Jump to content

Talk:Developing country: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
m Reverted 1 edit by 37.111.168.114 (talk) to last revision by Annh07
 
(97 intermediate revisions by 51 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|noarchive=yes|search=no}}
to you (hello) from an underdeveloped country now. If anything, I vote for linkage with the "Third World" debate article. Thanks. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Joyce898|Joyce898]] ([[User talk:Joyce898|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Joyce898|contribs]]) 18:12, August 29, 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
{{Controversy}}
{{calm}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Economics|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject International relations|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Sanitation|importance=mid}}
}}
{{Backwardscopy
|author = Surhone, L. M., Surhone, L. M., Timpledon, M. T., & Marseken, S. F.
|year = 2010
|title = Social determinants of obesity: Obesity, social class, globalization, physical fitness, undeveloped countries
|org = Betascript Publishing
|comments = {{OCLC|712973362}}, {{ISBN|9786132041050}}.
|bot=LivingBot
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 1
|minthreadsleft = 5
|minthreadstoarchive = 3
|algo = old(150d)
|archive = Talk:Developing country/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{Archives|auto=short|collapsible=yes|search=yes|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=150}}


== Climate Change ==
[[User:PeregrineAY|PeregrineAY]] 22:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


Hi there,
: '''Oppose'''. While possibly misguided, "developing countries" does seem to be the convention. For example, Google search for "developing country" on [[UN]] website shows 30,800 matches (as of writing of this comment), and no matches for "economically less developed country" or "less economically developed country"; similarly, Google search of [[WTO]] website gives 23,600 matches for "developing country", and no matches for either of the proposed terms, and on the [[World Bank]] website, the results are similarly 56,600, 0, and 0 respectively. Besides, it's much easier to say. [[User:Ikh|Ikh]] 09:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
I am new (to this page and to wikipedia editing) so apologies if I am not adhering to guidelines. Please do correct me! I think that in general, but in particular for this section we need to write about the leadership of developing countries in adapting and building resilience to climate change and that they are not just portrayed as victims. I have started to do this by adding a sentence or two on Bangladesh but there is much more that can be added. [[User:MduToit74|MduToit74]] ([[User talk:MduToit74|talk]]) 13:17, 30 November 2020 (UTC)MduToit74
: '''''Oppose''''' Impolitic: the current titles are the prevalent ones in use, being intuitive and conforming to the [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions|Wp common naming convention]]. The proposed titles are not at all used (online) and unnecessarily occlude the topic for a visitor. Similarly, the UN [[HDI]] categorises countries according to high, medium, and low human development. Instead, edit the article to better embrace a [[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]]. [[User:E Pluribus Anthony|E Pluribus Anthony]] | [[User talk:E Pluribus Anthony|''talk'']] | 12:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
: Thanks for making this edit, [[User:MduToit74|MduToit74]]! That's a good move and we need more of that... [[User:EMsmile|EMsmile]] ([[User talk:EMsmile|talk]]) 02:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
::Nothing would be occluded (obstructed), would it? The redirect would ensure they find the article. And to quote from [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions]]:
:::"This policy in a nutshell: Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature."
::The title [[Less developed country]] (plus appropriate redirects) would satisfy this policy - the meaning is easily recognized, and less ambiguous the the current name - while also being more accurate than "developing country". See my comments below. --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] 05:22, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
**points well taken, I shall edit the articles soon, instead of renaming. <font color="#2e8b57">[[User:PeregrineAY|Peregrine]]</font><font color="#006400"><sub><sup>[[User_talk:PeregrineAY|AY]]</sup></sub></font> 10:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)


== Developing country as a historical term ==
I'm not saying anything needs to be changed, i just hate the term 'developing country' - it assumes that all countries are aiming to be like the developed countries. It assumes that economic development is the only important attribute of a country, or that rural, agricultural countries are somehow ''backward''. Maybe if that's a common objection to the term it could be mentioned in the article? [[User:Joziboy|Joziboy]] 27 Feb 2006, 19:13 UTC


In the introduction, it says that Developing country is equal to LMIC, whereas I think most people think of Least Developed Countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_developed_countries when they say Developing country. In the 1970's the world, in regards to income, looked like a Bactrian Camel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactrian_camel while it since the last 20 years or so looks more like a Dromedary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dromedary, see the 1970 compared to 2015 figures here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World#Great_Divergence_and_Great_Convergence. Less than 10% of the world's population live in countries that are low-income and thus in what we used to call Developing countries. Perhaps a billion or so live in high income countries, so left are more than 5 billion people, the bulk of humanity, who lives in middle-income countries. The terms Developing/Developed countries are therefore out-dated as the world no longer is divided in two. Let's take Hunger as an example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger#/media/File:Hunger_Map_2020_World_Food_Programme.svg. Some countries in Europe (Developed Countries) have a higher proportion of people suffering from hunger than a quite large number of countries in Developing countries. So, just like the use of 1st/2nd/3rd world countries describing how the Cold War divided the world, but where people still use Third World countries as a term for low-income countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-world_model, I would like to change the content in the article so that the term Developing country also is viewed as a term belonging to how the world '''was''' divided, but not is anymore. -- Please also refer to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Developing_country/Archive_1#Discussion_about_name_change_(again) for a previous similar discussion. [[User:Olle Terenius (UU)|Olle Terenius (UU)]] ([[User talk:Olle Terenius (UU)|talk]]) 15:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
: This article concentrates on single area and has no ambition to cover everything. That the term gets used in wrong contexts is not problem that could be solved here. [[User:Pavel Vozenilek|Pavel Vozenilek]] 05:28, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
::But that doesn't mean we should repeat a common error, if we can easily be more accurate. --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] 05:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
:'''<s>Strong</s> Conditional support''' for name change <s>- at least, I'd support changing this one to [[Less developed country]] (currently redirects to this article).</s> The common term ''Developing country'' is euphemistic and inaccurate as a general term. We must be concerned with accuracy, not just common usage.
:The term ''Less developed country'' is not as common (2.5 million hits on Google, compared to 98 million), but it is in use, especially in academic writing, and writing focused on these countries. I have come across it a number of times in my study. It's more factual and actually more easily understandable than ''Developing country'', making it more suitable as the article title. The explanation in the intro will ensure there is no confusion. --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] 05:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
::I've realized that LDC also stands for [[Least Developed Country]], a term used by the UN with a related but different meaning. So [[Less developed country]] mightn't be ideal. I still don't like the term "Developing country," but it needs to be a clear term which is already in use (though I think not necessarily as common as "Developing country" or [[Third world]]. Will give it some thought. --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] 07:55, 7 April 2006 (UTC)


