> I'd never quite reached the point of thinking it was a deliberate action
I always thought these aid and loan programs through organizations like IMF, WP, and countries require return on their investment beyond interest on principal.
This is why they include clauses related to education, democratic participation, financial and taxation reforms, etc as a condition of receiving the aid.
You can be less cynical and think they are advocating for reforms which make these countries grow and pay back the loan otherwise they might default.
You can be more cynical and think many of these policies are detached from what is needed on ground looking at impact.
For example, opening a particular industry or providing consumable aid often distort local markets and might impact local businesses and exports through currency manipulation.
Maybe you believe onerous regulation and compliance of first world without the enforcement budget and low corruption make these places less attractive for businesses. Introducing those as condition of receiving aid might be net negative in the long run.
It all depends on how you view with your lens.
Although countries who are receiving aid like this have no choice in the matter. They are desperate for cash. Power imbalance exist and can be abused.
> This is one (of several) reasons why improved education is far less effective at increasing economic productivity than is commonly thought. (For more on this I highly recommend Ha-Joon Chang's 21 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism, which has an excellent chapter on the topic.)
You touch an excellent point that I never factored in when looking at why western government organizations demand free education in poor developing countries through policy or loan measures.
People who are taking highly specialised degrees and training for free cannot work locally because there is no market.
You earn on reputation, interest, and skilled labour through these measures.
I always thought these aid and loan programs through organizations like IMF, WP, and countries require return on their investment beyond interest on principal.
This is why they include clauses related to education, democratic participation, financial and taxation reforms, etc as a condition of receiving the aid.
You can be less cynical and think they are advocating for reforms which make these countries grow and pay back the loan otherwise they might default.
You can be more cynical and think many of these policies are detached from what is needed on ground looking at impact.
For example, opening a particular industry or providing consumable aid often distort local markets and might impact local businesses and exports through currency manipulation.
Maybe you believe onerous regulation and compliance of first world without the enforcement budget and low corruption make these places less attractive for businesses. Introducing those as condition of receiving aid might be net negative in the long run.
It all depends on how you view with your lens.
Although countries who are receiving aid like this have no choice in the matter. They are desperate for cash. Power imbalance exist and can be abused.