Schuftan C
Int J Health Serv. 1983;13(1):33-49. doi: 10.2190/EKB0-AFND-8GN3-GE72.
Today most foreign aid donors are genuinely committed to the idea that development in Third World countries should start with rural development. Therefore, a sizable proportion of their development funds are invested in rural projects. However, donors channel these funds through local governments (most often representing local bourgeois interests) that are not as committed to the principle of rural development. These governments are often also embarked in policies that are actually--directly or indirectly--expropriating the surpluses generated by agriculture and investing them in the other sectors of the economy. The peasants are therefore footing most of the bill of overall national development. This paper contends that, because of this state of affairs, foreign aid directed toward rural development is actually filling the investment gap left by an internal system of unequal returns to production in agriculture. In so doing, foreign aid is indirectly financing the development of the other sectors of the economy, even if this result is unintended. This perpetrates maldevelopment without redressing the basic exploitation process of peasants which lies at the core of underdevelopment. Evidence to support this hypothesis is presented using data from a primarily agricultural exporting country: the United Republic of Cameroon.
如今,大多数外国援助捐赠者真心致力于这样一种理念,即第三世界国家的发展应从农村发展起步。因此,他们相当一部分发展资金投入到了农村项目中。然而,捐赠者是通过地方政府(大多代表地方资产阶级利益)来输送这些资金的,而这些地方政府对农村发展原则的承诺并不那么坚定。这些政府往往还推行一些政策,实际上——直接或间接地——征用农业产生的盈余,并将其投资于经济的其他部门。因此,农民承担了国家整体发展的大部分费用。本文认为,由于这种情况,旨在农村发展的外国援助实际上填补了农业生产内部不平等回报体系留下的投资缺口。这样一来,外国援助在无意中为经济其他部门的发展提供了间接资金。这导致了不良发展,却没有纠正处于不发达核心的对农民的基本剥削过程。本文利用一个主要农业出口国——喀麦隆联合共和国的数据,来支持这一假设。