: I took part in the previous discussion, so for people who are new, please take a look at that archived discussion link. I personally don't think this statement is true: "I think most people think of Least Developed Countries when they say Developing country". Is there any evidence for it or just a gut feeling? I don't have evidence at hand either but as far as I can see from the literature, newspaper articles, websites, blogs etc. the term "developing countries" is currently still used interchangeably with "low and middle income countries" (maybe it'll change in future?), and includes the sub-articles of e.g. [[Least developed countries]], [[Small Island Developing States]], [[Landlocked developing countries]], [[Heavily indebted poor countries]] (there is probably some overlap and repetition between those articles which ought to be improved). Note that I also started a discussion here about a possible new category for "developing countries topics": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Categories#New_category_for_articles_that_deal_with_topics_in_developing_countries? Overall, the guiding principle for the naming of Wikipedia articles is [[WP:Commonname]]. It'll be interesting to hear what everyone else things. - Apart from that, nothing would stop you, [[User:Olle Terenius (UU)|Olle Terenius (UU)]], from improving the content of this article and adding more information, using reliable sources. A good starting point would be the section on "definitions" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country#Definitions). Also the section on "opportunities" needs reworking (it's actually a left over section from an earlier version of the article). [[User:EMsmile|EMsmile]] ([[User talk:EMsmile|talk]]) 12:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
::Given that developing countries do not have a very coherent definition, I would not start further discussion topics related to them. In my opinion, it is better to have specific rankings of development indicators (GDP per capita, infrastructure, health, etc.) across all countries than to have very broad but not very precise articles on developing countries or to restrict attention to an arbitrarily picked set of countries. I would follow the World Bank approach in that as they are the biggest experts [[Special:Contributions/99.225.143.94|99.225.143.94]] ([[User talk:99.225.143.94|talk]]) 12:50, 14 June 2024 (UTC)


== The Gulf, Chile, Mauritius, Seychelles ==
I think 'developing country' is really a lie - some countries will develop others not, largely because the rich don't want them to. The term 'developing country' supports the myth that everything is going the right way to sort out poverty. "Poor countries" is often appropriate "less developed countries" is at least true[[User:Johncmullen1960|Johncmullen1960]] 16:23, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


How is UAE, Qatar, and the gulf countries except Yemen not developed?🤫🤫🤫 democratic no but developed yes [[User:Nlivataye|Nlivataye]] ([[User talk:Nlivataye|talk]]) 15:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
It seems that "developing country" is the best choice. There is a clear difference between what economists call a developing country and an underdeveled country, less developed country or third country. Developing countries are those that showed in the last years sings of improvement not only from the economic point of view, but also regarding security and political stability and all the rest.
: [[User:Nlivataye|Nlivataye]] we can only go by what the published sources say. Do you have a publication handy that states that those countries are not grouped as developing countries? If yes, then please add that information with the source. Thanks. [[User:EMsmile|EMsmile]] ([[User talk:EMsmile|talk]]) 01:29, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
:: Most likely human rights and violence agaisnt women. [[User:13Sundin|13Sundin]] ([[User talk:13Sundin|talk]]) 08:44, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
== "[[:Backward Area]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
The redirect <span class="plainlinks">[//en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Backward_Area&redirect=no Backward Area]</span> has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|redirects for discussion]] to determine whether its use and function meets the [[Wikipedia:Redirect|redirect guidelines]]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 28#Backward Area}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> [[User:TartarTorte|<b style="color: #ea5a5a;">Tartar</b>]][[User talk:TartarTorte|<b>Torte</b>]] 18:05, 28 September 2023 (UTC)


== LDC, LLDC..... ==


== Suggest to delete the IMF map and downplay/discuss their definition ==
the least developed country [https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/appendix/appendix-a.html#L]
The IMF term, the only institutional definition at this point since the World Bank has abandoned the term and at the UN it is by self identification, is Developing and Emerging Markets and not Developing Countries. As discussed later in the article, their definition emphasizes global financial integration instead of general level of economic and social development. For this reason, I would not use their map and it is questionable whether a workable definition of developing countries exists. I would just have a historic overview, and then jump to the classification of the World Bank and Global South, etc.
In summary, I propose deleting the IMF/UN map (or keep the UN portion only), and start with the WB classification. The IMF classification is discussed later anyway. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/99.225.143.94|99.225.143.94]] ([[User talk:99.225.143.94#top|talk]]) 12:38, 14 June 2024 (UTC)</small>


:I suggest we do keep the map in the lead but we add some further context and explanations to the caption to indicate to the reader that "it's complicated!". [[User:EMsmile|EMsmile]] ([[User talk:EMsmile|talk]]) 08:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
== EU members? ==

I am pretty sure some of the eastern european nations are still developing. if i am correct, we cannot say all EU members are developed nations.

