FINITE RESOURCES

.

Finite Resources

Name of Student

Name of Instructor

Date

Finite Resources

To discuss this question effectively I will first describe the dominant ideology before moving on to discuss the ecological critique of economic development and whether it provides an viable alternative viewpoint or is simply a fashionable but irrelevant set of theories. One of the first problems encountered in a discussion of this nature is one of terminology, because it can be seen that economic development/progress and growth do not always have agreed meanings nor are they necessarily synoymous. Gavin Kitching provides us with one answer when he states the position of economists such as David Ricardo and Adam Smith - 'For these thinkers, economic growth occurred in society if the volume and value of output or production in that society rose quickly and continuously'. However, other thinkers such as Sismondi believed that increased production in itself did not constitute progress unless it was accompanied by a more equitable distribution of wealth and economic power. For the purposes of this essay, I shall define economic growth as being a sustained increase in income per head of population, whilst development is the former accompanied by falling poverty expressed in terms of more even wealth and income distribution.

It can be seen that the superior ideology common in the subject of financial development stresses the necessity of development through industrialization as a means to expanded prosperity. It is sensed that the nature of agriculturally-based finances prevents them from making any thing other than a relatively little increase in people's incomes over time, and at the very least such finances should be adept to trade with other, more industrialized nations. This is the main cause why industrialization is seen as absolutely vital for the facilitation of significant financial development, as well as the best way to gain the advantages ...