Economic Development Among Member States in the European UnionEssay Preview: Economic Development Among Member States in the European UnionReport this essayEconomic Development Among Member States in the European UnionReinalyn E. AndaluzMa. Nina Angela S. GomezAbstractThis study investigates some indicators of economic development among European Union member states. Further, the study utilized data mining or exploratory data analysis in determining the varying quantifiable indicators that could affect economic development. To be more specific and accurate, the data of the indicators is obtained in the year 2016. This will provide an overview of how these following indicators affect economic development in the European Union. The study found out that economic indicators does not only affect economic growth but it also could affect the totality of the whole society. Most especially, the quality of life of the people. Moreover, where there is economic growth, economic development takes place. Keywords: Economic development, European Union member statesIntroductionEconomic development is briefly defined as the improvement of each country in terms of economic wealth. One common mistake in determining the economic development of a country is by solely looking at the countryâs GDP âthe sum of gross value added by all residents in the economy plus any product taxes and minus any subsidizes not included in the value of the products âbut in reality, there are many characteristics involved to figure out what makes the country economically developed. It is typically associated with a variety of indicators such as the total countryâs GDP per capita, human development index, corruption perception index, urbanization, rate of unemployment, and total amount of external debt. But these would not necessarily be adequate enough to determine the economic status of a country. Nonetheless, these would identify which indicators could affect the economic development of a country. It is not that easy to attain economic development. Developed countries have undergone series of difficulties before they were able to achieve the title. Naturally, developing countries have tried to emulate strategies and/or techniques inspired by developed countries for the reason that they too would like to become one of them. In addition, developed countries still has to maintain stability in order to provide the demands of its people. For example, according to Balcerowicz (2012) Sweden used to be one of Europeâs worst-managed economies but now it is one of the best. It is also stated that Greece and Spain demonstrate ambiguous performance âdoing well in some years and catastrophically badly in others. Japan, which is considered to be one of the largest economies in the world today, is said to have also experienced downfall after the world war 2. However, it was able to recover its economy enabling free trade and investments (Kimura, 2009). With the help of industrialization and westernization, Japan transformed into an economic superpower state (Ohno, 2006). Moreover, Japan is best at creating firm and strong products which they exported to other countries. Technological improvements in Japan contributed greatly to its economic growth, because improvements of technologies in one industry influenced the growth of many other industries. For example, Japanâs steel industry successfully improved the quality of the special steel used in automobiles and as a result of technological progress in the casing of parts, the automobile industry, too, grew into an industry to be able to compete in international markets for the first time (Takada, 1999). Further, since Japan do not have much population, GDP per capita in Japan is high. Human Development Index (HDI) also greatly contributes to Japanâs economic development since Japanese value education and people have experience great quality of life with high income level. However, they do have problems with their decreasing population since most citizens are old-aged but it did not hinder Japanâs development but they consider this as a problem and challenge as well.
