c4b117d4-ac7b-58ec-8c28-68747f3beb87
  33. https://unctadstat.unctad.org/EN/Pci.html
  34. https://unctad.org/topic/least-developed-countries/productive-capacities-index
  35. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/f7ae60c4-b1e2-54b4-8f15-3afbea1b79db
  36. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/developmenttalk/broad-based-productivity-slowdown-seven-charts
  37. https://policy.desa.un.org/sites/default/files/inline-images/eapd2023/2019LINK-Monday-Session5-E.pdf
  38. https://itpo-tokyo.unido.org/files/UNIDO_What-factors-drive-successful-industrialization-Evidence-and-implications-for-developing-countries.pdf
  39. https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/wesp/wesp_current/2014wesp_country_classification.pdf
  40. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9185389/
  41. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09692290.2023.2246975
  42. https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20021206_RL31662_e027b76c031d8532c67726eaf62662c27fb8d24b.pdf
  43. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/devel_e/d1who_e.htm
  44. https://www.tralac.org/news/article/13839-an-undifferentiated-wto-self-declared-development-status-risks-institutional-irrelevance.html
  45. https://geneva.usmission.gov/2019/10/15/statements-by-the-united-states-at-the-wto-general-council-meeting/
  46. https://policy.desa.un.org/least-developed-countries
  47. https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/development-dimension-what-do-about-differential-treatment-trade
  48. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/asia-and-africa
  49. https://www.oerproject.com/en/oer-materials/oer-media/html-articles/origins/unit8/connecting-decolonization-and-the-cold-war
  50. https://www.worldbank.org/en/archive/history
  51. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/frequently-asked-questions
  52. https://unctad.org/news/un-trade-and-development-pioneering-global-economic-and-development-thought-decades
  53. https://unctad.org/topic/least-developed-countries/recognition
  54. https://www.un-ilibrary.org/content/books/9789210056052c008
  55. https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org7_e.htm
  56. https://online.norwich.edu/online/about/resource-library/consequences-collapse-soviet-union
  57. http://dspace.univ-tlemcen.dz/bitstream/112/15121/1/amirat-belaid.pdf
  58. https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2021/what-washington-consensus
  59. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-have-the-washington-consensus-reforms-affected-economic-performance-in-sub-saharan-africa/
  60. https://www.aehnetwork.org/blog/washington-consensus-reforms-and-economic-performance-in-sub-saharan-africa-lessons-from-the-past-four-decades/
  61. https://www.economicsobservatory.com/the-brics-countries-where-next-and-what-impact-on-the-global-economy
  62. https://www.unido.org/sites/default/files/unido-publications/2025-02/IID%2520Policy%2520Brief%252017%2520-%2520Leveraging%2520BRICS%2520for%2520industrial%2520development.pdf
  63. https://growthlab.hks.harvard.edu/files/growthlab/files/serra8.pdf
  64. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-brics-group-and-why-it-expanding
  65. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG
  66. https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2023/12/11/sp121123-cold-war-ii-preserving-economic-cooperation-amid-geoeconomic-fragmentation
  67. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/stages-of-economic-growth/9CB46055035A1915509CE15A57848A07
  68. https://www.thoughtco.com/rostows-stages-of-growth-development-model-1434564
  69. https://www.tutor2u.net/economics/reference/economic-growth-harrod-domar-model
  70. http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/les/Solow1956.pdf
  71. https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/inline-files/Lectures%25202%2520and%25203%2520-%2520The%2520Solow%2520Grow%2520Model.pdf
  72. https://biblioguias.cepal.org/prebisch_en/XXIcentury/structural-heterogeneity
  73. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w27919/w27919.pdf
  74. https://biblioguias.cepal.org/prebisch_en/prebisch-eclac-and-historical-structural-method
  75. https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/downloads/Dependency-theory-e-book-online.pdf
  76. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/223386599900200106
  77. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3340297
  78. https://www.marxists.org/archive/mandel/1955/08/imp-crit.html
  79. https://monthlyreview.org/articles/imperialism-and-white-settler-colonialism-in-marxist-theory/
  80. https://www.americasquarterly.org/article/failed-protectionism-what-latin-america-can-teach-us/
  81. https://ivypanda.com/essays/does-the-east-asian-miracle-invalidate-dependency-theory/
  82. https://www.e-ir.info/2014/10/16/the-asian-tigers-from-independence-to-industrialisation/
  83. https://oxfordre.com/internationalstudies/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.001.0001/acrefore-9780190846626-e-142
  84. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0147596720300639
