The geography of tyranny and despair: development indicators and the hypothesis of genetic inevitability of national inequality

Development geography has long sought to understand why inequalities exist and the best ways to address them. Dependency theory sets out an historical rationale for under development based on colonialism and a legacy of developed core and under-developed periphery. Race is relevant in this theory only insofar that Europeans are white and the places they colonised were occupied by people with darker skin colour. There are no innate biological reasons why it happened in that order. However, a new theory for national inequalities proposed by Lynn and Vanhanen in a series of publications makes the case that poorer countries have that status because of a poorer genetic stock rather than an accident of history. They argue that IQ has a genetic basis and IQ is linked to ability. Thus races with a poorer IQ have less ability, and thus national IQ can be positively correlated with performance as measured by an indicator like GDP/capita. Their thesis is one of despair, as little can be done to improve genetic stock significantly other than a programme of eugenics. This paper summarises and critiques the Lynn and Vanhanen hypothesis and the assumptions upon which it is based, and uses this analysis to show how a human desire to simplify in order to manage can be dangerous in development geography. While the attention may naturally be focused on the 'national IQ' variables as a proxy measure of 'innate ability', the assumption of GDP per capita as an indicator of 'success' and 'achievement' is far more readily accepted without criticism. The paper makes the case that the current vogue for indicators, indices and cause-effect can be tyrannical.

Recognition, assessment and treatment of social anxiety disorder: summary of NICE guidance

Social anxiety disorder is one of the most persistent and common of the anxiety disorders, with lifetime prevalence rates in Europe of 6.7% (range 3.9-13.7%).1 It often coexists with depression, substance use disorder, generalised anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder.2 It can severely impair a person’s daily functioning by impeding the formation of relationships, reducing quality of life, and negatively affecting performance at work or school. Despite this, and the fact that effective treatments exist, only about half of people with this condition seek treatment, many after waiting 10-15 years.3 Although about 40% of those who develop the condition in childhood or adolescence recover before adulthood,4 for many the disorder persists into adulthood, with the chance of spontaneous recovery then limited compared with other mental health problems. This article summarises the most recent recommendations from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) on recognising, assessing, and treating social anxiety disorder in children, young people, and adults.5