When examining Jahan’s viewpoints on the subject of human developement, like many of his peers he presents clever and important ideas - however they can come off as a bit naive. His definition of human developement as “of the people, for the people, and by the people,” certainly strikes a chord with listeners, which is crucial for the publicization of the ongoing struggle in the field of human developement. Although Jahan does come across as shortsighted at times, his statement that all development can’t be economic. Money continues to be unable to solve all the worlds problems. Money can’t be used to filter water, new laptops can’t be used as shoes to get to school, the continued dumping of money into extravagances neglects the true issues that are at the heart of development. On top of that, people continue to die of easily preventable illnesses simply because they lack things as basic as shoes. These are just a few of the problems that cannot be solved by money alone, they need radical global restructuring of the way that we look at development. Jahan specifically references youth employment and gendered work, as well as the informal sector, including people such as street vendors and nannies. He also discusses how we need to redefine work, outside of just money being exchanged for hours - it also includes volunteer work, art, and other things that are done in our day to day lives.
Rosling suggests this same idea of the extent of human developement outside simply economic outreach in his TED talk. He states, similarly to Jahan, that social development must happen before economic development. Oppressive governmental structures continue to keep the poor in poverty as the rich gain wealth. Zimbabwe is a prime example of this. When president Robert Mugabe ran out of money to continue funding his nation, he simply printed more - causing radical hyperinflation which totally devalued the currency. Without social change developement proves to be impossible. Furthermore, he continues to discuss the redefinition of the term “third world.” He proposes that the idea of “third world” countries is an outdated CIA term that is a remnant of Cold War tensions and a U.S. superiority complex. he proposes the use of the term “Developing Countries” as it speaks more honestly to what is honestly required for change. Frankly, I agree with the sentiment, as the term “Developing Countries” works to inspire hope in people, and it speaks to what we can do to help the people in these countries. This is contrary to the term “Third World” which doesn’t inspire much except fear and serves to alienate billions of people.