== [[Developing nation]] → [[Developing country]]== and equivalently [[Developed nation]] → [[Developed country]]
The latter term is much more common (outweighs the former 10:1 in Google). Also "nation" potentially raises more political development issues than is usually intended; the term is economic. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 15:02, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
* '''Support.''' I would assume the article was probably written by an American, since in general we Americans have little understanding of the conceptual division between a ''nation'' and ''state'' (and even less an understanding of a ''nation-state'' I might add) and have confused the terms to the point of making them synonymous when they aren't. &mdash;[[User:ExplorerCDT|ExplorerCDT]] 15:59, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. Country gives a more precise meaning. [[User:Icundell|Icundell]] 19:35, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
*'''Support''' as long as [[developing nation]] and [[developed nation]] remain as redirects, as they are commonly used synonyms. --[[User:LostLeviathan|LostLeviathan]] 00:20, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
* '''Support'''. -- [[User:Naive cynic|Naive cynic]] 01:00, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
* '''Strong support'''. "Nation" is quite incorrect usage here (and taken literally, "developing nation" is quite insulting, implying lack of cultural development). &mdash;[[User:Tkinias|Tkinias]] 22:40, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
::No it does not. To be pedantic it implies a lack of national institutions and nothing to do with culture. To take Germany as an example. It had cultural development long before it had national unity and national institutions. Indeed one could argue that for part of its existence as a nation that its cultural development went into reverse! The UK is a nation state but it consists of 3 and 1/4 countries. Just as the UK consists of more than one counrty (as did the USSR), there are countries like Korea (and before reunification Germany and Vietnam) which consists of more than one nation state. Normally when one says developing nation, one means the region inside a nation state not in the one of more (or less) countries which make up the nation state. Developing nation is usually used as a short hand for economically developing nation state. As IMF statistics are calculated by nation state and not by country, and development aid, loans etc are allocated by nation state and not by country, I am not sure why anyone would want to put the article under country. [[User:Philip Baird Shearer|Philip Baird Shearer]] 15:15, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
:::"The UK is a nation state but it consists of 3 and 1/4 countries." I would say precisely the reverse is the case - the UK is a state or country consisting of English, Welsh, Scots nations, plus NI. In general, country is synonymous with state, the latter being a political term. Nation is a cultural term. We use nation state for states that consist primarily of a single nation (or perhaps claim to or aspire to). Your IMF remark, BTW, is wrong - the IMF [http://www.imf.org] talks about countries, not nations or nation states. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 17:21, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
::"it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more or less". The trouble is that the words country and nation do not have a precise meanings and vary depending on the context. England is a country and the major English national sport is football. The UK is a nation state consisting of 3 and 1/4 countries, <small> England, Wales, Scotland and most of Ulster, which one of the four provences of Ireland (and ignoring for this example semi-detached Channel islands and the Isle of Man)</small>. One does not go to the nationside one goes to the countryside, so country has something to do with territory occupied by a people who can be identified as a nation. As for the IMF as they say ''On this site, the term "country" does not in all cases refer to a territorial entity that is a state as understood by international law'' after all it is the International Monetary Fund, it is not called the Intercountry Monetary Fund. It is the United Nations not the United Countries. [[User:Philip Baird Shearer|Philip Baird Shearer]] 18:25, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
:::Look mate, by your logic, I could go on about the different meanings of "developing". Ultimately, what matters is the compound term we're describing here, and it is "developing country" by a country mile (pun intended). [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 21:01, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:I'm moving this up the page for further discussion - apart from [[User:Philip Baird Shearer|Philip Baird Shearer]] there seems to be broad support, so let's have some more votes and see where it goes. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 21:01, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* '''Support'''. Google results can be misleading and I'm one who supports 'official' names rather than 'most commonly used' names. (And I'm sure that most Wikipedians disagree with me on this.) I support this because the IMF, UN, and WTO all use 'country' rather than 'nation'. And for those arguing over the meanings of 'country' and 'nation', my dictionary (''The American Heritage Dictionary'') gives this help:
::'''''Synonyms:''' 'Nation' primarily signifies a political body rather than a physical territory&mdash;the citizens united under one independent government, without close regard for their origins; secondarily it denotes institutional ties, a community of economic and cultural interests. 'Country', in strict usage, is a geographic term signifying the territory of one nation, but it is often used in the extended sense of 'nation'.'' &mdash;[[User:Moverton|Mike]] 21:47, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

Trying to ascertain whether proposal does have broad consensus. Looks like to me - so can we have it moved? [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 00:20, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
:It will be done as soon as an admin notices this section. Please don't move the discussion or comment elsewhere on this page. Is there some urgency with this? -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 01:21, 2005 Jan 2 (UTC)

----
Terms such as "developed" and "developing" are so rooted and tainted by Eurocentric bias that the author doesn't even realize it. The criteria used to define levels of "development" clearly show a capitalist bias. (edit made by [[User:Musicus]])

: The terms are in widespread use or at least much more widespread than any others. [[User:Pavel Vozenilek|Pavel Vozenilek]] 00:26, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

== How many people live in Developing countries? ==

This is the question that brought me here, but I don't see the answer. I assume something like 2/3 or 3/4 of the world's population live in developing countries. [[User:DirkvdM|DirkvdM]] 11:17, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
:A (very) quick calculation: China 1.3bn, India 1bn, Africa 600m; that's a lower bound of about 3bn, not including Latin America or the rest of Asia. Alternatively, Europe, North America, Japan, SKorea amount to around 1bn, so that leaves around 5bn in developing countries. Better estimates would need more time and clearer definitions. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 16:41, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

So that's roughly what I thought, but indeed it all depends on the definition. Is China a developing country? Well, it's developing pretty fast now, but ironically, that is not what is usually meant by 'developing country'. And it would be a rather condescending western upstart attitude to use such a name for a country that was developed way over our western heads when we were walking around in bearskins :) . Actually, I really meant 'poor countries' in the sense that the majority of the people will not have a private car and therefore use [[public transport]], because I made an edit in the top of that article without being able to give exact numbers.
:By the "most not having a private car" definition, China (and India) certainly qualifies. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 21:08, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
:So does Japan, and probably Singapore. It's not a worthwhile definition. --[[User:63.231.59.53|63.231.59.53]] 01:19, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

China and India are developing (or even "poor") countries alright, but using automobile ownership as a mean to distinguish the developing and the developed countries, I would say, is a poor argument. Automobile in many countries, outside the US, especially the ones where space is more limited, is considered good to have, not essential to have as in the US. Nor is public transportaion a symbol for the poor as people in the US may conceive. This largely is due to the difference from infrastructure development to population density. User: kc October 7, 2005

== Self-designation ==

I think the following statement, under [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country developing country] (see sub-heading ‘Nature of development’), may be incorrect. (Note, the statement has already been cited from Wikipedia by a media source. See top of this page...)