  85. https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/022/0040/003/article-A006-en.xml
  86. https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/publications/institutions-as-the-fundamental-cause-of-long-run-.pdf
  87. https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.91.5.1369
  88. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/1c1c7a97-7df0-576a-a857-3670a0810a51
  89. https://voxdev.org/topic/how-daron-acemoglu-simon-johnson-and-james-robinson-have-contributed-development-economics
  90. https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/institutions-and-prosperity-2024-nobel-laureates
  91. https://actuary.org/article/on-economics-first-principles/
  92. https://rei.unipg.it/rei/article/view/14
  93. https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/inline-files/Institutions%2C%2520Human%2520Capital%2520and%2520Development.pdf
  94. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w27852/w27852.pdf
  95. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2017/11/17/Growth-and-Jobs-in-Developing-Economies-Trends-and-Cycles-45412
  96. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2024
  97. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.IND.TOTL.ZS
  98. https://ilostat.ilo.org/topics/informality/
  99. https://unctad.org/publication/state-commodity-dependence-2025
  100. https://unctad.org/topic/commodities/state-of-commodity-dependence
  101. https://www.ined.fr/en/everything_about_population/demographic-facts-sheets/focus-on/2024-les-nations-unies-publient-de-nouvelles-projections-de-population-mondiale/
  102. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/total-fertility-rate
  103. https://ourworldindata.org/un-population-2024-revision
  104. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8393076/
  105. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/developmenttalk/youth-bulge-a-demographic-dividend-or-a-demographic-bomb-in-developing-countries
  106. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4528970/
  107. https://wol.iza.org/articles/youth-bulges-and-youth-unemployment/long
  108. https://thesouthernhub.org/topics/socio-economic/youth-bulge-in-africa-the-middle-east--migration-the-brain-drain
  109. https://jfsdigital.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/21-2-2.pdf
  110. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/human-capital
  111. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/overview
  112. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372862512_Human_Capital_in_Developing_Countries_Common_Challenges_and_the_Path_Forward
  113. https://www.healthdata.org/news-events/newsroom/news-releases/lancet-dramatic-declines-global-fertility-rates-set-transform
  114. https://ideas.repec.org/a/aes/jetimm/v1y2023i2p18-29.html
  115. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/past-present-and-prospective-the-demographic-dividend-opportunity-in-arab-youth/
  116. https://acetforafrica.org/research-and-analysis/insights-ideas/policy-briefs/harnessing-africas-demographic-dividend/
  117. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/2bf826e0-9608-40f7-97cc-23ffd18766ba
  118. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/worldwide-governance-indicators
  119. https://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/sites/govindicators/doc/wgimethodologypaper.pdf
  120. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/gdsmdpbg2420064_en.pdf
  121. https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/
  122. https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/downloads/WJPIndex2024.pdf
  123. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=86119
  124. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381397513_Institutional_quality_and_economic_growth_Evidence_from_developing_countries
  125. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099506412192421990/pdf/IDU1f29a804219f32142101af511d58f39efea00.pdf
  126. https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2024
  127. https://images.transparencycdn.org/images/CPI2024_Report_Eng1.pdf
  128. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/transparency_corruption/WB-low-mid/
  129. https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2023
  130. https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/publications/120224%2520Corruption%2520Review%2520Final.pdf
  131. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276726528_Institutional_quality_and_economic_growth_Empirical_evidence_from_the_Sudanese_economy
  132. https://virtusinterpress.org/IMG/pdf/jgrv13i2siart15.pdf
  133. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2017
  134. https://gsdrc.org/document-library/the-worldwide-governance-indicators-project-answering-the-critics/
  135. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/09_wgi_kaufmann.pdf
  136. https://www.gresham.ac.uk/watch-now/import-substitution
  137. https://fpa.org/price-fixing-can-worsen-crisis-venezuela/
  138. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/122915/worst-hyperinflations-history.asp
  139. https://leaksmyheng.wordpress.com/2018/02/23/the-main-causes-of-hyperinflation-zimbabwe-and-venezuela-the-mismanagement-of-fiscal-policy/
