Short Elucidating Note 123:  How can the structure of the traditional economic development model with a mask be stated? What are the development and policy dilemmas linked to the working of this structure?

Central to market development are growth and profits, which can be achieved without generating externalities and when generating externalities.  The model that achieves growth and profits without generating externalities is a golden paradigm, and the model that reaches growth and profits while generating externalities is a flawed paradigm, and hence they have different structure in terms of the nature of market prices, the nature of resource use, and the nature of critical problem generation.  If a flawed paradigm is sold or presented as a golden paradigm then you have a form of golden development paradigm with a mask where you assume that a flawed paradigm is a golden paradigm creating in the process a golden development model with a mask.  The central focus of this paper is the flawed paradigm known as the traditional market and how its actual nature can be framed using flawed paradigm-golden paradigm theory. It is well-known that the traditional market has socio-environmental externalities, and hence, it is a flawed development paradigm; and if we assume that the traditional market, a flawed paradigm, is a golden paradigm, then we create the structure of the economic development model with a mask.  Therefore, understanding the structure of the economic development model with a mask is important for among other things: i) To understand internal forces that drive the pursue of growth and profits towards resource use inefficiency trends and the generation of critical socio-environmental pollution production problems; ii) To understand how the economic  development model with a mask can be fixed, partially or fully, to resolved its critical socio-environmental problems; and iii) to understand how the critical socio-environmental issues of the economic development paradigm with a mask can be left unresolved or can be fully ignored by just redefining the nature of the economic development paradigm with a mask using positive labeling.  And this raises the question, how can the structure of the economic development model with a mask be stated? What are the development and policy dilemmas linked to the working of this structure? Among the goals of this paper are to provide an answer, both analytically and graphically, to those questions.