The statement reads:

“The United Nations allows each nation to decide for itself whether it will be designated as "undeveloped" or "developing" (though many economists and other observers ignore the UN rule about self-designation).”

I assume the term 'undeveloped' in the above context would be similar in meaning to the more commonly used [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_developed_country least developed country]. In fact, the UN has very specific guidelines to determine whether countries should be considered [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_developed_country Least Developed Countries (LDC)] as opposed to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country developing countries]. These criteria can be found at [http://www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls/ldc/ldc%20criteria.htm http://www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls/ldc/ldc%20criteria.htm] It also states that the General Assembly is responsible for the final decision on the list of LDCs.

I have read in the past that the WTO allows self-designation when it comes to whether countries are considered a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country developed country] or [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country developing country], so maybe this has led to confusion?

== Suggested changes ==

This article is in need of substantial revision. Comparing the subtlety of the text to the Wikipedia entries of "international development" and "Third World" leaves much to be desired. 1. Phrases like "backwards infrastructure" do not convey the NPOV that Wikipedia strives to represent. Much of the beginning section should be rewritten to reflect the controversial nature of the term developing to describe certain countries.
2. In particular need of revision is the "Sources of (under)development" section. No sources are cited, and it seems to me to exclusively embrace a conservative worldview. For example, no mention is made of trade disparities, colonialism, or the support of dictatorial regimes by the North during the Cold War period. This section should either be expanded to explain the issues from various competing points of view (with references to appropriate paradigms and authors) or it should be deleted.--[[User:Ove|Ove]] 20:55, 28 August 2005 (UTC) (UTC)
:I agree. I think it should also mention whether becoming a developed nation is desirable or appropriate for every country/region/people. Some people may prefer to live simply. You have the extreme of [[bushmen]], and the middle ground of [[Inuit]], who have only embraced some of aspects of industrialized society, like snowmobiles and modern medicine. -- [[User:Kjkolb|Kjkolb]] 12:08, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
:I also support the points made by Ove. I came here by redirect from "less developed country" which seems to me to be a more useful term, and now more generally accepted than "developing country" -- after all aren't all countries "developing", even those that claim to be "developed". Fundamentally, what we are talking about is "poverty", "inquality" (both within and between countries) -- and "social justice". Perhaps what is needed is a short article that concentrates on internationally accepted usage, such as that of the UN, World Bank, UNDP etc., and signposts to other articles on the major themes and debates of development theory. The short article would have to flag up alternative approaches to measuring "development", mention current concerns, such as the millenium development goals, but leave the detail to be expanded elsewhere. '''PS''' For anyone who is interested I would recommend reading Chapter 2 of UNDP's 2005 Human Development Report "Inequality and human development" which begins with a quote from '''Don Quijote''' ''“There are only two families in the world, as my grandmother used to say: the haves and the have-nots.”'' [http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2005/pdf/HDR05_chapter_2.pdf] The big inequalities that really matter are not just between countries but are also within countries and between urban and rural, between ethnic groups, between boys and girls, between regions, etc. --[[User:Kahuzi|Kahuzi]] 13:26, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
::I agree. Further, I'd like to see a critism section on this page. The term "developing" is in and of itself ethnocentric, as it implies there is some sort of ladder that countries progress along. And, of course, Western nations are the best, at the very top. I don't feel comfortable adding a section, but perhaps someone else could? [[User:Lartrak|Lartrak]] 17:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

== '''[[Template_talk:Infobox_Country#VOTE.21.21_-_HDI_in_country_infobox.2Ftemplate.3F|VOTE!!]]''' - HDI in [[Wikipedia:List of infoboxes#Countries|Infobox#Countries|country infobox]]/template? ==

The Human Development Index ([[HDI]]) is a standard [[UN]] measure/[[List of countries by Human Development Index|rank]] of how developed a [[country]] [[developed country|is]] or [[developing country|is not]]. It is a composite index based on [[List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita|GDP per capita (PPP)]], [[literacy]], [[life expectancy]], and school enrollment. However, as it is a [[index|composite index]]/rank, some may challenge its usefulness or applicability as [[information]].

Thus, the following question is put to a vote:

'''''Should any, some, or all of the following be included in the Wikipedia [[Wikipedia:List of infoboxes#Countries|Infobox#Countries|country infobox]]/template:'''''
:(1) Human Development Index (HDI) for applicable countries, with year;
:(2) Rank of country’s HDI;
:(3) Category of country’s HDI (high, medium, or low)?

[[Template_talk:Infobox_Country#VOTE.21.21_-_HDI_in_country_infobox.2Ftemplate.3F|'''YES''' / '''NO''' / '''UNDECIDED/ABSTAIN''']] - [[Template_talk:Infobox_Country#VOTE.21.21_-_HDI_in_country_infobox.2Ftemplate.3F|vote here]]

Thanks!

[[User:E Pluribus Anthony|E Pluribus Anthony]] 01:52, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

== NPOV dispute ==

This article is tagged with an NPOV dispute, but there seems to be no real discussion about why it is POV. The one reference there is doesn't seem to be in the article anymore. Does anyone object to the removal of the tag? --[[User:Konrad West|K.]] <small>AKA</small> [http://www.konradwest.com Konrad West] <small>'''[[User_talk:Konrad West|TALK]]'''</small> 05:16, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

: The user who tagged the article as biased has not cited his/her concerns over the article. I am hence removing the tag --[[User:Deepak gupta|Deepak]]|[[User talk:Deepak gupta|वार्ता]] 06:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

== role of developing countries ==

== Definition of Developed Area ==

A developed nation should be defined as one that has completed demographic transition - that is, a region that has successfully moved from high birth and death rates to low B/D rates without falling into the demographic trap. I do not believe that it should be defined as an industrialized or urbanized region. Kerala in India is an example of an economically poor region that has completed demographic transition

== role of mncs ==

== Undeveloped vs. underdeveloped ==

This article does not distinguish between the two. [[Underdevelopment]], meanwhile, hints at but doesn't fully explain the usage. [[User:70.109.237.162|70.109.237.162]] 02:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

