This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

International development Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International development, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of international development, including such areas as appropriate technology, microfinance and social issues, on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International developmentWikipedia:WikiProject International developmentTemplate:WikiProject International developmentInternational development Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. International relations Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Globalization High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Globalization, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Globalization on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.GlobalizationWikipedia:WikiProject GlobalizationTemplate:WikiProject GlobalizationGlobalization High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Effective Altruism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Effective Altruism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relevant to effective altruism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Effective AltruismWikipedia:WikiProject Effective AltruismTemplate:WikiProject Effective AltruismEffective Altruism High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of Utah supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2013 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

Above message substituted from {{WAP assignment}} on 15:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I propose that the SDGs or the transition from the MDG to the SDG agenda should be documented in this section, or in its own section underneath the MDGs. Considering the influence these goals have on international development policies and projects, it would be helpful to define this shift.Dhyeya.P (talk) 19:33, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I propose removing or replacing the 3 paragraphs that start "International development has existed as long as nations have existed." This redefines ID in a way that is too broad to be helpful, is not consistent with common usage, and is inconsistent with the rest of the article. It is true that international relations and international trade have a longer history, but international development as a field of study and practice really started after WWII. I don't see any reason why the wikipedia article should take a different position than most text books. Unless there are any objections in the next couple of days, I will make the appropriate changes to the history section (and remove the link to Shah Waliullah for same reason), Cheers. APB-CMX 02:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • The above suggestion is well-taken. If we look back at human history, it is simply not true that "international development" has existed for very long. For most of the history of nations, war and conquest was the rule. The theoretical, practical and fiscal concern of actually 'aiding' other nations in and of themselves, and/or understanding how they can develop to promote human welfare is a relatively new concern. Perhaps in part because social mobility - including accessible and widespread wealth - is also a relatively new feature of the general human experience. In sum, I agree with APB above in the suggestion to remove or replace this misleading suggestion that the existence of nations and the idea of international development somehow relate or connect. Globalfix (talk) 18:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the field of international development may not have existed after WWII but that doesn't mean that the process of development doesn't exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.129.39 (talk) 19:04, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The following qoute should be tempered. It is well known that if you take out China (which has not followed liberalism, but rather a state-guided capatalism- quite the opposite), poverty in the world has not decreased. This is an entirly misleading statement. someone please share their thoughts before I change anything. This is the qoute: "By the 1990s, development theory had reached an impasse [5] and some academics were imagining a postdevelopment era[6]. The Cold War had ended, capitalism had become the dominant mode of social organization, and UN statistics showed that living standards around the world had improved over the past 40 years[7]. Nevertheless, a large portion of the world's population were still living in poverty, their governments were crippled by debt and concerns about the environmental impact of globalization were rising." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.171.49.168 (talk) 16:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC). I have heard similar criticism of development statistics in the past, but I am unsure if the numbers from China merely pad the increase in global development or are the sole cause of a positive vs. negative growth percentage in world poverty statistics. Could you include a link to the statistics you are citing? 204.227.243.16 19:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)pkmilitia An article from Wikipedia's poverty article should help to clear up any confusion about rising poverty rates and the influence of China's development on overall poverty statistics. [[1]] This article written by Xavier Sala-i-Martin, a Professor of Economics at Columbia University, states that, "The exact growth of income per capita in China is a key determinant of the reduction of worldwide poverty, given its large size and the remarkable rate at which it has reduced poverty. Using only survey data, the World Bank estimates that $1-a-day consumption poverty in China fell from 53 percent in 1980 to 8 percent in 2000.[13] Although China is an important part of this success story with a decline in the poverty rate from 32 percent in 1970 to 3.1 percent in 2000, which accounts for 251 million people escaping poverty, it is by no means the whole story. Indonesia’s poverty rate declined from 35 percent in 1970 to 0.1 percent in 2000. Thailand, with a poverty rate over 23 percent in 1970, had practically eliminated poverty by 2000. In fact, with one exception, all of the countries in this region experienced reduction in poverty rates; the only country in which the poverty head count increased was Papua New Guinea." It goes on to detail an increase in the number and percentage of people rising above the poverty line in South Asia (minus Nepal), and an increase in development in Latin America when measured from 1970 to the present, with most occuring in the first decade, and a more modest backtracking since. It also deals with Africa, which has gotten poorer over the same period, and shows an increase in development in post-Soviet states, when they abandoned state-run economies, and began shifting towards a more market-driven economic approach. So overall, China does play a role but its rise is not the sole cause of numbers detailing increasing global development. 204.227.243.16 19:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)pkmilitia[reply]

I gave it my best go, and I think what content is there reads pretty well. Still, someone who knows something about the topic should definitely go in and add some more information. I was also somewhat concerned about the use of "some think that" in the last section, but I didn't know and the previous version didn't specify either. So that'd be something for someone who knows these things to add.

