Schools of thought

THERE are two schools of thought that try to explain how development can come about.
The former argued that economic development will foster development, while the later argued that social development will foster development.
Both were right for some time, but did not last.
Those that follow the former school had a lot of money, but no healthy populace and necessary infrastructural, including health and other social sector establishments to sustain and continue to higher heights in their development.
Hence, they collapsed and tend to blame it on politics and government over and over. While those who follow the later school of thought, had a lot healthy working class people and social establishments, but did not have the monies to sustain and continue their development. Hence, they too collapse and tend to blame it on their government over and over.
That resulted in a third school of thought.
It argued that economic and social development must go hand in hand to foster development.
Right now we’re seeing a lot of investments coming into our country and our monies at work in hosting regional and world events, including the Apec, but back there in all our neighborhood, our hospitals are run down with now proper facilities and doctors and schools facing accommodation and sewerage and many other social and economic issues you can think of because our economic and social development have not been tied down to each other.
The point is any state funds coming into the country must be diverted to its social sector and everything are happing concurrently to avoid unnecessary ‘gaps’ or ‘sore’ in Papua New Guinea’s development.

Dr Matthew Walaun
Port Moresby