ABSTRACT
Less than ten years ago the title of this paper would have meant little, even to media specialists. But recent times have seen an unprecedented proliferation of phraseology. The game has become even more puzzling now that words covering vaguely defined concepts are strung together, multiplying possible confusion and misinterpretations. I am afraid that the object of this brief contribution is a case in point. The key-word in the title-'development'-is still a subject of controversy. The least one can say is that no completely satisfactory definition of it has yet been given. Economists, who also play their part in enriching our vocabulary, distinguish about a dozen stages of economic development varying from conditions prevailing in the least privileged countries to those in the 'rapidly developing countries', a class to which Iran undoubtedly belongs. It is obvious, to take another example. that Brazil has far more in common with France than with Lesotho or Zambia. Yet this huge and potentially rich country and the two little African states are considered 'developing', whereas France is labelled 'developed' once and for all. Since, however. my purpose is not to indulge in arguments, I shall adopt the most conservative and cautious definition of the word development, a definition which might apply to the whole world without distinction: 'a carefully planned process of change'-for better or for worse!
