How did certain countries become hopeless basket cases?

Nov 2016
1,531
Indus Valley, Pakistan
#31
Sorry but I dont really see how this thing could work

First you'd need accurate headcount in each dot...Do we have that ? My guess is no

Second, you could have one big bright light (such as advertising) and around it homes with no electriticity... So how does one derive the "number of people living in the dark" from that ?

Third with heavy use of curtains, lights would be blacked out.. Conversely say in the Netherlands where traditionnally they dont use curtains, you'd have brighter lights...

Fourth looking from above what you see is mostly street lights (or car headlights) and other "open sources" of light.... you'd not really see lights inside homes or appts...
Please read the full report. It does touch on various problems and how these are addressed.

Sustainability | Free Full-Text | Using Nighttime Satellite Imagery as a Proxy Measure of Human Well-Being | HTML

The algorithem the researchers developed has been refined over time and has high rate of efficacy in showing poverty - as measured against other data sources or samples.

As you pointed out there are problems but most of these pertain to the developed world where the actual light metric is complicated by various factors. Other then the examples given by you we have the recent use of LED bulbs which give differant light. However all these are not a issue with the developing world. Where extreme poverty would mean having electricy connection and a cheap incandescent bulb would be measure of economic mobility.

Satellite imagery might not help out figuring if one neighbourhood of Berlin is more prosperous then another but in the developing world it does. Huge areas of developing world are not even connected to the national grid. This is where satelite imagery is very handy as these are the very sort of regions where normal data is going to be poor to non existant or unreliable.

Also it is evolving technology and continously being refined but like any other single source is not perfect but it does give us insight and better understanding of the world we live in.
 
Last edited:

Asherman

Forum Staff
May 2013
3,277
Albuquerque, NM
#32
4 well, I know it seems strange but the world atlas does list 23 different nations connected with North America. I'm responding on a smartphone without understanding how to provide a link to the world that was. It shouldn't be hard to find on Google.
 

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,478
#33
4 well, I know it seems strange but the world atlas does list 23 different nations connected with North America. I'm responding on a smartphone without understanding how to provide a link to the world that was. It shouldn't be hard to find on Google.
That list includes all the carribean nations (cuba, haiti etc...)
 

VHS

Ad Honorem
Dec 2015
4,484
Florania
#34
4 well, I know it seems strange but the world atlas does list 23 different nations connected with North America. I'm responding on a smartphone without understanding how to provide a link to the world that was. It shouldn't be hard to find on Google.
Central America and Caribbean islands are included here!
 
Jul 2016
885
Europe/Switzerland/Ticino
#35
You have included Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and Haiti in your list though they are not African countries. You have also later included Yemen.
So I suggest that you expand the list world-wide and include other cases too. I suggest that Pakistan and some other south Asian countries like Thailand, Laos and Cambodia be included. Pakistan is facing bomb blasts every now and then with its Baluchistan and FATA areas already rumbling with discontent. It is troubled with corruption scandals with its Prime Minister being named in the Panama Papers. And yet its Army is dreaming of conquering Indian held Kashmir, not to speak of the whole of India.And it is fomenting terrorism in Indian held Kashmir. A ripe case for being called a basket case.

Is North korea the poorest country in the world ? Maybe YES..
 

Asherman

Forum Staff
May 2013
3,277
Albuquerque, NM
#36
The number of nations per continent can, of course, be arrived and totaled at in more than one way. My point is that we need some foundation for what a "failed nation" might be. "Successful nations" are less debatable, even when there are drastic differences between them. Looking at the entire globe today, where are those nations that are clearly "successful" and which are clearly "failed"? Within each region/continent what features do we see indicating either "success", "fail", or "intermediate"?

Some of the indices might be: Health and Sanitation (clean water, sewage disposal) with an adequate medical support system; Affordable nutritious food available to the population; Economic productivity and stability, does the population have an income adequate to raise a family; Relative poverty and taxation; a Justice system that is fair and open; Freedom of individuals to think and believe without coercion; Hate speech and action constrained, and a non-violent means of leadership succession.

Africa probably has more than its share of "Failed States", and presumably the rest of the World would like to reverse that. What differentiates Aftrican States? Are the differences between North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa enough to treat them differently? How great a part does religion play in whether a State fails or succeeds in nation building? What all nations have in common is that they all are conglomerations of humans with all the problems human creativity has been able to invent over the past million, or so years.
 
Nov 2016
1,531
Indus Valley, Pakistan
#37
The number of nations per continent can, of course, be arrived and totaled at in more than one way. My point is that we need some foundation for what a "failed nation" might be. "Successful nations" are less debatable, even when there are drastic differences between them. Looking at the entire globe today, where are those nations that are clearly "successful" and which are clearly "failed"? Within each region/continent what features do we see indicating either "success", "fail", or "intermediate"?

Some of the indices might be: Health and Sanitation (clean water, sewage disposal) with an adequate medical support system; Affordable nutritious food available to the population; Economic productivity and stability, does the population have an income adequate to raise a family; Relative poverty and taxation; a Justice system that is fair and open; Freedom of individuals to think and believe without coercion; Hate speech and action constrained, and a non-violent means of leadership succession.
Well, to define a 'failed state' there is danger that geo-political agenda might creap in and care should be taken to not to fall in that trap. Therefore we must try to only look at tangibles as opposed to intangibles that are so prone to subjective interpretation. In the developing world it matters naught to the average citizen if their country is sending rockets to Pluto or winning the gold at the Olympics. What matters are the basics of life. If your country is providing these or creating conditions amenable to these then the state has met it's basic requirement.

What are the basics? I am reminded of the 1972 election slogan of the late Prime Minister Bhutto of Pakistan whose rally call was "Roti, Kapra Aur Makan". Translated "food, clothing and housing". He won the elections. So my list in order of priority would be:-

1. Income (to buy food, clothing etc)
2. Sanitation (clean water, toilet )
3. Housing
4. Law and order
5. Education

As a rule there will be relationship between these variables - a state that does a good job in providing sanitation for example won't be utterly failing on delivering housing or vice versa. Housing will have correlation with sanitation for obvious reasons.
 
Last edited:

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,474
San Antonio, Tx
#38
By the way, I forgot Yemen, and it should be on the list.
Before unification, Yemen Arab Republic was slightly better off than People's Republic of Yemen.
Still, both were the poorest in the Middle East.
Unification did not improve the fortune much; political instability and economic stagnation resulted.
Blame the khat is easy, but the issue should be deeper than that.
You might also have added Venezuela: rich in oil, poor in everything else, especially government. I remember 30 or so years ago, the country was quite prosperous.