Regional and national development: comparative analysis of four territories

¶ … Regions & Two Countries

The North Africa / Middle East region (NA/ME) is very different from Sub-Saharan Africa, in culture, geography, climate, and history. For example, land that is useful for growing food for people is scarce in NA/ME region (too dry for most kinds of agriculture). The Sahara Desert features nomadic cultures, but mainly is useless for crops. There are a few regions within the (NA/ME) that are fertile and sustain agriculture, such as the Nile Valley in Egypt, The Levant (a geographical region located from the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea to the Isthmus of Suez to the Taurus Mountains, about 75,000 square miles), and in areas of Turkey and Iraq. And yet the earliest known forms of agriculture and cultural development came from the Middle East region, specifically in Tigris -- Euphrates Rivers in Mesopotamia. SSA is where the bones and fossils of the earliest known relatives of humans have been found. Immense oil reserves have a big economic and cultural impact in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait and UAE; Diamonds in SSA.

Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is south of the Saharan Desert, and vastly different from North Africa. This region has tropical rainforests; in Nigeria, Madagascar, and the Congo rainforests are being clear-cut. The "Green Belt Movement" has planted 30 million trees, no tree planting effort is to be found in North Africa). There are three deserts (, none nearly as large as the Sahara. The NA/ME East is know for oil; African (Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ivory Coast, Congo) is known for "blood" diamonds (mined in a conflict zone). While much of the NA/ME region is arid, SSA is lush green in many places and has the most plant diversity in the world. AIDS/HIV has killed 25 million Africans; in NA/ME AIDS/HIV is rare. While dry farming is prevalent in NA/ME, slash-and-burn is very prevalent in SSA. The Tigris -- Euphrates rivers bring needed water to the NA/ME while in SSA the Niger, Senegal, Congo, Nile and Zambezi offer far more fresh water to those cultures.

Brazil and Chili -- a Cultural Comparison

Brazil was originally colonized by Portugal, while the Spanish colonized Chili. The natural resources that provide jobs and help the economy in Brazil include gold, timber, tin, nickel, iron ore, oil and hydropower. Chili's natural resources include hydropower, copper, nitrates, molybdenum and timber as well. Chili only has 2.62% of its land that is arable; in Brazil, 6.93% of the land is arable. Brazil's fishing industry has a lot of fresh water and ocean to use, 55,460 square kilometers (with 7,491 miles of coastline); the Chilean fishing industry has just 12,290 square kilometers of ocean and fresh water to use (with 6,435 miles of coastline).

In Brazil the deforestation of the Amazon Basin (rainforest) is severe and has put many species of plants and animals in jeopardy. Improper mining tactics have caused Brazil's environment great harm and severe oil spills have caused degradation of the ecology. Chile, too, is guilty of widespread deforestation, poor mining strategies that threaten the environment, and water pollution from improper sewage treatment. These environmental hazards are harmful to the cultures of both countries.