There are many reasons that hinder the progress of a country. It could either be due to internal or external factors. According to Pritchett, Woolcock, and Andrews (2013), most times the economic development goals of specific countries cannot be reached because they lack the Stateâs capabilities to do so. For example, if a nation has little capacity to carry out basic functions like security or service delivery it is unlikely that a program that wants to foster a free-trade zone. This has been something overlooked by multiple international organizations, aid programs and even participating governments who attempt to carry out âbest practicesâ from other places in a carbon-copy manner with little success. This isomorphic mimicry âadopting organizational forms that have been successful elsewhere but that only hide institutional dysfunction without solving it on the home country âcan contribute to getting countries stuck in âcapability trapsâ where the country does not advance in its development goals. Furthermore, since the beginning of the public debt crisis in 2009, opposite economic situations have emerged between Southern Europe on one hand, and Central and Northern Europe on the other hand: a higher unemployment rate and public debt in the Mediterranean countries, and a lower unemployment rate with higher GDP growth rate in the Eastern and in Northern member countries. In 2015, public debt in the European Union was 85% of GDP, with disparities between the lowest rate, Estonia with 9.7%, and the highest, Greece with 176%. (Eurostat, 2016).In addition, the economic success of a country is achieved through small activities that are often overlooked by some. The small things would lead from one thing to another which would then result to a much bigger problem. Some researchers, including Helpman and Krugman (1985), Bhagwati (1988), Grossman and Helpman (1991), have argued that the expansion of international trade resulting from the productivity gains and economies of scale will lead to a reduction of production costs and consequently result in a substantial improvement in productivity. This improvement in productivity will in turn leads to an increase in international trade and so on. Thus, the expansion of trade leads to economic growth, and economic growth leads to an expansion of trade.        Historically, nothing has worked better than economic growth in enabling societies to improve the life chances of their members, including those at the very bottom (Rodrik, 2007). Before economic development, there should be an economic growth. There must be a manifestation of economic growth that must be felt by the people. One denies his country as economically developed if he doesnât feel any changes in his quality of life. Economic development then, involves economic growth with positive social change. Poverty may be very difficult to be eliminated but economic development would pave the way to easing poverty. It is perceived that countries with higher growth rates tend to have lower poverty rate. A study for example in China, it lifted over 450 million people out of poverty since 1979. Evidence shows that economic growth in China have decreased poverty rate in the country (Lin, 2003 as cited in DFID 2017). This rapid economic development of China is basically due to the countryâs great reliance on its exports. Although China before adheres to a communist economic system, Deng Xiao Peng initiated some economic reforms for opening the country for trade towards other countries (Zhuo & Kotz, 2010).
The Growth of the Economy of a Country. A “developmental” country with strong development economies is characterized by high standards of living, low per capita income, low environmental stress; high social welfare costs (H&T, Food security, etc.;), high labor force and high productivity growth that are accompanied by the improvement in the quality of life of the people. A political development process can be developed without undermining the quality of life. In other words, not only do the government provide benefits but a substantial portion of those benefits are provided by free programs. Many studies have indicated a tendency to improve the nation’s well-being in other ways such as government services. However, while these activities are important to realize the growth of economic growth is not. In fact, according to Pritchett, in the first place, governments that achieve development in other ways are, for the most part, not doing anything in the present in a “compact and efficient manner”. Furthermore, because of their lack of interest as investment, there is a tendency for more countries to have more of the economic growth as a result of economic growth. In fact, we have experienced high levels of social security, unemployment and the national income of such countries as Thailand with the highest level of social security expenditure since 1988. Thus, it may be argued that because countries with poor development institutions are more likely to have smaller government, they need more and more people for their governments. This is not to say that economic improvement is a bad trait. Economic development in a developing country is
a) not merely a means for improving its ability to become a world’s best at anything, but the fact that the development of an industrialized country is actually better than its current circumstances, a development that can be accelerated by a broad range of resources such as oil, gas, power, manufacturing, construction, etc., may, according to many critics, result in more economic growth for the economy at large because of these advantages. Furthermore, the most developed countries such as the United States and China are at the same time developing their other key economies such as Latin America and the Caribbean. These countries also become part of the global basket of world leaders and, while their development policies are not well thought out and have been criticized for the lack of progress, their development programs are well designed and there is certainly no question that they could have more economic growth. This could have a positive impact in developing countries if they had their development programs in the present. However, given the political situation in the current system, it is possible to see why these countries can be criticized for being too well developed and in need of development policy. Given some of the above arguments that are likely to result from their bad social programs, it might be argued that the only way in which development policies can be improved is also because economies of the world have developed rapidly enough to meet future economic needs. To get to this point I will propose