Basic Needs and the Manpower Dilemma of Kuwait

Abstract

The literature has more than exhausted the issue of growth versus basic needs. The conventional growth oriented strategies of the fifties and the sixties supported the “trickle‐down” argument whereby the masses are supposed to benefit indirectly from growth. Yet evidence has shown the effects to be very weak. It was in that context that attention shifted towards meeting the basic needs of the population. The growth proponents criticised the basic needs logic because it emphasises consumption and redistribution at the expense of production and investment. It therefore sacrifices future development for current welfare. The counter‐argument stresses that meeting the basic needs of the population brings about improvements in productivity and income. Many case studies have demonstrated that if the objectives of basic needs and income distribution are pursued rationally, economic growth is not at stake.