== Warsaw Pact ==

It's idiotic to class 'former [[Warsaw Pact]]' nations together, are you saying that east {{GER}} and {{CZE}} are at the same level of development, as countries like {{TJK}} and {{AZE}}? +[[User:Hexagon1|Hexagon1]] ([[User_talk:Hexagon1|talk]]) 02:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

== Underdeveloped ==

I suggest moving the article to a more appropriate term, "Underdeveloped country". In fact, many of the countries listed as "developing" aren't experiencing economic growth at all, and their HDI sometimes is getting worse as well. Please, let's talk sense. It's not because an incorrect term is used somewhat widely that it should be used in an encyclopedia. We should aim for what's true, not for what's common. --[[User:Andrelvis|Andrelvis]] 15:06, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

== Nature of Development ==
I don't think post-modern editorializing like the following belongs in an encyclopedia article:

"Even though a lot of the world seems to aspire to development, the term itself is criticized by those who think it is too centered on Western countries. The term implies a direction and a movement that the countries must follow; it implies an inferiority of the developing countries."

There are some people who think this way, sure; they happen to mostly be in the English departments of universities in the "developed world". I doubt that most people who reason this way have ever been to a so-called developing country, and am confident based on my experience that few people in what I prefer to call [[poor countries]] or the [[Tiers Monde]] would object to industrialization.

If this is going to stay, someone (who is less angry than I am about this point of view) needs to summarize it better, identify who holds this opinion (post-modernists or somesuch bullshit) and include a critique of what is a decidedly minority view. Or I'm going to delete it.
[[User:203.199.50.16|203.199.50.16]] 11:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

== Removing the map ==

[[Image:Developing countries.PNG|thumb|right|300px||{{legend|#007DCC| Developing Countries}}]]
I have removed the map to the right because I think it generalises the issue too much and is somewhat inaccurate. The thing that struck me most about it was its inclusion of East Germany as developing. Firstly, East Germany is not an independent political unit and hence should not appear separately on the map. If we accept that it should, then we are also accepting other subnational units such as Southern Italy or Extramadura or Cornwall, all of which are at about the same income level as East Germany. Secondly, the inclusion of the former Eastern Bloc are "developing" fails is far too generalised. Countries like Slovenia and the Czech Republic are high-income, developed, net donor economies. The Czech Republic also considers itself developed. The other countries of Eastern Europe are also mostly upper-middle income economies which are classified as developing regions by the UN. For this reason, I believe they should be removed from the map. [[Image:Flag of Europe.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] '''[[User:Ronline|Ronline]]''' [[User talk:Ronline|✉]] 09:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
:This map is basically mixing transitional countries with developing ones.--[[User:Planemo|Planemo]] 17:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

== Merging "Third World" with "Developing country". ==

* I oppose, because wether we like it or not, the term "[[Third World]]" refers basicly to the poorest nations in the world, no to all of the developing world. Doing this will confuse the users to falsely believe that all of the developing world is considered Third World. And what about the [Newly industrialized country|Newly Industrialized Countries]? that according to the definition, are countries with developing levels beyond those found among Third World nations. So '''I oppose'''. -- [[User:AlexCovarrubias|AlexCovarrubias]] 02:30, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

* Third World is an outdated term that should have its own article that explains its unique description. Developing countries is seen to be a more politically correct term, although it has shortcomings too. A neutral term that should be used more often is "Less economically developed country", LEDC. <font color="#2e8b57">[[User:PeregrineAY|Peregrine]]</font><font color="#006400"><sub><sup>[[User_talk:PeregrineAY|AY]]</sup></sub></font> 05:08, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

*oppose 16:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

*strongly oppose. "Developing" and "developed" are ideological terms, implying a Western norm. I prefer the neutral "[[Global south]]" (currently redirecting to [[Third World]] or "[[underdeveloped world]]" capturing active process by which the global south was under-developed. [[User:Bobfrombrockley|BobFromBrockley]] 14:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

* I oppose merging the two pages. I came here to look up the term "Majority world", and went on to read the "[[Developing world]]" page. I think the current split between terminology (this page) and concepts (primarily "Developing world") is useful. What they should be headed is a separate discussion -- but I think there are too many exceptions to make "South" a sensible part of the answer.
[[User:Oak|Oak]] 16:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

* Strongly Oppose: Third World Country and Developing Country are not synonyms. It just happens to be the case (because of historical/economic/social reasons, I'm not suggesting that it is just a coincidence) that countries that are one, tend to be the other.

As all the votes are against, should merger proposal tag be removed? [[User:Bobfrombrockley|BobFromBrockley]] 14:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I came here to '''oppose.''' Will zap the tag. Long overdue. :) --[[User:Smilo Don|Smilo Don]] 00:29, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

== whose fault? ==
This article should contain more reference to the widespread opinon that underdevelopment is caused by the domination of rich countries. (See the writings of international charities like Oxfam). This is not the only possible view, but it is a widespread view and should be represented here. [[User:Johncmullen1960|Johncmullen1960]] 16:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

== Sources of underdevelopment ==

What does "real or used as justification" mean in this context?
All of the items are said to come from "different theories", so it seems a kind of bias or weakening of those points. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/131.220.223.7|131.220.223.7]] ([[User talk:131.220.223.7|talk]]) 14:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

== Merging "third world", "developing countries", "least developed countries" etc. under the umbrella of "Majority World" ==

* Using the term "Majority World" encompasses all the variants of the global community that are not Westernized, without pronouncing judgement on what is and is not "development".[[User:Hurtsmyears|Hurtsmyears]] 02:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

* I think "Majority World" is an awkward term. Wikipedia tries to use the term that is most commonly used, and that is developing/developed. To avoid judgement, the term Less economically developed country works well, but it is not in common use, so the article will have to remain named as "Developing country," but do add "Majority World" as a synonym into the main article page. <font color="#2e8b57">[[User:PeregrineAY|Peregrine]]</font><font color="#006400"><sub><sup>[[User_talk:PeregrineAY|AY]]</sup></sub></font> 10:14, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

* Can you provide references of the use of this term? Because Wikipedia cannot be used to create original terms or investigations. <font color="#CE1126">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Alex]]</font>''<font color="#006847">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Covarrubias]]</font>'' [[File:Flag of Mexico.svg|15px]] <sup><font size="1" color="green">[[User_talk:AlexCovarrubias|( Let's talk! )]]</font></sup> 15:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

* The term 'majority world' is presently being used by organisations such as Oxfam, Indy Media, World Food Policy, Lancashire Global Education Centre, Oxford Research Group, Aid Watch, New Internationalist, and is just begining to be used by the United Nations. So by no means would wikipedia be creating a new term here. [[User:Hurtsmyears|Hurtsmyears]] 03:11, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

* You will notice that [[Third World]] has its own article, because it is a term that actually refers to a different entity. We haven't merged [[Third World]] into this article, because they are actually different entities.

