If

Stiglitz writes about developing countries with natural resources and how they have to manage their resources to develop. He sights many countries that have failed to take advantage of the rich oil reserves/ minerals due to corruption, inequality, exploitation, fighting and unwise spending of the riches. His basic argument makes sense. Developing countries with resources must be wise with how they extract/sell them and use the income from the sales. If they can do that then they have a good foundation for development. Moreover, if the developed countries can be less exploitative and more supportive of developing countries then these countries' situations look hopeful.

That raises another question. What then are left for the developing countries without much natural resources? What kind of strategies can they take? I suppose these countries have their comparable advantages but how can they possibly build themselves up? I suppose there is some hope becasue some of the developed countries are small countries with little natural resources and they have successfully developed.

I realized I used a lot of "if"s to talk about development. If only we can figure out what actually works...