Well...before I do anything, I want to run by some ideas to anyone who might be following this topic. The first is that "Development Theorists and Practioners" could be merged with "Development Studies" and "Development Economics" under those sections. Also, there should be a separate "Law and Development" article, detailing that area. Also, I included a section of Regional Development Agencies and the thing that immediately came to mind were the regional banks, but I wanted to leave it open for others. And maybe it is not even necessary, I am not sure how best this page would be organized yet. Working on some ideas. Gibbsale 09:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Some ideas to elaborate on:

• WID (women in development)
• GAD (gender and development)
• GED (gender, environment, development)
• gender/women in environmental conservation
• gender/women and stuctural adjustment
• gender/women analysis of micro-credit
• difference of practical and strategic needs
• further explanations on the making of underdevelopment —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saraheli (talk • contribs) 01:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is list-heavy and text-light. I'd like to see a lot of the terms, theories, etc incorporated into a textual discussion of their relevance to international development rather than simply sit, unexplained, in list form. I don't really have the time to do this at the moment, however... --The Way 05:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You caught me in the middle of making some revisions! I added the lists first, but have since added a big chunk of text (a section called 'the era of development'). I intend to add more text at a later date. I believe that both text and lists are needed if this is to become the definitive article on international development. Note: I have not touched the old section on 'Methods and concerns', which is now partially redundant. Does the original author want to make some edits, or shall I take a go at this? APB-CMX 11:26, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a development in practice heading with "methods and concepts" as a sub-heading. I think this could include explanations of how development projects might actually work - what is taken into account (such as participation, women, children etc). There could also be a section on development sectors (health and sanitation, education, shelter, human rights, governance etc) explaining what they are and what their effects are.Tkn20 04:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the article on 'Development theory' is virtually without content and this article has a big section on it--would it be appropriate to move the section into that article? Countermereology 16:31, 12 February 2007 (UTC) Modernization Theory & Dependency Theory are two main development theories/schools of thought. If others agree this is where those ideas belong I will find the time to write up some of their main theories, once I am done writting an essay on them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saraheli (talk • contribs) 01:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the relationship between the Economic development article and this one? What should that relationship be? Jeremy Tobacman 22:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps the best way to classify the distinction is 'economic theory' versus 'history & policy'. Also, the models discussed in economic development appear to relate primarily to domestic (ie, internal to the country) requirements for growth, while the concepts discussed on international development relate to global aims, goals, policies, etc. My recommendation would be to maintain two separate articles, otherwise they risk becoming too long and confusing. Specifically, the relation should be the discussion and explanation of economic theory (ie, Harold-Domar model) versus global policy aims. Admittedly, it is a difficult matter to parse precisely - but clearly important and worthwhile! Globalfix (talk) 18:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I changed sustainable to long-term as much of what is done under the heading of international development cannot be considered sustainable. Sustainability is a fairly new concept in development and is only gradually being incorporated outside of the rhetoric, and I think it would be wrong to portray international development as being distinguishable from humanitarian assistance on the basis of sustainability. I am also looking to come back and include alot more on the history of international development, but I don't think the 'theories' section should be a sub-section of 'history'... Should it just be its own heading perhaps?

I added some substance to the Livelihoods section. As the SLA is widely respected in policy circles and in use today by development agencies and organizations, there should really be a new article focusing simply on the approach's history, framework, connection to development theory, and how it is utilized in development practice. Perhaps someone could start this up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjjulian (talk • contribs) 02:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

United Nations.Hote Belvedere Starcraft.Adi 1/1 343225854767.579786255828000000000000000000$ 79279818846829468991763972846284682648929764/7272864927618649164391916361829000000000000000000000000000000000000$ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.24.76.183 (talk) 20:26, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry, I hope it doesn't come off as rude, but the image of global indicators does not look entirely professional and I feel when we're discussing such a serious matter we should want to have better images. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.123.191.52 (talk) 04:53, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My name is Aryn and I am apart of the Wikiproject Foreign Policy initiative. I am currently developing an article devoted to rights-based approach to development and I would like to add a subsection on this page or add some additional information either in the capacity building section or the human rights section. Please let me know what you think of this. Thanks. Aerapp (talk) 18:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to elaborate more on the “Finance” section of the “Practice” subtopic. While this section is linked to two other pages, the actual information given is very broad. The statement “several organizations and initiatives exist which are concerned with providing financial systems and frameworks…” has no citation and is simply just a claim. In order for the information given on this page to actually be useful, an actual organization needs to be cited for proof. My proposed change is as follows:

The International Monetary Fund is one organization concerned with reducing the frequency of crises among the emerging market countries, specifically the middle-income developing countries that are open to massive capital flows^[1]. A second goal of the IMF for developing countries is to help them achieve macroeconomic stability and poverty reduction ^[2] . The IMF also examines the economic policies of countries requiring assistance in the form of loans to determine if the shortage of capital was due to fluctuations or policy ^[3]. Financial assistance is given to countries as loans and these loans have certain conditions such as economic policy reform ^[4].