Also, until "majority world" spreads into widespread usage (the public as well as the NGOs), we should not change the article name. Wikipedia is not necessarily politically correct.

--<font color="#2e8b57">[[User:PeregrineAY|Peregrine]]</font><font color="#006400"><sub><sup>[[User_talk:PeregrineAY|AY]]</sup>;</sub></font> 11:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Why is it assumed that these countries are "undeveloped"? This is making the massive presumption that Western captialism is the ultimate goal for all countries - this isn't true. Many nations are more interested in going their own way, through their own cultural values and beliefs... They may be aiming to "develop" in a way that doesn't mean industrialisation or economic growth. [[Special:Contributions/82.36.197.2|82.36.197.2]] ([[User talk:82.36.197.2|talk]]) 18:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

== Merging 'Underdevelopment' into 'Developing country' ==

What about merging the content of 'Underdevelopment' (which is almost entirely about underdeveloped countries) into this article? There could be a separate section about the differences in terminology and implications of the word 'underdeveloped' versus 'developing'. While I agree in opposing previous suggestions to merge with 'Third World', since that is a specific theoretical concept distinct from 'Developing country', I think that 'Developing country', 'LDC', and 'Underdeveloped country' are more or less synonymous (plus 'Underdeveloped country' already redirects here, so shouldn't 'Underdevelopment' also?)
[[User:Countermereology|Countermereology]] 15:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

:I think it should not be done. A redirect seems more appropiate. <font color="#CE1126">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Alex]]</font>''<font color="#006847">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Covarrubias]]</font>'' <sup><font size="1" color="green">[[User_talk:AlexCovarrubias|( Talk? )]]</font></sup> 05:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

== let me guess. ==

Russia isn't a developed country,isn't she?

== OR problem with "Typology and names of countries" section ==

"Typology and names of countries" section does not have proper sourcing. Please add refreences or we need to remove current name of countries based on OR/Verifiability policy.[[User:Farmanesh|Farmanesh]] 01:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
:No, we don't need to remove anything just because you don't like it, or you lack the ability or the willingness to simply click a reference, or to go to your local library and ask for the book. In Wikipedia, there is no [[WP:DEADLINE|deadline]]. You have been doing this in several articles you don't like. I have a clue why you're doing this, but I'd rather assume good faith. The list of countries are based in the respective articles: developed country, newly industrialized countries, etc. There is no such a thing as "OR". This article has been here for a long time, and surprisingly, the thousand of editors involved have never raised such a "controversy". Why? Because it is clear those countries are listed in their respective articles.<font color="#CE1126">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Alex]]</font>''<font color="#006847">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Cov]]</font>'' [[File:Flag of Mexico.svg|15px]] [[Image:Black ribbon.png|10px]] <sup><font size="1" color="green">[[User_talk:AlexCovarrubias|( Let's talk! )]]</font></sup> 12:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
::I agree with what you said: "assume good faith" and not to attack personally. Lets keep it professional and freindly. As I said before I am willing and able to look at refrnece anyone gives.
::Now as OR/V policies clearly say you need to give refrence for a section you want to be included. If it is a book which page. You can not synthesize it to advance a position. If you give a list of countries you need to give a direct/clear refrence which has such list.
::Please save everyones time and just give the refrence.[[User:Farmanesh|Farmanesh]] 14:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Sorry, but it is not my duty or work to "save your time". And I did not created those lists. I only added the NIC list. And the countries included in each list are listed in their respective articles. So you need to go to each article and "claim" the list as OR. These lists are just a mirror of those articles.<font color="#CE1126">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Alex]]</font>''<font color="#006847">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Cov]]</font>'' [[File:Flag of Mexico.svg|15px]] [[Image:Black ribbon.png|10px]] <sup><font size="1" color="green">[[User_talk:AlexCovarrubias|( Let's talk! )]]</font></sup> 15:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
::::I agree with [[User:Farmanesh|Farmanesh]]. I tried to improve the section mentioned, but I'm afraid it needs better references. I have scanned all my economics books and made a google search, and all the sources mentioning "Newly-Industrialized Countries" either refer to the original use of the term (To refer to the [[East Asian Tigers]] that industrialized in the 1970's), or are unencyclopedic sources not retaled to economics (ie: Time magazine, bussiness journals, etc). If you have a proper source for this section of the article, why not list it?--[[User:Lobizón|Lobizón]] 18:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::All the sources are economics books and each of them presents a list of countries currently considered NICs. The "East Asian Tigers" where the first generation of NICs along with Mexico and Brazil, but the first 4 are now considered developed by several authors. <font color="#CE1126">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Alex]]</font>''<font color="#006847">[[User:AlexCovarrubias|Covarrubias]]</font>'' [[File:Flag of Mexico.svg|15px]] [[Image:Black ribbon.png|10px]] <sup><font size="1" color="green">[[User_talk:AlexCovarrubias|( Let's talk! )]]</font></sup> 08:19, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

== It's "least" peeps! ==

I hope I've not come to the party too late, but surely following the UN's meaning of LDC as '''Least''' Developed Country/ies and not 'less', 'little' or even 'lachrymose', is the most sensible alternative since this is what is used in international affairs. For a list see [http://www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls/ldc/list.htm].
--[[User:198.54.202.22|198.54.202.22]] 20:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

