I got bored and was wandering around Google Video when I came upon this.
It's pretty long (20min), but I found the layout of the information incredibly accessible (considering what it is) as well as relevant to the way I view the rest of the world.
Basically, the state of developing countries vs others is graphed with regards to their child mortality, income, longevity, and even internet use (to name a few). The disparity isn't as clear as I thought it was, and I'm pretty sure that's Hans Rosling's point.
I'm interested to hear some of your thoughts on this.
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
As a "developing world" denizen I couldn't agree more with Hans Rosling. I would go as far as to say that I never saw a better presentation on the subject. Generalizations always tend to be dumb. In this day and age, you can find a bit of everything everywhere. A professor (don't remember his name) once called Brazil "Belíndia" (Belgium+India) because it has regions comparable to Belgium in economy, population wellfare, etc. Others, though, not so fortunate. That's also the truth for the world, as a whole. Great vid, airmanfour.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
I would prefer it if there were a written summary rather than having to watch 20 minutes of vid, especially considering download speeds here means it would likely take 3 days of downloading - or more - before I could watch it.
Sorry. Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
But the graphics are really pretty, quidscribs! And...you know...pretty graphics are the most important thing in a presentation! ;-)
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Yeah, but it'll take me three days to download. Cuz, you know, even though I have high speed internet, I'm in a developing country (is that the same as third world? I don't know all the classifications...) high speed really isn't very fast at all and is, at times, barely faster than dial up. Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
He nails a lot of the important points. One thing he doesn't emphasize much is that the increased measures of income inequality are almost entirely due to a tiny part of the world's population becoming much, much richer, and a small part of the world's population not becoming much richer. Almost no countries are becoming poorer, and by far most people are becoming richer, even in countries not making much progress; those are being held back by a large part of the country moving into abject poverty due to war, famine, and disease. Purchasing Power Parity (the ability to buy the things you need/want locally with your money) is increasing incredibly dramatically.
Increased income inequality isn't the problem, the problem is the people who aren't managing to increase their income, and the rich aren't causing that by doing well. In fact, notice that the countries that accelerate the fastest on his graphs are all ones that have greatly reduced their trade barriers and chosen to commerce freely with the major economic powers.
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
quid, where are you?
Posted by General Sax (Member # 9694) on :
I was very impressed by the data and the skilled representation thereof, I was also cheered to see that family size except in Muslim countries is universally drifting smaller.
It was a happy coincidence as well to learn that Vietnam actually tossed communism in the eighties and to see the results it tied in with a thread on the topic that I just started.
A very worthwhile lecture.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
GS: family size in muslim countries is soundly drifting smaller, he misspoke and corrected himself. Its sub-saharan africa where family size is not becoming much smaller.
Posted by General Sax (Member # 9694) on :
Ah, well drifting smaller did not move them from the right side with the rest of us, but it is good they are heading the right way....
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
(Eduardo: Sri Lanka)
Ah, thanks for the info, fugu.
Sri Lanka is one of those countries that is at war and whose purchasing power parity is dropping, even more so in the north and east where the majority of the war takes place.
For example, sugar is available to us at about $0.60 US per kg, but in the north and east, in September it cost around $1.50 US, but now is up to $4 per kg when it's available, which it isn't always.
Three years ago, that same kg of sugar cost us, in Colombo, about $0.35 US.
Wages, however, have not increased very much at all. I wish I had hard data on that, but I don't - I'm going by word of mouth info. What I can tell you, though, is that thanks to the tsunami and the war starting up again, the tourism industry has been suffering dramatically since Dec 2004 (I write for a travel magazine, so I do hear directly from people in the know. Unfortunately, my lousy memory means that I don't remember specifics) as has the fishing industry, which was virtually destroyed. Even though, thanks to international aid, many fisherman have received new boats & fishing equipment, the fish themselves have not recovered - they're very scarce. Fish & other seafood costs have increased by 3-4x since the tsunami.
Sri Lanka has higher literacy rates than most countries in the region at over 90% (I think it was around 95%, but not positive). It also has reasonable life expectancy rates in the 70s for both male and female, again, higher than its neighbors.
