Improvements in health, education and trade are essential for the development of poorer nations. However, the governments of richer nations should take more responsibility for helping the poorer nations in such areas. To what extent do you agree?

Undoubtedly governments of developed nations should share the responsibility of helping less fortunate nations. Different measures exist, ranging from market access to direct financial payments or even medical assistance. This essay will explain why certain measures are inherently better than other methods. Firstly, the most adequate manner to assist the lesser developed countries is not through health or education ‘hand-outs’. This method is flawed and only offers temporary relief from long-term challenges; also this assistance can be cut at any moment, leaving the country stranded. For example, economical help from the UK to disadvantaged regions in Africa has gradually been reduced since the onset of the financial crisis. Although some parts of the continent may be better educated or in better health, the benefit was short lived, thus leaving the countries of Africa to look for other donors. Commerce is without doubt the most essential type of assistance that can be given. If the lesser developed country has the opportunity to develop trade, then it will build strong capabilities to serve it for the long term. These strengths can develop the local economy and are more reliable than education or health. For example, while trading with the richer country the government can search for other foreign markets to trade with. This would offer more stability and diversification for the nation. To conclude, assistance is definitely necessary for the poorer regions; however, ‘hand-outs’ are short-term solutions. The optimum solution is to offer market access so the region can produce products and generate regular income.