== query: ==


Can emerging countries be called developing countries or viceversa? [[User:Ed Rung|Ed Rung]] ([[User talk:Ed Rung|talk]]) 15:03, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

== Guam ==

Guam cannot be considered a developing country because it is not an independent country. It is a territory of the U.S.A. It's certainly located in a geographical region of the world that's developing, but itself is not included. I question whether the Northern Marianas should be included as well due to its slightly less dependence on the U.S.A. (it's a commonwealth unlike Guam which is a territory of the U.S.)[[User:Jlujan69|Jlujan69]] ([[User talk:Jlujan69|talk]]) 13:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

== Original research ==

Wikipedia has a policy excluding [[WP:NOR|original research]]. That means we can't simply choose what we consider a developing country. Instead, we need to rely on reliable published sources. If desired, a table could be created to compare various sources, but for now one is enough. In [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Developing_country&diff=190365966&oldid=190330993 this edit], [[User:Sbw01f|Sbw01f]] says he has changed the list to use IMF data. I haven't checked it, but that is a reliable source. Neither [[:Image:Industrialized countries 2007.PNG.png]] nor [[:Image:Developing countries 2007.jpg]] cites a reliable source, so I have removed it. It would be useful to create a map based on IMF data (if one doesn't exist already). Arbitrary changes to the list or images are not acceptable, and will be reverted. [[User:Superm401|Superm401]] - [[User_talk:Superm401|Talk]] 17:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
:Does anyone know where on the IMF site the developing country list is? [[User:Superm401|Superm401]] - [[User_talk:Superm401|Talk]] 17:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

== Redirects problem ==

This article contains a link to [[Less economically developed country]], which Redirects to [[Third World]]. [[Third World]] contains a link to [[Less economically developed countries]], which Redirects to here. [[LEDC]] and [[LEDCs]] link here. I don't know what should link where. [[User:AlmostReadytoFly|AlmostReadytoFly]] ([[User talk:AlmostReadytoFly|talk]]) 14:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
:Who all thinks a merge is the answer? The [[Third World]] article seems to more about the term than the actual countries and such. I realize there are nuances in the terms 'third world', 'developing', 'least developed' and 'newly industrialized', but the pages as they are now do nothing to clear up what they are, and the redirects go to all sorts of random places. [[User:Loggie|Loggie]] ([[User talk:Loggie|talk]]) 14:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
::edit: read the previous horrible deaths of merger options, so I've elaborated on what I think should be done in a new section.[[User:Loggie|Loggie]] ([[User talk:Loggie|talk]]) 19:05, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

==Maps==
The maps that are currently on this page I find more confusing than helpful. There is no single map that says "these are the developing countries", and of the maps that are there, I don't see what good half of them do.
*The first one shows incomes, but countries aren't labeled 'developing' based only on income. Thus I could see this map being useful in a discussion of the differences between low income and developing, but I don't see the merit in having it as the first one.
*With the second map, I am confused. In the article it states that 'least developed' countries shouldn't be classified as 'developing', however the key for this map has two groups of 'developing': non-least developed and least developed. Still, this appears to me to be the best map, as it has the developed countries labeled, even if it is in two colors, and in conflict with the text of the article.
*With the third I think some comment to how 'developed' the market is relates to whether the country is 'developing' or not is in order. The only comparison I am able to draw is that the advanced economies have developed markets. Given that there is a difference between the terms 'third world' 'developing' 'least developed' and 'newly industrialized', I don't see how this map can help me figure out which are which, and which countries are on top isn't what this article is trying to show.
*Fourth: why is this here at all? The article says at the top that newly industrialized countries are different, and there is no text near the map to help me make sense of it.
To add to the confusion, there is a different map on the [[Third World]] page that doesn't match any of the maps on this page. [[User:Loggie|Loggie]] ([[User talk:Loggie|talk]]) 14:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


==Dare I suggest a merge?==
After reading the responses to merging propositions before, I'd like to suggest a different answer than a simple merge. The problem I see is that currently there are 5 articles about these countries: [[Underdevelopment]], [[Developing country]], [[Third World]], [[Newly industrialized country]], and [[Least Developed Countries]], and many similar names that are redirects (as well as entirely different terms), and the redirects go to many different places. The second problem is people linking to one of these articles, when in reality they wanted a different one- while the 'Third World' page gives a great description of the origin of the term, it doesn't talk about the countries themselves, which is what (I would assume) many of the links are expecting it to do.

What I don't see is one article that talks about the differences between these terms, in a clear manner. I think there should be an article to do this, and another to discuss the countries themselves, as I assume there is more to talk about than what label they are being given. So I think what we should end up with is two articles- one on the terms, and one on the countries. If there is too much about the various terms that have been prevalent at various times, I suppose more than one article would work, but I think we need to be careful to make sure people know that they have arrived at an article about the term, rather than the countries, and vice versa. So that is my merger proposal. [[User:Loggie|Loggie]] ([[User talk:Loggie|talk]]) 19:05, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

i think it should be edited tbh, its very good but its soposed to be about developing countrys...it leads on to other types of things instead

== South Korea and "BEM" ==

It stuck me when I first sighted "South Korea" in the lead for a "developing countries" article. It is quite obvious from the [[developed countries]] article that South Korea is a distinct standout compared to other "Big emerging markets". It is the only country out of the ten "BEM" which has a HDI over 0.9, is an advanced economy according to both CIA and IMF, and is a high income economy according to the world bank. It is also a [[Democracy Index|fully functioning democracy]]. Although South Korea is a developing market according to the MSCI, it is a [[developed market]] by the FTSE from september 2009 onwards. My concern also applies to the other East Asian Tigers and to a further extent, Israel. I would agree if this article was more along the line of just "emerging economies", but using this term in the lead seems to imply that every "emerging markets" are developing nations. [[User:Karellt|Karellt]] ([[User talk:Karellt|talk]]) 15:02, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

== Orphaned references in [[:Developing country]] ==

I check pages listed in [[:Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting]] to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for [[User:AnomieBOT/docs/OrphanReferenceFixer|orphaned references]] in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of [[:Developing country]]'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for ''this'' article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

