Human Development Strategy in Small States

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.13169/worlrevipoliecon.8.3.0349
• Pages: 349-364
• Published date: 01 October 2017
• Date: 01 October 2017
• Author: Tim Anderson
• Subject Matter: human development,small states,development strategy

World revieW of Political economy vol. 8 no. 3 fall 2017

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY IN SMALL

STATES

Tim Anderson

Tim Anderson is a senior lecturer in Political Economy at the University of

Sydney. His most recent books are The Dirty War on Syria (2016) and Land

and Livelihoods in Papua New Guinea (2015). He has written many dozens of

academic articles on aid, regional integration and development in small island

states, is a consultant to the UNDP on south-south cooperation and development

strategy and has written extensively about Cuban medical cooperation in Timor-

Leste and the South Pacific. Email: t.anderson@sydney.edu.au

Abstract: What are the human development opportunities and challenges for small states

in a multi-polar world? An answer to this question must consider human development

strategies at large, the constraints imposed by neoliberal globalism and better practice

in recent times. Small states have particular vulnerabilities but may also benefit from

realignments within new regional blocs. There are already a number of relevant and

important “post Washington Consensus” themes and lessons from the Brazil, Russia,

India, China and South Africa (BRICS), Community of Latin American and Caribbean

States (CELAC) and Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) groupings.

These have much to do with redefined human development policies and less to do with

extraction of natural resources. The best examples of human development come from

those which are relatively resource poor but which have invested heavily in human

capacity. This article considers the strategic opportunities and challenges for small states

within the new forms of integration presented by an emerging multi-polar world with its

new regional blocs. Best practice has come from sustained and focussed human capacity

building, while the range of possible integration strategies in the new global environment

could be characterised as passive integration, avoiding capture, counter-leverage and

regional realignment, within and between the emerging blocs.

Key words: human development; small states; development strategy

The human development opportunities and challenges for small states have shifted

with the recent growth of strong, independent regional and what we might call

post-globalist organisations. Many of the priorities of the Brazil, Russia, India,

China and South Africa (BRICS) bloc and of the Latin American blocs (the

CELAC, Union of South American States [UNASUR] and the Bolivarian Alliance

350 TIM ANDERSON

WRPE Produced and distributed by Pluto Journals www.plutojournals.com/wrpe/

for the Peoples of Our America [ALBA]) for example, are quite distinct from

those of Washington and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development (OECD). Engagement or integration with these new currents opens

up new options in “south-south” finance, trade, technology, health and education.

Yet taking advantage of these opportunities requires states strongly committed to

investing in their people and to resisting globalist pressures. These cannot be the

minimalist, weak states facilitating open markets, of neoliberal ideology.

Small states (including small island states) have particular vulnerabilities but

may also benefit from counter-leverage and realignments within new regional

blocs, given appropriate priorities and sufficient political will. Many international

development reports (e.g., Bass and Dalal-Clayton 1995; Krausmann, Richter, and

Eisenmenger 2014; UN-OHRLLS 2011) focus on sustainable resource use (and in

the case of small islands states, climate change) yet the relevant and important

post-globalist or “post Washington Consensus” themes and lessons have more to

do with strengthened human capacity building, and less to do with simple extrac-

tivism. In fact, there are no real examples of strong human development in small

states built on resource extraction strategies. Many of those, including most petro-

states, are notorious failures. On the contrary, there are several examples of rela-

tive success among small and island states which are resource poor but which have

achieved some notable successes by investing heavily in human capacity.

Appropriate priorities and long-term commitment to sustained and focussed

human capacity building are critical (Anderson 2013). This article considers the

strategic opportunities and challenges for small and island states within the new

forms of integration presented by an emerging multi-polar world. Much has been

written about the particular vulnerabilities of small states, and in particular “small

island developing states” (e.g., Briguglio 1995). However, a focus on the ecologi-

cal fragility of islands tends to distract attention from wider human development

concerns. This article places greater emphasis on what is required for small states

to take advantage of the new international opportunities. It begins with a review of

the underlying shift from globalist unipolarity to multi-polarity, revised ideas of

the developmental state, in light of the “right to development,” and then presents

some thoughts on broader development strategy.

1. From Unipolarity to Multi-polarity

The unipolar world that seemed to emerge after the collapse of the Soviet Union

helped reinforce the World Bank “structural adjustment” programmes and limited

options for independent development. Many small states faced the end of prefer-

ential trade agreements yet pressure to continue their focus on extractive indus-

tries, with greater integration in global value chains. The rising chorus for investor