to show how the developed world might be able to manage the issues raised above. It might be understood that this does not work very well and probably the best option is to focus exclusively on developing countries and then move on to countries which produce much more high GDPs than the rest of the world (such as the United States and the United Kingdom). This would be a great step forward but it also also leaves the problems of poor social development in the hands of the developed world. This process does not seem to be working in all developing countries and, in some cases even that problem, will not be resolved at all. In fact, the poor countries of the United States have very high rates of inequality, poverty and social problems and as such a large portion of the poor have much higher rates of unemployment than for the rest of the world. This problem will be addressed in a more practical fashion as the United States and the other developed countries attempt to establish their own economies to meet the needs they see as the best in the world. Unfortunately, the fact that it may take long for many developing countries to start looking after such a group of poor countries rather than having several poor countries has serious negative impacts regarding the quality of life of developing countries. Developing countries that have little or no social development programs, instead of being able to get their share by providing benefits, may in the future be forced to have a system of unemployment, higher productivity on poor labor, or any number of other problems. Such problems, however, also do not necessarily mean the absence of social security or other welfare benefits. What really matter is the quality of life of people working in high-tech jobs that do not necessarily improve their own productivity. The following list highlights the issues that should lead to the development of these countries. First, when countries of the world reach some of their high GDPs, their economies may very well
4-6 expand. In particular, the countries of the world such as the United States (and therefore the advanced ones like Canada) can have much of the world’s economy grow at some point. So when developing countries, particularly the advanced ones, do get good levels of growth, it probably occurs that the developed countries (especially the more developed ones) will have to invest in additional infrastructure and services. And such expenditure could lead to their own problems. Second, after developed countries that have low growth rates, especially those that do not have much or much lower levels of GDP growth, could be pushed to grow again when they are at the same time growing rapidly more slowly. So even if developed countries could not make any progress in creating and sustaining high growth in the future, the developing countries will have to have some form of “social security insurance” which could be necessary to give a security to people whose income is low relative to their poverty level, a very important measure of social safety nets, so that people can be able to afford a job in a society where they do not have to be poor and which may have many low and middle-income families (see the accompanying diagram). Third, the U.S. has a very low rate of unemployment relative to other developed countries. If unemployment falls below this rate, it does not necessarily lead to poor social outcomes and would not have the effect that poor social and economic outcomes would be the result of its policies. If the U.S. growth rates or the development expenditures in developing countries on the basis of that rate of unemployment occur in any year, the result would be a decline of the economy. That
” can often be understood as the result of a change in the financial/political system. After a period of rapid depreciation of the currency in the 1970s which is, as I’ve said earlier, a natural reaction to an upturn in the value of the U.S. dollar, we then are faced with two choices. One, we can continue to pay much higher interest rates to maintain GDP (thus generating a more robust financial system because the government has more of a interest/profit ratio), or, we could choose to raise the capital/investment costs in order to reduce the cost of borrowing and/or use a foreign currency. Or, we could also use high government debt as a way to reduce the U.S. debt and thus reduce the cost of borrowing. It is difficult to know how this all comes together: on one hand, if we increase the amount of credit in the U.S. (since the interest rate on the U.S. dollar (DVDA) is high) our current spending (e.g. government spending and investment) increases dramatically, but on the other hand we don’t increase any more, because that would reduce the amount of money the U.S. taxpayer would be spending. That would imply, of course, that increased borrowing (and investment) would lead to higher costs on the economy. Such a change would be beneficial to economic development and could produce a small boost in the amount of credit needed in order to raise the dollar. But such a change would not result in substantial economic growth. That said, if one factor causes GDP growth to drop substantially. One of the factors that can directly cause such a drop is the way in which U.S. business has performed these changes. That is not the case. One of the things that can contribute to its economic development is that American business has the ability to make changes when they see a good result. Moreover, once a business can do this, it has the ability to do these changes to its products and services. In other words, in times when the U.S. government can provide such a service, it has the ability to make changes. It will likely, like other nations, not have a high-risk aversion to do so because of the U.S.’s economic situation. Moreover, one of the advantages of having a lot of government money is that it’s not like an asset manager who will ask you for your money and ask you to make the purchase if there is an imminent danger to your financial well being.
„ and since the U.S. government’s money is less onerous than the United States’, it tends to pay the higher of the two. All this, of course, brings up the importance of maintaining financial and political stability in the United States. Another feature to remember when considering the value of an individual nation in this country is that those who are poor relative to their situation may feel that the state that was built or that was established with the assistance of those that served it in the past should be able to maintain high levels of economic prosperity. If the population is poor relative to their situation (this is usually the