U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-07-2013, 06:38 PM
 
530 posts, read 1,077,099 times
Reputation: 610

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lepillow View Post
In your opinion, what will be the world's first truly developed African country, and in which year will this be achieved? Think on the level of Switzerland or Denmark, not those straddling on the periphery like South Korea.

I'd say Ghana in the year 2100. I base this conjecture on what I've heard and read about the country. It seems to be performing very well for its size compared to other giants like Nigeria or South Africa.
I would say an island country will be the first to be developed (like Mauritius, Sao Tome and Principe, The Seychelles). Unfortunately, most of continental Africa is too prone to mass migration to ever sustain very high human development levels on a widespread level.

+However, I think if Angola keeps it up then they could be the first developed sub-saharan African nation. Here are some reasons why:
- Rapid economic growth consistently within the last decade
- Attempts by the government to improve the quality of life of lower/middle classes (housing market, etc)
- Attempts by the government to diversify it's economy and not be too oil dependent.
- Remote location of the nation's capital/largest city makes mass migration much more difficult (though of course still possible).
- Small population relative to it's size
- Increase in foreign direct investment (FDI)
- Resource-rich (but needs to avoid the "resource curse" again and like many other African nations)
** However, don't get me wrong. It still faces serious issues though such as an extremely high cost of living, property rights issues and corruption.

+ Botswana is another possibility. In my opinion, Botswana is currently the most developed in Sub-Saharan Africa and would actually likely be classed in the near-developed category if it wasn't for the HIV epidemic.

+ As for Nigeria, even though Nigeria is currently a continental economic heavyweight and will experience much more economic growth; the population is just too growing and large to uniformly benefit from those gains. They also need to control religious instability in the north as well as the instability in the southeast. One good thing about it is that it has a very large diaspora so that will reap some benefits (most Nigerians that I know of are very intelligent and have a strong desire to improve their country); but they really need to control their population which is definitely easier said then done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
The world's first developed African country? How is that different from "Africa's first developed country"?

It happened already. The Republic of South Africa, under white rule. To a traveler passing through, it was just like Canada or Australia.
LOL, South Africa only had a high/developed standard of living for the small minority of Whites and a few coloreds in the apartheid era. For the vast majority of other residents, they still lived in the destitute townships in absolute poverty. It's one of the biggest myths/urban legends that South Africa AS A WHOLE was better off under white rule; the reason this myth is so widespread is b/c it's almost exclusively white people who migrated to other region and of course spread this idealogy. At least some areas like Marlboro, Jhb are developing strong middle classes representing the composition of regular South Africans.
______________________________________________
Here are some guides that present solid and well-researched information (for those not familiar):
Human Development Index: Indices & Data | Human Development Reports (HDR) | United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
Political Risk/Business Friendliness indicators: A - B | iPoliticalRisk

Last edited by PrestigiousReputability; 11-07-2013 at 06:50 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-07-2013, 07:19 PM
 
Location: Singapore
156 posts, read 233,577 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrestigiousReputability View Post
I would say an island country will be the first to be developed (like Mauritius, Sao Tome and Principe, The Seychelles). Unfortunately, most of continental Africa is too prone to mass migration to ever sustain very high human development levels on a widespread level.

+
However, I think if Angola keeps it up then they could be the first developed sub-saharan African nation. Here are some reasons why:
- Rapid economic growth consistently within the last decade
- Attempts by the government to improve the quality of life of lower/middle classes (housing market, etc)
- Attempts by the government to diversify it's economy and not be too oil dependent.
- Remote location of the nation's capital/largest city makes mass migration much more difficult (though of course still possible).
- Small population relative to it's size
- Increase in foreign direct investment (FDI)
- Resource-rich (but needs to avoid the "resource curse" again and like many other African nations)
** However, don't get me wrong. It still faces serious issues though such as an extremely high cost of living, property rights issues and corruption.


+ Botswana is another possibility. In my opinion, Botswana is currently the most developed in Sub-Saharan Africa and would actually likely be classed in the near-developed category if it wasn't for the HIV epidemic.


+ As for Nigeria, even though Nigeria is currently a continental economic heavyweight and will experience much more economic growth; the population is just too growing and large to uniformly benefit from those gains. They also need to control religious instability in the north as well as the instability in the southeast. One good thing about it is that it has a very large diaspora so that will reap some benefits (most Nigerians that I know of are very intelligent and have a strong desire to improve their country); but they really need to control their population which is definitely easier said then done.




LOL, South Africa only had a high/developed standard of living for the small minority of Whites and a few coloreds in the apartheid era. For the vast majority of other residents, they still lived in the destitute townships in absolute poverty. It's one of the biggest myths/urban legends that South Africa AS A WHOLE was better off under white rule; the reason this myth is so widespread is b/c it's almost exclusively white people who migrated to other region and of course spread this idealogy. At least some areas like Marlboro, Jhb are developing strong middle classes representing the composition of regular South Africans.
______________________________________________
Here are some guides that present solid and well-researched information (for those not familiar):

Human Development Index: Indices & Data | Human Development Reports (HDR) | United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
Political Risk/Business Friendliness indicators: A - B | iPoliticalRisk

Exactly. I think South Africa looks better only when put in contrast against regional countries that are in the doldrums. As for it being a truly-developed country (not just in affluent communities), there's still some way to go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2013, 07:35 PM
 
3,522 posts, read 3,922,381 times
Reputation: 2170
Quote:
Originally Posted by lepillow View Post
In your opinion, what will be the world's first truly developed African country, and in which year will this be achieved? Think on the level of Switzerland or Denmark, not those straddling on the periphery like South Korea.

