How developing is your country?

There's a growing buzz at the ongoing Baku COP29 from most African countries, poorer Asian nations and small island states that the tag of 'developing countries' shouldn't be slapped on to China and India. Truth is, having a 'developing country' label is like having a learner's sticker on a car - it gets you certain benefits that you can't avail if you're seen as a developed country/driver. Developing countries - or, as goes the euphemism, 'global south' - implies a continuous process of improvement. It's patronising, like calling a teenager 'almost an adult', suggesting that these nations are perpetually in a state of becoming, forever aspiring but never arriving.

So, does having China, India, Nigeria and Tonga in one basket make sense? But the 'more developing' countries don't seem to mind this flattening of terms at all. They see it the same way an upper-middle class feels socially obliged to be counted as an 'aam aadmi'. When it comes to paying taxes (or climate action bills), making South Africa and Bhutan come across as shipmates in the lower deck has its benefits - for South Africa. Not to cook India's - or China's - goose here, but perhaps it's time for a more nuanced vocabulary that acknowledges a layered classification between rich and poor nations. Like lower middle-class, middle middle-class, upper middle-class economies?