Muriel and I have now spent about 230 days abroad over the last year, of which the vast majority of time has been in countries that are either middle or lower income. This has been better for our own wallets, as the living costs in these countries are generally lower.
All told during these 230 days, we have been (or will be, once we get to Colombia in a week) to 28 countries. Between Africa and South America -- 19 countries. Knock on wood on the Colombia frontera, by the way. The breakdown is 11 countries for Africa, all on the southern and eastern sections of the continent, and 8 countries for South America, which comprise the majority of the countries for this continent.
Pretty much all of the countries we have visited have some qualities that reinforce the lower standard of living compared to our US lives. Pick one, or many of the following list - irregular transportation networks, safety concerns, toilet paper thrown in the garbage can instead of flushed, dirt cheap and unregulated street food, hygienic worries (food or otherwise), guys rocking jerseys from players in the nfl and nba that retired a decade ago, currency issues such as unsustainable black market spreads or closed currencies, huge potholes, lack of safe drinking water and spotty electricity. There are reasons big and small for all of these characteristics, and honestly they don't really bug us much as we travel. But, they are emblematic of the way that these societies could serve their citizens better.
 |
| Tana, Madagascar |
While in Bolivia, which is one of the poorest countries in South America, we got to comparing our lived experience to places facing extreme poverty, like Malawi, Madagascar and Tanzania. In some ways, the countries felt similar, in fact Sucre, Bolivia and Tana, the capital of Madagascar reminded both of us of the other city. In other ways, the countries felt quite different, for example the transport in Bolivia is great, comfy buses connect cities and run all the time, while Madagascar is connected exclusively by taxi-brousses (toyota pick up trucks laden with people and stuff) and the airplanes of the elites.
 |
| Sucre, Bolivia |
As we are wont to do, our minds have wandered to the economics of these countries, especially in a relative comparison of the various stages of development. Both of us have extensive work and study experience in development, from the micro approach of Mu's peace corp time in Madagascar to the macro focus of the UN system I worked in for a summer in Geneva while in grad school.
The Data
From that idea, I went and did a little research to compare some economic data for the countries we have visited in Africa and South America on our extended travel. Below is the data for the 19 countries we have visited in this sample, broken down by Gross Domestic Product per capita (on a PPP basis, see below) and then ranked according to that metric, continent and GNI coefficient, a measure of inequality in the economy (basically the higher the number the more unequal the country is).
Rank and Country GDP per capita (PPP) GNI (%)
1 Argentina (SA) $17,376 36.4
2 Chile (SA) $16,171 52.1
3 Uruguay (SA) $15,469 45.3
4 Brazil (SA) $11,845 54.7
5 South Africa (A) $11,035 63.1
6 Botswana (A) $10,866 61.0
7 Colombia (SA) $10,155 55.9
8 Peru (SA) $10,000 48.1
9 Ecuador (SA) $8,335 49.3
10 Namibia (A) $6,658 63.9
11 Paraguay (SA) $5,548 52.4
12 Bolivia (SA) $4,843 56.3
13 Zimbabwe (A) $2,413 50.1
14 Mozambique (A) $1,335 45.7
15 Kenya (A) $1,125 47.7
16 Zambia (A) $911 54.6
17 Madagascar (A) $911 44.1
18 Tanzania (A) $720 37.6
19 Malawi (A) $596 39.0
Thoughts
- The numbers: knowing some basic background context and being on the ground, even I was surprised by the results of this little analysis. Seven out of the top 9 countries in economic production are in South America, while the seven bottom countries are all in Africa. The relative spread of the wealth is large, Malawi at just under 600 dollars a year is just 3.4% of Argentina's better than $17k a year. There is more separating the two continents than similarities.
On the equality front, I was quite stunned to see the degree to which GDP and the GNI coefficient were negatively correlated. For whatever reason, the low income countries on our list have lower GNI numbers, and hence more equality. The worst countries for equality ended up being the richer countries in Africa, with Namibia being the shameful leader.