<b>Reference named "qq":</b><ul>
<li>From [[First World]]: [http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2008/01/weodata/groups.htm#ae IMF Advanced Economies List. World Economic Outlook, Database—WEO Groups and Aggregates Information, April 2008.]</li>
<li>From [[Developed country]]: [http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2008/02/weodata/groups.htm#ae IMF Advanced Economies List. World Economic Outlook, Database—WEO Groups and Aggregates Information, October 2008.]</li>
</ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. [[User:AnomieBOT|AnomieBOT]][[User talk:AnomieBOT|<font color="#888800">⚡</font>]] 16:22, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

== China ==

China is not in the list of emerging or developing countries. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/99.226.234.37|99.226.234.37]] ([[User talk:99.226.234.37|talk]]) 19:49, 15 March 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== A correction to the article ==

Turkey and South Africa are classified as developed countries (DCs) by the CIA. Mexico is a developing country and not a developed country. South Africa is also classified as a developing country by the CIA. Please visit the source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/appendix/appendix-b.html . Thanks for your time.

[[User:Svr014|Svr014]] ([[User talk:Svr014|talk]]) 16:21, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Chicagoland, Illinois, USA.

Latest revision as of 19:24, 4 September 2024

Climate Change

[edit]

Hi there, I am new (to this page and to wikipedia editing) so apologies if I am not adhering to guidelines. Please do correct me! I think that in general, but in particular for this section we need to write about the leadership of developing countries in adapting and building resilience to climate change and that they are not just portrayed as victims. I have started to do this by adding a sentence or two on Bangladesh but there is much more that can be added. MduToit74 (talk) 13:17, 30 November 2020 (UTC)MduToit74[reply]

Thanks for making this edit, MduToit74! That's a good move and we need more of that... EMsmile (talk) 02:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Developing country as a historical term

[edit]

In the introduction, it says that Developing country is equal to LMIC, whereas I think most people think of Least Developed Countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_developed_countries when they say Developing country. In the 1970's the world, in regards to income, looked like a Bactrian Camel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactrian_camel while it since the last 20 years or so looks more like a Dromedary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dromedary, see the 1970 compared to 2015 figures here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World#Great_Divergence_and_Great_Convergence. Less than 10% of the world's population live in countries that are low-income and thus in what we used to call Developing countries. Perhaps a billion or so live in high income countries, so left are more than 5 billion people, the bulk of humanity, who lives in middle-income countries. The terms Developing/Developed countries are therefore out-dated as the world no longer is divided in two. Let's take Hunger as an example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger#/media/File:Hunger_Map_2020_World_Food_Programme.svg. Some countries in Europe (Developed Countries) have a higher proportion of people suffering from hunger than a quite large number of countries in Developing countries. So, just like the use of 1st/2nd/3rd world countries describing how the Cold War divided the world, but where people still use Third World countries as a term for low-income countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-world_model, I would like to change the content in the article so that the term Developing country also is viewed as a term belonging to how the world was divided, but not is anymore. -- Please also refer to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Developing_country/Archive_1#Discussion_about_name_change_(again) for a previous similar discussion. Olle Terenius (UU) (talk) 15:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I took part in the previous discussion, so for people who are new, please take a look at that archived discussion link. I personally don't think this statement is true: "I think most people think of Least Developed Countries when they say Developing country". Is there any evidence for it or just a gut feeling? I don't have evidence at hand either but as far as I can see from the literature, newspaper articles, websites, blogs etc. the term "developing countries" is currently still used interchangeably with "low and middle income countries" (maybe it'll change in future?), and includes the sub-articles of e.g. Least developed countries, Small Island Developing States, Landlocked developing countries, Heavily indebted poor countries (there is probably some overlap and repetition between those articles which ought to be improved). Note that I also started a discussion here about a possible new category for "developing countries topics": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Categories#New_category_for_articles_that_deal_with_topics_in_developing_countries? Overall, the guiding principle for the naming of Wikipedia articles is WP:Commonname. It'll be interesting to hear what everyone else things. - Apart from that, nothing would stop you, Olle Terenius (UU), from improving the content of this article and adding more information, using reliable sources. A good starting point would be the section on "definitions" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country#Definitions). Also the section on "opportunities" needs reworking (it's actually a left over section from an earlier version of the article). EMsmile (talk) 12:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Given that developing countries do not have a very coherent definition, I would not start further discussion topics related to them. In my opinion, it is better to have specific rankings of development indicators (GDP per capita, infrastructure, health, etc.) across all countries than to have very broad but not very precise articles on developing countries or to restrict attention to an arbitrarily picked set of countries. I would follow the World Bank approach in that as they are the biggest experts 99.225.143.94 (talk) 12:50, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Gulf, Chile, Mauritius, Seychelles

[edit]

How is UAE, Qatar, and the gulf countries except Yemen not developed?🤫🤫🤫 democratic no but developed yes Nlivataye (talk) 15:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nlivataye we can only go by what the published sources say. Do you have a publication handy that states that those countries are not grouped as developing countries? If yes, then please add that information with the source. Thanks. EMsmile (talk) 01:29, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Most likely human rights and violence agaisnt women. 13Sundin (talk) 08:44, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Backward Area" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Backward Area has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 28 § Backward Area until a consensus is reached. TartarTorte 18:05, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Suggest to delete the IMF map and downplay/discuss their definition

[edit]

The IMF term, the only institutional definition at this point since the World Bank has abandoned the term and at the UN it is by self identification, is Developing and Emerging Markets and not Developing Countries. As discussed later in the article, their definition emphasizes global financial integration instead of general level of economic and social development. For this reason, I would not use their map and it is questionable whether a workable definition of developing countries exists. I would just have a historic overview, and then jump to the classification of the World Bank and Global South, etc. In summary, I propose deleting the IMF/UN map (or keep the UN portion only), and start with the WB classification. The IMF classification is discussed later anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.225.143.94 (talk) 12:38, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest we do keep the map in the lead but we add some further context and explanations to the caption to indicate to the reader that "it's complicated!". EMsmile (talk) 08:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Developing_country&oldid=1244046193"