Why nations fail | James Robinson | TEDxAcademy

This talk was given at a local TEDx event, produced independently of the TED Conferences. Why do some states enjoy wealth, security, health and nutrition while others face poverty, unemployment, lack of health care and safety?

James Robinson is a political scientist and economist. Professor Robinson teaches Economics, History and Government at Harvard University. His main research interests lie in the study of the economies of
developing countries. He travels a lot in Latin America and Africa and spends
his summers teaching at the University of Bogota. In 2012, he was elected
Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. In 2007, James Robinson and Daron Acemoglu coauthored the book “Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy”. The book was considered the best book released on U.S. policy and international relations. Their latest book, "Why Nations Fail", was included in the ten best releases of the 2012 list in
Washington Post.

About TEDx, x = independently organized event In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x = independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized.* (*Subject to certain rules and regulations)

[wuokmayangjanguan]

James Robinson described the whole problem which torments my country. Thank you, man. You are my favorite economist.🙂

[obiflex]

The main reason why my country Nigeria is undeveloped is the absence of MERITOCRACY. The Nigerian constitution has something called federal character principle which means that ministers is and all government appointees must be appointed equally from all the states of the federation. People vote for the president based on what tribe they come from rather than their competence and the least educated tribes have the highest population. In business also, the wealthiest are the people with the most connection to the government. In high schools and universities people are admitted based on where they come from and this ensures that the best almost never get to run the country

[hamnchee]

What's funny is Edison didn't invent the damn light bulb. He was better versed in patent law, and got the original Inventor's patent disqualified on a technicality.

[sebitjameschiok]

All points are agreeable. I hope reading the book "Why Nation Fail" would be really fascinating and helpful to the development of my small organization (practically) and see how it will impact it.

[PattyACano]

I got his Book! Why Nations Fail. And yes, he talked about my country, Peru, in it! 👏👏

[icreatedanaccountforthis]

Interesting that I don't think he mentioned corruption once, yet he appears to be drawing a comparison between relatively corrupt institutions and non-corrupt ones.

[SharmarkeAOsman]

Thank you Mr Robinson for your effective speech

[jonjuraev]

Poor nations are poor because rich nations don't want any competition. Rich nations succeed in kicking away the ladder (protectionism) which they used to develop their economy. I suggest you read a book by Ha Joon Chang titled The myth of free trade and the guilty secrets of rich nations.

[tobias]

I love this man point I really do and I'll defiantly give his book "Why Nations Fail" a read, my only desire was for this amazing point to have been vocalized more eloquently. The point he he's makes is surprisingly topical and something that many in the US need to better understand. If only he had a better way with words then this message would reach further.

[juancarlostarazonacatacora]

Brillant, strong institutions, respect law, inclusivism institutions, freedom, political power distribution, no monopolys

[sricharannaga]

giving a presentation about failed countries in Greece (if you know what I mean)

[rroningpandan]

Excelent, I will come again to learn deeper about your speech, thanks so much Gentlemen

[hadihassan]

He didn't mention the role of colonialism and the exploitation and extraction of resources and labor by the former colonialists. The poor countries have failed to develop their inclusive institutions because historically they have been derailed from doing so due to the inconvenience that would cause to a few countries.

[Joachimboko]

I can't agree more. This presentation resonate so well with me! African countries will start developing really only when politicians and governments will start creating public goods, not private goods...

[MrFUCKINGINTERNET]

I think that the theory put forward by James Robinson in his book is invaluable and accurate. But I think there is a conflict between what that theory could generate in practice and what it wants to generate theoretically in the book. Let me explain: at the beginning of the video Robinson says that the rules of a state should create incentives and opportunities, but reaching the end he says that is necessary a political project in which a state that enforces the rules is reconciled with democracy . All this to avoid the use of the state to promote private interests and not public interests by making clientelism for example. So what would happen if the state policies propposed by a group of politicians are sold to the population as public interests (when they are not) and people believe it? being the people unable to understand that this is harmful to society as a whole and entering a spiral of decline.
So this is where there is a hidden premise in Robinson's reasoning. People need to understand and agree with each other and with politicians about what those public interests to defend are. I think it is highly unlikely that this understanding within society will lead to conclusions that create institutions that foster opportunities and incentives. Robinson believes that nobody is going to question that what he calls inclusive institutions are the correct ones and nobody is going to doubt that they pursue the public interest (when this is a very ambiguous and politically usable concept). And it also does not take into account that it is highly unlikely that politicians are actually working to pursue the public interest. Hardly anyone in society is really looking for that.

[hdt]

“In 2021, the top 10 percent of Americans held nearly 70 percent of U.S. wealth, up from about 61 percent at the end of 1989. The share held by the next 40 percent fell correspondingly over that period. The bottom 50 percent (roughly sixty-three million families) owned about 2.5 percent of wealth in 2021.” Please explain this using the great US institutions.

[angelosperlegkas]

His comments and comparisons might have been a bit too romantic for some, but the theory is so well put together by the facts and history/experience thats its hard to imagine it might not be 100% true. Sure some specific situations might need better analysis, but at its core, it just makes TOO much sense, compared to other theories. My favorite "book" up to now.

[robertocaricocofiel]

Since i Started to read this book, i just changed my mind about the political Issues👏👏👏👏👏

[sandeepvk]

the title should be "Why some nation develop while others don't". I think the talk is very limited in scope. Its seems like patent protection seems to be the road to development. If that were the case then China would have never become what is it, because it simply has no patent laws. There are other factors like demographic dividend, size, export oriented growth etc etc which lead to development not just plain patent protection

[FelipeMejiaMedina]

Such a good book, such a bad conference.