Spitballing some possible contributors to these results;
- Length of independence: reading the histories of the South American countries, i have been surprised at the length of time that they have enjoyed independence. Most gained it in the 1820's and 30's from Spain, although there were frequent debilitating battles and wars between the various countries. Still, that is in stark contrast to the history of Africa, where independence was earned almost exclusively after WWII, often two decades after. It makes sense that this difference has some role in the imbalance of economic results, after all residual impact of colonialism has a long tail and I believe it takes generations to get out from its corrosive sphere. Fast forward a century and surely many of the countries at the bottom of this table will have made impressive advancements.
 |
| The fun times driving in Kenya |
- Infrastructure: the difference in size, functionality and depth of the infrastructure between the two continents is vast. I had the pleasure, but not exactly the genuine kind of pleasure, of driving around Kenya for a week or so with my wife and parents. Some of it was amazing, 4x4 through the national parks with lions, buffalo and rhinos not more than 30 feet from the truck. That was amazing. But, most of the time, the driving was unbelievably stressful for 2 reasons. First, there are millions of potholes just waiting to grab you and throw the truck for a ride and secondly, the other drivers on the road. You can't let up for a second, and that is on the principal road in all of the country. When we got to our destinations, not just the drivers (my dad and I) but everyone in the car needed mental siestas to recover.
 |
| View from a speedy bus in Uruguay |
Contrast that to all the bus and taxi rides here in South America, which can comfortably average 100 kph for hours at a time, cover vast distances and much more closely approximate the experience of driving in the US or Europe. The roads are simply better, so the transit can flow at rates I would hazard are at least 2x faster. Think of all that time and resources retained, not wasted.
 |
| Dar es Salaam, Tanzania |
Furthermore, in the urban centers the relative size of the built environments are dramatically different. For example, in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, the main part of the city is gridded up as is typical of colonial centers. However, this grid begins to disintegrate after a kilometer or two, and then gets into straight chaos. Contrast that to Buenos Aires, which must be larger than San Francisco on a square kilometer basis. The buildings there are hefty and solid, and extended for farther than you would like to walk in a day. Huge difference.
 |
| Spiffy Buenos Aires, Argentina |
- Piggy backing: another concept i think might be in play is that the modern societies in South America seem to have built on top of the indigenous past, while in Africa none of the capital created by pre-European societies seems to have been utilized. The best example on our trip is Cuzco, Peru, which is literally built on top of indigenous capital of the Incas. Many, many churches and buildings in the city have a 10-20' foundation of perfectly constructed Incan stone work. I think of this as an apt metaphor for the continent, even while recognizing that much of this was a straight show of power and domination. The conquistadors of Europe took much, plundered terribly, but also kept some power structures in place and utilized some native agriculture. In Africa, colonization tended towards pillaging and extraction, leaving much less behind when independence took place.
 |
| Piggybacking in Cuzco, Peru |
- Development in action: lastly, and more positively, I have seen such tangible development just over the last decade or so. The change over the last 8 years since I saw 5 of the countries we have visited in South America is tremendous. There are WAY more buses, the food is much better, you feel safer, the connectivity is many orders of magnitude better. All positive, and not just for travelers but for citizens. Mu wrote about this beautifully in her impressions from returning to her Peace Corps village. Her friends now had cell phones,a more regular supply of food, and even motos. Also, my dad talked about development in action with respect to Kenya when he wrote on his return after 40 years. He felt like he was coming back to a different country in many ways.
Those are two of my all time favorite post from this blog, by the way.
My take away is that development is working, but way too slowly. We have seen it across these two samples of countries. But, there is much work still to do, obviously. I do feel that sometimes the first part of that equation gets forgotten, even though it is the one that should make all of us ready and willing to move forward on all that is left to do.
Editors note
The two main metrics I looked at above are GDP per capita on a purchasing power parity basis and the GNI coefficient. Below are slightly more in depth explanations of how those are calculated. In essence, PPP puts all of the economic production in these various countries into a single, comparable metric and GNI reflects the inequality in an economy, the larger the number the more unequal the society.
- GDP Purchasing power parity (PPP): is an economic theory and a technique used to determine the relative value of currencies, estimating the amount of adjustment needed on the exchange rate between countries in order for the exchange to be equivalent to (or on par with) each currency's purchasing power. Basically, this method tries to account for variance across countries in what a dollar, or euro, or peso buys. In theory, once the accounting is done, a dollar should buy you the same bundle of goods in one country or another, allowing comparisons between those countries.
- GNI coefficient definition: The Gini coefficient is a number between 0 and 1, where 0 corresponds with perfect equality (everyone has the same income) and 1 corresponds with perfect inequality (where one person has all the income—and everyone else has zero income). For the above chart, the coefficient has been resized to a percentage. Income distribution can vary greatly from wealth distribution in a country.
Posted with Blogsy
No comments:
Post a Comment