The rationale for expanding this article is that in it’s current iteration, it that it is too brief. Self-help groups (SHGs) are part of a large-scale anti-poverty intervention in India that reaches over 30 million people or households (Shyamsukha, 2011). The self-help group model is the largest part of the microfinance movement in India. This model links small groups of mostly poor women to the national banking system through the National Bank and Rural Development or NABARD. According to Chakrabarti (n.d.) “Over the past decade, NABARD’s “SHG-Bank Linkage Program” aimed at connecting self-help groups of poor people with banks, has, in fact, created the largest microfinance network in the world.” The volume of loans, people impacted by the loans, government and NGO funding and public interest of this effort warrants greater knowledge on the topic.

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).Chakrabarti, R. (n.d.). The indian microfinance experience – Accomplishments and challenges. (Master's thesis, Georgia Tech)Retrieved from website: http://www.isb.edu/caf/File/The-Indian-MicroFinance-Experience.pdf

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).Shyamsukha, R. Microfinance Information Exchange, Inc., (2011). India: post microfinance crisis results. Retrieved from website: http://www.themix.org/publications/mix-microfinance-world/2011/11/india-microfinance-post-crisis-results

Here is an outline of my proposed changes:

1 Structure expand section to define NABARD 1.1 How SHGs differ & are similar to other MF groups 2 Goals 2.1 Theory behind MF expanded social capital, increased female participation in village level decision making, increased female participation in family level decision making, increased training for women 3 NABARD's 'SHG Bank Linkage' program provide more detailed information about the government agencies that work to promote SHG membership 4 Advantages of financing through SHGs 4.1 Empirical evidence Limitations of SHGs discussion of concerns regarding MF as a whole, and specific to India 5.1 Post-economic crisis concerns 5.2 Empirical evidence of limitations 5 References NOTES: Addition of a notes List of Acronyms used table 6 External links add links to NABARD

Feedback and comments greatly appreciated.

--PaulaStockman (talk) 19:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PaulaStockman (talk) 19:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on International development. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061006054029/http://www.sistech.co.uk/media/ICEBrunelLecture2006.pdf?Docu_id=1420&faculty=14 to http://www.sistech.co.uk/media/ICEBrunelLecture2006.pdf?Docu_id=1420&faculty=14
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120513022729/http://upers.kuleuven.be/en/titel/9789058679024 to http://upers.kuleuven.be/en/titel/9789058679024

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:09, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in contributing to this discussion regarding the global decline of extreme poverty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_common_misconceptions#poverty

Benjamin (talk) 02:53, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The graph of "...key indicators of human well-being ... since 1970" is low resolution, not to mention being from 2009. If anyone can find a better graph, or the original data for making a new graph, you should do that. EDIT: I forgot to sign, and I've also started work on a new graph using google sheets https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ICfNMqiYfFTHhmoZxG0cmRVb6tQOvBnrwz7lcl-689s/edit?usp=sharing Talib1101 (talk) 21:18, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have done a lit review and I can't find any scholarly work that differentiates between those terms; there are used as synonyms. The articles are effectively forks of the same concept. Note that Economic development only mentions the other article in 'see also', while International development clearly states in the lead "Historically, development has often been largely synonymous with economic development. More recently, writers and practitioners have begun to discuss development in the more holistic and multi-disciplinary sense of human development. Other related concepts are, for instance, competitiveness, quality of life or subjective well-being" (but this is sourced to a video). This mess needs a cleanup, and the first step is to combine those two articles to avoid pointless forking. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:05, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Mild support. I think a merger could be a good idea, although it might not be easy to integrated the existing content seamlessly. What would be the title of the merged article? I would prefer "international development" but that's because I used to work in that sector so I am more familiar with the term. It might also be more overarching. Also keep in mind the article sustainable development which is distinct but will also have overlapping content. EMsmile (talk) 07:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Disagreement. Academic journals and degree programmes still use 'international development' and 'development' interchangeably to encompass a broader range of concerns than economic development. As the first user alluded to, the related page 'Human Development Index' shows the wider concerns captured in modern notions of development.Jojuj (talk) 10:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Disagree. I have a masters degree in International Development, I can tell you it is very different to Economic Development, mainly as it takes into account factors beyond the economy such as sustainability, humanitarianism, transnational aid, health services. You need to do another literature review frankly as your statement on not finding any scholarly work that differentiates between those terms is laughable for those that have studied these two separate fields within social science. One solution could be to merge economic development into one of the many articles on economics such as economic system, or development economics, I can see that this area is messy but definitely disagree that this merge is chosen. Mountaincirque^talk 10:48, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Disagree. The desire to subsume development under economics is part and parcel of the Growth Fetish (2003) and the antithesis of green growth and sustainable development. It's a neoliberal talking point that naked monetary growth floats all boats hence trickle down FTW. I actually have a modicum of cautiously bounded sympathy for the neoliberal position, but at the same time I concede that it's a horribly tilted starting point from which to approach the larger societal issues, and as such I would never even begin to consider merging these two articles. — MaxEnt 21:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The blue line is trying to be relative to both the year 2000 and the year 1990 and failing miserably at the former. — MaxEnt 21:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]