  140. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/735161586781898890/pdf/Price-Controls-Good-Intentions-Bad-Outcomes.pdf
  141. https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/2022/mar/why-price-controls-should-stay-history-books
  142. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2023/06/15/trillions-wasted-on-subsidies-could-help-address-climate-change
  143. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2023/06/B2B-subsidy-wars-elizabeth-van-heuvelen
  144. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/trade/global-trade-tensions-fueled-rising-government-subsidies-risk-undermining-efforts-fight
  145. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26230/w26230.pdf
  146. https://us.transparency.org/news/transparency-international-releases-the-2023-corruption-perceptions-index/
  147. https://www.transparency.org/en/news/cpi-2023-sub-saharan-africa-corruption-impunity-civic-space-access-justice
  148. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23322039.2022.2129368
  149. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/opinion/2023/06/13/corruption-is-a-global-problem-for-development-to-fight-it-we-all-have-a-role-to-play
  150. https://www.heritage.org/international-economies/report/cronyism-undermining-economic-freedom-and-prosperity-around-the
  151. https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/0817999620_1.pdf
  152. https://armgpublishing.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/BEL_8_2_2024_4.pdf
  153. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/207207/1/cesifo1_wp7816.pdf
  154. https://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/514691580305796466/pdf/Do-Weak-Institutions-Prolong-Crises-On-the-Identification-Characteristics-and-Duration-of-Declines-During-Economic-Slumps.pdf
  155. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/why-developing-countries-get-stuck-with-weak-institutions-and-how-foreign-actors-can-help/
  156. https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2022-09/institutional-causes-macroeeconomic-symptoms.pdf
  157. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090944325000213
  158. https://www.imf.org/EXTERNAL/PUBS/FT/ISSUES6/INDEX.HTM
  159. https://ourworldindata.org/global-education
  160. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/251m-children-and-youth-still-out-school-despite-decades-progress-unesco-report
  161. https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/83e58d3341493b223668bb9d6cb7e9c2-0140022023/related/EFW-2023-Report-oct9v2.pdf
  162. https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/mortality-and-global-health-estimates/ghe-life-expectancy-and-healthy-life-expectancy
  163. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2825%2901637-X/fulltext
  164. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43856-025-01111-2
  165. https://www.healthdata.org/research-analysis/library/burden-375-diseases-and-injuries-risk-attributable-burden-88-risk-factors
  166. https://www.conference-board.org/press/global-productivity-brief-2023
  167. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343535062_The_Causal_Links_Among_Economic_Growth_Education_and_Health_Evidence_from_Developed_and_Developing_Countries
  168. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1357
  169. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/aghion/files/causal_impact_of_education.pdf
  170. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/5e673a53-383e-4436-a49a-35098afcd303
  171. https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/573721527993012696-0010022018/original/C1MisallocationandTFPinGhanaAckahandothers.pdf
  172. https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/WP/2018/wp18112.ashx
  173. https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/WP/2021/English/wpiea2021051-print-pdf.ashx
  174. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/15/vast-fossil-fuel-and-farming-subsidies-causing-environmental-havoc-world-bank
  175. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climatechange/publication/detox-development
  176. https://www.chathamhouse.org/2023/05/deforestation-africa
  177. https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/tragedy-of-the-commons-impact-on-sustainability-issues
  178. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652624017591
  179. https://earth.org/what-is-tragedy-of-the-commons/
  180. https://www.iisd.org/articles/explainer/harmful-subsidies-explained-eight-key-takeaways-experts
  181. https://unctad.org/news/tariff-escalation-keeps-developing-economies-moving-global-value-chains
  182. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tariffs_e/tariff_data_e.htm
  183. https://en.irefeurope.org/publications/online-articles/article/how-do-agricultural-subsidies-in-wealthy-countries-harm-low-income-countries/
  184. https://policy-practice.oxfam.org/resources/stop-the-dumping-how-eu-agricultural-subsidies-are-damaging-livelihoods-in-the-114605/
  185. https://www.iatp.org/files/Dumping_on_the_Poor_The_Common_Agricultural_Policy%2C_the_WTO_...
