Although the question is that synonymous with modern social and economic growth index of any developing nations, and perhaps an hypothesis in unravelling the growth concept of a nation, nevertheless, is important to note here that Globalization is not a new phenomenon, and while inevitable, was propelled to its present proportions by deliberate policies in the areas of trade, finance and investment. The historic trend where the benefits of globalization were asymmetric and unequal or where it benefited only the strong as with the present situation between developed and developing countries, is no longer tenable. This trend must be halted and reversed by enhancing the capacities of developing countries especially LDCs, to participate meaningfully in the process.

In the absence of this, globalization would only lead to the further marginalization of the weak and pose serious concerns for international peace and stability. Therefore, there is a need for new institutional and policy changes to humanize globalization. Here, we mean firstly that the asymmetries, which make it difficult for LDCs to be beneficial participants should be removed. The free movement of capital could be matched with the free movement of labor. Trade liberalization could proceed faster in developed countries aimed at removing all quotas and duties and agricultural subsidies. Commitment to eradication of poverty and integrating the LDCs into the world economy - the right to development - should be matched by concrete actions in the area of Overall Development Aggregate, trade, debt and FDI. This is, in our opinion how globalization is to be humanized. And in order for this to happen, the cooperation of all stakeholders is required.

Concerning trade and market access, poor countries should not be looked at as buyers' market only but should be supported in efforts to access external markets. Even as a buyers' market, their enhanced purchasing power would benefit all sellers. Duty free and quota free market access for LDCs must be implemented immediately. Market access alone is not the panacea, a host of actions aimed at removing supply-side constraints and enhancing productivity and competitiveness are also required. The dichotomous situation where developed countries subsidized their agriculture and poor countries, through conditionalities, are not permitted to engage in similar practices , as stated above, is unacceptable and should be redressed as a matter of priority. At the same time the colossal losses as a result must be compensated. This is, in fact, another strong case for enhanced ODA in support of diversification, capacity building for competitiveness.

Paradoxically, the implementation of the international agreed target of 0.7% of the GDP of industrialized countries as ODA for developing countries and 0.15% and above as Overall Development Aggregate as I will prefer to use the term for LDCs should be implemented urgently. Beside the volume, the quality and effectiveness of Overall Development Aggregate (ODA) should be improved and it should target areas that will positively impact poverty eradication, promote accelerated growth and overall development and thereby leverage private capital flow and reduce aid dependency. For this parts, the LDCs should also demonstrate the resolve to continue the policy and structural reforms that are needed to make the new social institution to succeed, including the area of governance, transparency and accountability.

To triumph in this target, the current administration should apart from concentrating on power, energy and manpower development, it should as well establish some vital Social Institution seemingly for the growth of intellectual capacity necessary for Nation-building alone, and perhaps for the overall transformation process.


ECONOMIC AND INDUSTRIAL GROWTH RESOLUTION CONCEPT

Since it has been agreed upon by the contemporary African Least Developed Countries to be liberated from their pitied state of economic woes, within the African Sub-region, solutions, programs and agenda has been developed by the AU to tackle issues of poverty in its entirety. Not minding the solutions proffered by the IMF and other international institution seemingly for humanitarian gesture, and due to the Pact already entered as members of the UNO. Within Africa, more can still be done to settle the issues of economic and social situation of the LDCs by attacking such problems from its root, using local means. And this can be target by the use of such index as:

(i) To assist the Secretary-General in ensuring the full mobilization and coordination of all parts of the United Nations system, with a view to facilitating the coordinated implementation of and coherence in the follow-up and monitoring of the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries at the country, regional and global levels;

(ii) To provide coordinated support to the Economic and Social Council as well as the General Assembly in assessing progress and in conducting the annual review of the implementation of the Programme of Action;

(iii) To undertake appropriate advocacy work in favour of the least developed countries, in partnership with the relevant parts of the United Nations as well as with the civil society, media, academia and foundations;

(iv) To assist in mobilizing international support and resources for the implementation of the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries and other programmes and initiatives for least developed countries;

(v) To provide appropriate support to group consultations of Least Developed Countries.

BEYOND THEORITICAL APPROACH
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY LDC FUND

In light of this, other organisation and institution can periodically come in helping these LDCs through Special assistance or Aid. Such include the Global Development fund for the LDC alone in order to meet the assumed global target for buoyant national economies of the world.