Analysts say that Sri Lanka was poised to become this regions leader in technology because of the existing infrastructure. Instead, because of over two decades of civil war and more recently the tsunami, it has made no significant gains.
If you ask locals, they'll tell you that financially, they are no better off now than they were a decade or two ago because of inflation.
This particular country is, in the opinions of many, going into the toilet. It has nothing to do with potential or ability and everything to do with war, greed (ie, corruption) on the part of politicians (which, by the way, also goes hand in hand with the war), and natural disaster (although this one is actually a small part of it comparatively speaking).
Change the government to one which can manage effectively without corruption and with due consideration to the population of this country and this country would become wealthier.
ETA: Did he mention Sri Lanka specifically? If he did, would anyone be willing to say what he said? I'm curious if it agrees with the general consensus here. Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Ah, I see your confusion, and mine. There was a brief period where family size remains the same but life expectancy became higher in arab africa, but smaller family size quickly followed (as we can see on the graph at the end, there's nobody in the space arab africa briefly occupied). AIDS then caused sub-saharan africa to drop back down in life expectancy and increase in fertility rate (the latter likely a reponse to the former, as it would still be at least as beneficial to have descendants to support one in later life during the AIDS epidemic).
On another note, I've recently been hired to work on some projects for dealing with scientific datasets, including loading, managing, processing, and visualizing them. If I have opportunity I'm going to steal some of the features he uses in his animations .
Posted by General Sax (Member # 9694) on :
In our line of work that is just research...
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
I mean doing it without reference to specific datasets and formats (except as needed to load those formats into more compatible/generic representations). Specifically, I'll be working on a research computing platform.
http://iv.slis.indiana.edu/ (this site is slightly out of date, a new one will be rolled out in the relatively near future)
http://nwb.slis.indiana.edu/ (the specific platform I'll mostly be working with)
Posted by General Sax (Member # 9694) on :
One thing I like about the development of such representations is that once the data is crunched and the database set, it just keeps on being relevant, it is work that you do once and it stays done and relevant, apart from keeping the database up to date. So each one completed is like a nail in the coffin of ignorance.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
quid,
According to my government (I love saying that, be even more spooked to know that yes, it is the CIA) Sri Lankan men have a literacy rate of 94.8% (comparable to Bosnia), but for women it is a decidedly less impressive 90.2% (comparable to Viet Nam, Mexico or Zimbabwe) this averages out to 92.3% (comparable Portugal.)
However seeing as how India is only 61% literate (although this varies enormously on a State-by-State basis), Pakistan only 48.7% Bangladesh only 41.0% (both are some of lowest performing Muslim countries, which tend to do better as Islam stresses the ability to read the Qur'an), Sri Lanka can claim to be doing well regionally.
But not that well, 97.2% of Maldivians can read.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
The Maldives may not be considered as much of a literacy success compared to Sri Lankans simply because they have such a small population - something like 300,000 people compared to Sri Lanka's over 20 million people. It's also possible that they've only recently caught up. It's also possible that, with an older population in Sri Lanka, that that's where the majority of the illiterate people are.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
The site that he links you too, gapminder.org, has some really cool stuff on it.
Thanks for the link, this is a great 20 minutes, and those visuals blew me away. Our solutions to the problems of the world need to be more complex than I think many of us ever imagined.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: GS: family size in muslim countries is soundly drifting smaller, he misspoke and corrected himself. Its sub-saharan africa where family size is not becoming much smaller.
The data are confusing on that point, because the population size has more than doubled since the 1960s in Muslim countries. That number has to do with increasing life-expectancy and lower infant mortality as well.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by quidscribis: The Maldives may not be considered as much of a literacy success compared to Sri Lankans simply because they have such a small population - something like 300,000 people compared to Sri Lanka's over 20 million people. It's also possible that they've only recently caught up. It's also possible that, with an older population in Sri Lanka, that that's where the majority of the illiterate people are.
I agree. If you looked at a section of the population of Sri Lanka that was most comparable to the Malivian population on the whole, in terms of age, income, etc, then you might find this distinction to be non-existant.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
Well, of course. Literacy has never been achived without other forms of progress (that I know of). And, of course a small population can make things easier in the short run (although a larger, or at least growing, population is better for long run growth.)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
.