Importance’s of human resources in economic development
Human factor is a very large notion and covers all active spheres of the mankind. In this context, human is a logic ending of every action and mankind development history reflects his living in more useful conditions. In this regard, UN human development index is a necessary mechanism arisen from the modern requirements.
It proves once more that political and economic reforms carried out in Azerbaijan created favourable environment for the human to develop his potential and peculiarities.
In this regard, Nagono Karabakh problem, occupation of Azerbaijani lands by Armenia, which resulted in exiling of more than one million people from their homeland, prevent human factor development and create a situation unacceptable in the 21 st century. The 1996 Report opens with a fundamental statement: “Human development is the end-economic growth a means.
“The Report argues that economic growth, if not properly managed, can be jobless, voiceless, ruthless, rootless and futureless, and thus detrimental to human development. The quality of growth is therefore as important as its quantity; for poverty reduction, human development and sustainabijity.
The Report concludes that the links between economic growth and human development must be deliberately forged and regularly fortified by skillful and intelligent policy management. It identifies employment as critical for translating the benefits of economic growth into the lives of people.
But for this to happen, new patterns of growth will need to be developed and sustained well into the 21st century-and new mechanisms must be developed to integrate the weak and the vulnerable into the expanding global economy.
To support economic growth as a means to enrich people’s lives, the Report demonstrates why:
Over the past 15 years the world has seen spectacular economic advance for some countries- and unprecedented decline for others;
Widening disparities in economic performance are creating two worlds-ever more polarised;
Everywhere, the structure and quality of growth demand more attention-to contribute to human development, poverty reduction and long-term sustainability;
Progress in human development has mostly continued-but too unevenly;
New approaches are needed to expand and improve employment opportunities, so that people can participate in growth-and benefit from it; and
Economic growth is not sustainable without human development.
Behind the post-1950 world population explosion was the very different way in which the demographic transition took place and is still taking place in the countries of the developing world. Benefits of advances in public health and medicine were felt immediately and life expectancy rose very rapidly.
But these advances came at a different stage of development from what applied in earlier decades in Western Europe and North America. With the majority of population still agrarian in nature, children were still deemed an economic asset, and as a result, birth rates in these countries did not typically fall in concert with death rates.
Population growth rates climbed to unheard of heights: at three or four per cent per year a pace sufficient to double a country’s population in about 20 years. The very different way in which the demographic transition has progressed in more and in less developed countries is clearly evident in the two examples shown in.
In the years since 1950, 89 per cent of global population growth has occurred in the developing countries. During 1995 itself, about 97 per cent of world population increase will occur there. Some, perhaps several million, will migrate to industrialised countries but most of the growth will remain in the country of origin, taxing national resources and burdening local environments.
All developing countries had very high TFRs as the era of population explosion began. By the early 1970s, life expectancy had begun to climb, but the reaction shown by the TFR varied considerably. In some cases, fertility remained at the 1950s level while in others it dropped somewhat, but to levels that were still very high.
No simple, rigid pattern can be seen: the course of events in any country resulted from a complex mix of the level of development and of cultural mores and governmental policies regarding fertility. In matters of population, the TFR is the key to the future.
Today, women in developing countries bear an average of about 3.6 children or 4.2 when numbers for the much-lower fertility of giant China (with over a billion people and more than 21% of the world’s population) are removed.
Either figure is well down from the 6.1 of the early 1950s. Does this change remove concerns about a population explosion? The answer is found in simple mathematics. If the TFR remained constant in all countries at its present level, world population would rise from 5.7 billion today to 22 billion by 2050 and to 694 billion by 2150. At that point, it would still be growing, at over four per cent per year!
This purely illustrative projection ignores the likely possibility of associated calamities such as famine; still, it suffices to show the purely mathematical consequences of sustained high fertility.
The graph includes this rather fanciful (“constant” fertility) scenario already rising off the chart by the middle of the now approaching century. Such is the nature of population growth rates, which behave exactly like compound interest.