The Global Environment Facility (GEF) helps developing countries fund projects and programs that protect the global environment. Established in 1991, GEF forges international cooperation and finances actions to address six critical threats to the global environment: biodiversity loss, climate change, degradation of international waters, ozone depletion, land degradation, and persistent organic pollutants (POPs). With sufficient financial curiosity, the GEF has allocated $4 billion in grants and leveraged an additional $12 billion in co-financing from other sources to support more than 1,000 projects in over 140 developing countries and countries with economies in transition. In August 2007, 46 donor nations pledged nearly $5.3 billion to fund the work of the GEF for the next four years. GEF brings together from 173 to 205 member governments, working in partnership with the private sector, NGOs, and international institutions to address complex environmental issues while supporting national sustainable development initiatives. Alot of research has been done to solve this economic problems of the LDCs for over two decades now, and such agenda has been made to keep going.


ASSISTANCE TO LDCs

In November 2001, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), at its seventh session (COP 7 of the UNFCCC) decided that the least developed countries (LDCs) should be assisted in preparing national adaptation programmes of action (NAPAs) to address urgent and immediate needs and concerns related to adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change. It also requested the Global Environment Facility (GEF as the entity operating the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC) to provide funding for preparing NAPAs, as the first activity under the LDC fund (Established by decision 7/ CP.7 of the COP of the UNFCCC).

In December 2006, the GEF Council responded to these COP decisions by authorizing GEF support to LDCs for the preparation of NAPAs with anticipated funds from contributions towards the LDC fund (Paragraph 1 S (c) of the Joint summary of the chairs of the GEF Council meeting of December, 2001). These operational guidelines for the funding of NAPAs are intended to assist LDCs to prepare proposals for obtaining GEF funds through an expedited process.

The Global Environment Facility (GEF) organized a consultation with select LDCs and members of the LDC Expert Group in Arusha and Tanzania on February 28th and March 1st; 2002, to discuss guidelines for the preparation of NAPAs. During this Consultation the three Implementing Agencies and UNITAR presented their experiences in planning for Adaptation in developing countries.


GEF GRANTS

Four main categories of GEF grant co-financing are available through the World Bank Group:

1. Full-Sized Project funding (GEF grants over US $1 mil);
2. Medium-Sized Project funding (GEF grants up to US $1 mil);
3. Expedited Enabling Activity grants; and
4. Project Preparation Grants.

If such resources can be used for the purpose with which it was meant for, and programmes are spelt out according to the law or purpose that the commission was setup to look into such cases, then I m certainly confidant that question posed would have been answer.

There are many criterion for the LDC to succeed, and this cannot be done without first articulating agendas for their preparation such as:

. a low-income criterion, based on a three-year average estimate of the gross national income (GNI) per capita (under $750 for inclusion, above $900 for graduation);
. a human resource weakness criterion, involving a composite Human Assets Index (HAI) based on indicators of: (a) nutrition; (b) health; (c) education; and (d) adult literacy; and
. an economic vulnerability criterion, involving a composite Economic Vulnerability Index (EVI) based on indicators of: (a) the instability of agricultural production; (b) the instability of exports of goods and services; (c) the economic importance of non-traditional activities (share of manufacturing and modern services in GDP); (d) merchandise export concentration; and (e) the handicap of economic smallness (as measured through the population in logarithm); and the percentage of population displaced by natural disasters.

When this is brought into play by the seriousness of International institution, and this is not just for aid alone but for total economic and social transformation of the LDC and its entire polity.

FUNCTIONAL USE OF THE EMPERICAL PLATFORM
In meeting the needs to totally eradicate poverty and to enhance economic and social transformations, platforms has been developed to accommodate innovations, and perhaps the relics of higher standard of living. In the lond extended survey and research carried out by the AU, and other Humanitarian and International institution, the results of the findings included:
i) great improvement of quality of life for rural population, and this thanks to access to energy through the platform, specifically for women who were used to spend many hours collecting water and firewood for food preparation and agro processing;

ii) significant increase of revenues to the village shareholders in a platform, which covers the maintenance and running costs and returns a profit.

iii) each platform create income or provides permanent jobs for7 to 10 persons, such as mechanics, millers, cashiers, etc.

iv) the platform increases automatically the rate of school attendance for girls, since they are no longer obliged to permanently assist their mothers;
v) the quality of products processed through the platform, like the mill, is of best standard compared to those produced manually, moreover, less raw material is lost with the use of the platform ;

vi) thanks to the revenue generated by the platform, this tool is acquiring gradually the status of a small enterprise.

The successful introduction of the platform in Africa and the Middle East for instance is one of the steps to expand the multifunctional platform experience into the sub-Saharan African LDCs under the umbrella of NEPAD. The programme has attracted a number of sponsors, Denmark and Sweden having already indicated their intention to give between US$4 and 5 million for a large scale five-year programme of some US$10m which is to start in 2003, covering 12 African countries, most of them LDCs with a South - South cooperation approach.

This is the best option I think we should adopt for the LDC with regard to my research, and the caretaker review of the UNO, AU and other partnering institutions.