  186. https://cepr.org/publications/dp20457
  187. https://unctad.org/news/vulnerable-economies-urge-stronger-global-support-tackle-mounting-shocks
  188. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/trade/brief/trade-has-been-a-powerful-driver-of-economic-development-and-poverty-reduction
  189. https://www.tutor2u.net/economics/reference/what-are-the-main-arguments-put-forward-in-dead-aid-by-dambisa-moyo
  190. https://revisesociology.com/2016/11/11/dambisa-moyos-dead-aid-a-summary-and-criticism/
  191. https://www.carnegiecouncil.org/media/series/39/20090409-dead-aid-why-aid-is-not-working-and-how-there-is-a-better-way-for-africa
  192. https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/2010/11/cj29n3-1.pdf
  193. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/09foreignaid_easterly.pdf
  194. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/rxforsurvival/series/matters/s2p1_case.html
  195. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/soej.12725
  196. https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/bad-samaritans-foreign-aid
  197. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X23003194
  198. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2024/12/03/developing-countries-paid-record-1-4-trillion-on-foreign-debt-in-2023
  199. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/ar/2023/in-focus/public-debt/
  200. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/debt-distress-road-belt-and-road
  201. https://apnews.com/article/china-debt-banking-loans-financial-developing-countries-collapse-8df6f9fac3e1e758d0e6d8d5dfbd3ed6
  202. https://issafrica.org/iss-today/lessons-from-sri-lanka-on-chinas-debt-trap-diplomacy
  203. https://www.uu.se/en/press/press-releases/2025/2025-06-11-ucdp-sharp-increase-in-conflicts-and-wars
  204. https://www.cfr.org/report/conflicts-watch-2025
  205. https://acleddata.com/global-analysis/conflict-watchlist
  206. https://www.crisisgroup.org/global/10-conflicts-watch-2025
  207. https://www.steptoe.com/en/news-publications/stepwise-risk-outlook/conflicts-to-watch-in-2025-amid-global-focus-on-trade-war.html
  208. https://concernusa.org/news/countries-in-conflict/
  209. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/fragilityconflictviolence/overview
  210. https://acleddata.com/series/acled-conflict-index
  211. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-currently-at-war
  212. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1122271/
  213. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X20304009
  214. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022199612001341
  215. https://www.elibrary.imf.org/display/book/9781589068186/ch002.xml
  216. https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL33534.html
  217. https://www.amro-asia.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Chinas-Reform-and-Opening-Up_compressed.pdf
  218. https://www.cato.org/publications/chinas-post-1978-economic-development-entry-global-trading-system
  219. https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/twenty-five-years-indian-economic-reform
  220. https://trends.ufm.edu/en/article/indias-liberalization-1991/
  221. https://www.heritage.org/americas/report/us-role-chiles-democratic-and-economic-reforms
  222. https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstreams/7312037c-abbe-6bd4-e053-0100007fdf3b/download
  223. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254078936_Mass_Privatization_State_Capacity_and_Economic_Growth_in_Post-Communist_Countries
  224. https://factsanddetails.com/korea/South_Korea/Modern_History/entry-7184.html
  225. https://kellogg.nd.edu/sites/default/files/old_files/documents/166_0.pdf
  226. https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2018/march/how-south-korea-economy-develop-quickly
  227. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24739418
  228. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2015/03/how-lee-kuan-yew-transformed-singapore/
  229. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/lo/countries/sg/sg_economic.html
  230. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-32028693
  231. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/china/overview
  232. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10358941/
  233. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/383897977_The_Role_of_Secure_Property_Rights_in_Driving_Economic_Growth_A_Review_of_Recent_Evidence
  234. https://www.libertarianism.org/publications/essays/property-rights-key-economic-development
  235. https://www.theatlantic.com/podcasts/archive/2024/10/taiwan-east-asian-miracle-land-reform/680183/
  236. https://www.academia.edu/63151983/Economic_Reform_and_Performance_A_Comparative_Study_of_China_and_Vietnam
  237. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2018/09/how-vietnam-became-an-economic-miracle/
  238. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2025/02/28/india-accelerated-reforms-needed-to-speed-up-growth-and-achieve-high-income-status-by-2047
  239. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5213693
  240. https://hanushek.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Hanushek%2BWoessmann%25202016%2520Science%2520351%286271%29.pdf
  241. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/east-asian-miracle-remembered-tiger-secrets-hidden-plain-sight
  242. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/975081468244550798/pdf/multi-page.pdf
  243. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590051X23000278
  244. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264999321001826
  245. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/shleifer/files/do_institutions_cause_growth.pdf
