Cola Wars

Madhav Mehta
Comparative Development
18th December 2009
I would first like to start by presenting a slightly grim truth about the social sciences- it is that all who are engaged in it live in uncertainty. Different studies give different results; there is no blueprint, no foolproof plan for development. However this does not mean that development is impossible, neither does it mean that certain policies, systems, and developmental strategies don’t work better than others. Development is definitely possible, however the road that leads a nation towards development follows a twisted path. Countries differ and thus methods for attaining development also do as they correspond to the local conditions and environment.
There are multiple definitions of development, however, the dominant definition is one that treats economic growth as the centerpiece of development. I quite like Amartya Sen’s conception of development as one that “must go much beyond the accumulation of wealth and the growth of gross national product (Sen, 14)”; he mentions that under-development is present even in rich countries like the USA, where life expectancy for African Americans is lower than that of the people in the province of Kerala, India. However we also must realize that income and wealth play an essential role in giving people “more freedom to lead the kinds of lives they have reason to value (Sen, 14)”. Thus even though it is nice to hold a view of development as an ideology rather than an actually attainable goal like Wolfgang Sachs and Amartya Sen do, for all practical purposes excessive stress on economic growth proves to be a widespread conception as the focal point for development. The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, as well as William Easterly, an American economist, strongly follow this definition.
Thus the goals for the country of Pomona as far as economic and political development is concerned must be- a. to reach the path of self-sustainability in economic...