Three selections here Acemoglu and Robinson, Diamond, and Kenny offer three different perspectives on whether development is shaped mainly by culture, by institutions, or by geography and other conditions that cannot be altered. Which of these perspectives is most intuitively appealing to you? Why?

Political economy of development

Read:

“Uncultured: Mitt Romney Doesn’t Know Much About Economic History” from Foreign Policy
Try this pdf if you can’t access the Foreign Policy Link
“Romney Hasn’t Done His Homework” from The New York Times

Question:

Three selections here Acemoglu and Robinson, Diamond, and Kenny offer three different perspectives on whether development is shaped mainly by culture, by institutions, or by geography and other conditions that cannot be altered.

Which of these perspectives is most intuitively appealing to you? Why?

Now, assume that a classmate finds another perspective more appealing. What are the challenges that would arise if you try to “prove” to her or him your preferred theory is the most effective? Do these challenges imply that debates of this kind cannot be resolved?

Last Completed Projects