Least developed countries - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by FateClub (talk | contribs) at 23:16, 3 April 2007 (But this is not a geology article but economics. Europe and Asia are not integrated economically. Europe is not expected to have a country in this list ever). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:16, 3 April 2007 by FateClub (talk | contribs) (But this is not a geology article but economics. Europe and Asia are not integrated economically. Europe is not expected to have a country in this list ever)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Least Developed Countries (LDCs or Fourth World countries) are countries which according to the United Nations exhibit the lowest indicators of socioeconomic development, with the lowest Human Development Index ratings of all countries in the world. A country is classified as a Least Developed Country if it meets three criteria based on:

low-income (three-year average GNI per capita of less than US $750, which must exceed $900 to leave the list)
human resource weakness (based on indicators of nutrition, health, education and adult literacy) and
economic vulnerability (based on instability of agricultural production, instability of exports of goods and services, economic importance of non-traditional activities, merchandise export concentration, and handicap of economic smallness, and the percentage of population displaced by natural disasters)

Countries may "graduate" out of the LDC classification when indicators exceed these criteria. The United Nations Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States coordinates UN support and provides advocacy services for Least Developed Countries.

The classification currently applies to around 50 countries. As of 2006, the least developed country in the world is Niger.

Usage and abbreviations

Least developed countries can be distinguished from developing countries, "less developed countries", "lesser developed countries", or other terms for countries in the so-called "Third World". Although many contemporary scholars argue that "Third World" is outdated, irrelevant or inaccurate, others may use the term "Fourth World" in reference to least developed countries.

However, in order to avoid confusion between "least developed country" and "less developed country", which may both be abbreviated as LDC, and to avoid confusion with landlocked developing country, which can be abbreviated as LLDC, "developing country" is generally used in preference to "less developed country".

Characteristics

Least developed countries generally suffer conditions of extreme poverty, ongoing and widespread conflict (including civil war or ethnic clashes), extensive political corruption, and lack political and social stability. The form of government in such countries is often authoritarian in nature, and may comprise a dictatorship, warlordism, or a kleptocracy. The majority of LDCs are in Sub-Saharan Africa.

During the last United Nations review in 2003, the UN defined LDCs as countries meeting three criteria, one of which was a three-year average estimate of gross national income (GNI) per capita of less than US $750. Countries with populations over 75 million are excluded.

Trade and LDCs

Issues surrounding global trade regulations and LDCs have gained a lot of media and policy attention thanks to the recently collapsed Doha Round of WTO negotiations being termed a development round. During the WTO's Hong Kong Ministerial, it was agreed that LDCs could see 100 percent duty-free, quota-free access to U.S. markets if the round were completed. But analysis of the deal by NGOs found that the text of the proposed LDC deal had substantial loopholes that might make the offer less than the full 100 percent access, and could even erase some current duty-free access of LDCs to rich country markets., Dissatisfaction with these loopholes led some economists to call for a reworking of the Hong Kong deal.