I'd say Ghana in the year 2100. I base this conjecture on what I've heard and read about the country. It seems to be performing very well for its size compared to other giants like Nigeria or South Africa.
africa is already fully developed in its own way.
will africa ever become a part of the capitalist west?
i really hope not.

as an african, what the west labels as 'development' i rather have nothing to do with.

i'm not saying it's bad. just not for me.

it can be done differently, and i hope africa chooses that path as opposed to the one set out by the west as ideal.
because, being in the west, things here are anything but.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2013, 12:20 AM
 
6,552 posts, read 9,067,154 times
Reputation: 2837
Quote:
Originally Posted by dub dub II View Post

as an african, what the west labels as 'development' i rather have nothing to do with.

i'm not saying it's bad. just not for me.

it can be done differently, and i hope africa chooses that path as opposed to the one set out by the west as ideal.
because, being in the west, things here are anything but.
What would be an example of African development?

I think there are basic things that represent development in general. Like having a large educated literate population. Developed infrastructure. A political system that allows people to elect leaders and to transfer power peacefully. A economic climate that allows entrepreneurs to prosper etc. These things are common to most developed countries and they could be applied to African countries as well.

Last edited by Motion; 11-08-2013 at 01:11 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2013, 06:22 AM
 
50 posts, read 122,234 times
Reputation: 45
South Africa, Libya, Gabon, Seychelles, Equatorial Guinea, Mauritius, Botswana

With the exception of South Africa and Libya, the rest each has a population of less than 3 million.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2013, 10:17 AM
 
Location: inside your head
149 posts, read 268,095 times
Reputation: 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrestigiousReputability View Post
LOL, South Africa only had a high/developed standard of living for the small minority of Whites and a few coloreds in the apartheid era. For the vast majority of other residents, they still lived in the destitute townships in absolute poverty. It's one of the biggest myths/urban legends that South Africa AS A WHOLE was better off under white rule; the reason this myth is so widespread is b/c it's almost exclusively white people who migrated to other region and of course spread this idealogy. At least some areas like Marlboro, Jhb are developing strong middle classes representing the composition of regular South Africans.
Actually, South Africa as a whole was indeed doing better before 1994. I wouldn't say it was better off because thanks to the end of Apartheid some blacks indeed entered the middle class, yet it was doing better as a whole (not judging by personal income only).

For instance, there was never a power shortage before 1994 because the white government invested in new power plants. by contrary today's South Africa faces a huge problem with electricity production, as the new black government failed to maintain the existing ones, not to mention they also failed in building new ones. It is hard to imagine for someone who lives in the Western world but in five years time electricity will be shut down for a few hours a day in every major South African city, every day.

The other thing is crime, which has rocketed sky-high since 1994. This is actually one of the reasons why the White population leaves South Africa now and relocates to Australia. These crimes happen in farmlands mostly but now they enter middle-class suburbs as well and are extremely brutal. For instance, last year's probably most brutal crime was this one: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1706508.html It doesn't affect Whites only.

Not to mention the Apartheid government, as much as I hated them for this idea, at least put some money in building low-income houses for the non-White citizens through government programs. Currently, no such program is continued so that poorer population has no place to live and at the same Jacob Zuma, the black president of SA, spends $30 million on his fourth mansion's renovation. Outrage over South Africa president Jacob Zuma's $30 million retirement home renovation bill - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2013, 01:30 PM
 
604 posts, read 464,739 times
Reputation: 1231
Quote:
Originally Posted by lepillow View Post
In your opinion, what will be the world's first truly developed African country, and in which year will this be achieved? Think on the level of Switzerland or Denmark, not those straddling on the periphery like South Korea.

I'd say Ghana in the year 2100. I base this conjecture on what I've heard and read about the country. It seems to be performing very well for its size compared to other giants like Nigeria or South Africa.
As a few before me have predicted, I also predict that country will be Ghana. It will be well before 2100 however. I predict middle income within a few decades and "first world" by 60s or 70's.

Oh and South Korea is not on the periphery. It is a nation whose trajectory Africans should study in fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2013, 05:17 PM
 
2,241 posts, read 2,672,622 times
Reputation: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
The world's first developed African country? How is that different from "Africa's first developed country"?

It happened already. The Republic of South Africa, under white rule. To a traveler passing through, it was just like Canada or Australia.
Equitoreal Guinea, South Africa, Angola, and Mozambique ARE overnight African nation success stories. Zimbabwe was successful but after getting independence and rebelling against white European rule, it went downhill from there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2013, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Jersey
2,296 posts, read 3,395,520 times
Reputation: 2031
I want to say Botswana, but I don't understand how such a relatively wealthy country can have the sort of HIV epidemic as it does. The Southern part of Africa sans Zimbabwe is doing fairly well in general.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2013, 05:31 PM
 
6,552 posts, read 9,067,154 times
Reputation: 2837
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelismaticEchoes View Post

Equitoreal Guinea, South Africa, Angola, and Mozambique ARE overnight African nation success stories. Zimbabwe was successful but after getting independence and rebelling against white European rule, it went downhill from there.
How have these two countries been determined to be developed? Both Equitoreal Guinea and Angola have oil but too much corruption has been associated with both countries oil.


African Oil: Where's The Money Going? - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Africa
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top