  246. https://pure.eur.nl/en/publications/heterogeneous-participation-of-developing-countries-in-global-val
  247. https://www.britannica.com/money/developing-country
  248. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2016/05/why-is-the-world-bank-getting-rid-of-the-term-developing-country/
  249. https://www.heritage.org/global-politics/commentary/china-not-developing-country-and-should-not-be-treated-one
  250. https://theglobalobservatory.org/2019/01/china-developing-country-status-wto-time-for-upgrade/
  251. https://www.heritage.org/international-economies/commentary/american-conservatives-renew-push-against-chinas-developing
  252. https://www.reuters.com/world/china-says-it-wont-change-developing-country-status-will-forgo-benefits-2025-09-24/
  253. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/china-gives-up-wto-developing-country-status-in-face-of-u-s-tariffs
  254. https://fee.org/articles/the-failures-and-fallacies-of-foreign-aid/
  255. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227001942_Exploring_the_Failure_of_Foreign_Aid_The_Role_of_Incentives_and_Information
  256. https://english.umd.edu/research-innovation/journals/interpolations/spring-2012/ineffectiveness-foreign-aid
  257. https://economics.mit.edu/research/publications/growth-theory-through-lens-development-economics-0
  258. https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/10846/can-geography-explain-differences-in-economic-development-between-present-day-ec
  259. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1056819023002890
  260. https://academic.oup.com/book/32736/chapter/272744767
  261. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/geography-and-institutions-on-the-origins-of-comparative-development/
  262. https://www.cato.org/cato-journal/fall-2021/alternative-theoretical-framework-economics
  263. https://direct.mit.edu/jinh/article/48/4/523/49460/The-Effect-of-Geography-and-Institutions-on
  264. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/economics/comparative-advantage/
  265. https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/ap-macroeconomics/basic-economics-concepts-macro/scarcity-and-growth/a/lesson-summary-comparative-advantage-and-gains-from-trade
  266. https://www.econ.iastate.edu/ask-an-economist/any-real-world-examples-comparative-advantage
  267. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=117374
  268. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325263956_Impact_of_trade_openness_on_economic_growth_Empirical_evidence_from_South_Africa
  269. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212567115000040
  270. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/011416/exportled-growth-strategies-through-history.asp
  271. https://www.hinrichfoundation.com/research/article/tech/export-led-growth-on-the-wane-in-east-asia/
  272. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1043951X19300720
  273. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2001/06/loungani.htm
  274. https://researchfdi.com/foreign-direct-investment-advantages-disadvantages/
  275. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1925209924003218
  276. https://unctad.org/publication/world-investment-report-2025
  277. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/competitiveness/publication/global-investment-competitiveness-report
  278. https://www.lawjournals.org/assets/archives/2025/vol11issue3/11030.pdf
  279. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/declining-foreign-direct-investment-cant-contribute-much-to-sustainable-development/
  280. https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/itcdtab8_en.pdf
  281. https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/rise-services-exports-new-pathways-growth
  282. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/de08005f-b7d9-5594-a0e7-2ed36c5ee4ff
  283. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/migration/brief/remittances-knomad
  284. https://www.nber.org/reporter/2025number1/international-migration-remittances-and-economic-development
  285. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780444537683000205
  286. https://wol.iza.org/articles/brain-drain-from-developing-countries/long
  287. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5345397/
  288. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/099654308272476002
  289. https://egc.yale.edu/research/brain-drain-or-brain-gain-new-research-identifies-more-nuanced-story-about-skilled-migration
  290. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354105418_International_Migration_Remittances_and_Brain_Drain_Impacts_on_Development
  291. https://johanneshaushofer.com/publications/Batista_et_al_Science_2025.pdf
  292. https://unctad.org/news/trade-balance-developing-and-developed-countries-continues-converge-unctad-statistics-show
  293. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/11/trade-deficit-global-economy/
  294. https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/journals/offshoring_and_labor_final.pdf
  295. https://www.kdci.co/outsourcing-blog/post/outsourcing-to-developing-countries
  296. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/offshoring-service-jobs-bane-or-boon-and-what-to-do/
  297. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022199610000280
  298. https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/economic-impact-of-migration.html
  299. https://www.iom.int/resources/migration-and-development-dhananjayan-sriskandarajah
  300. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/developmenttalk/the-shifting-landscape-of-global-manufacturing--from-offshoring-
  301. https://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/ib/2001/110801.htm
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.