The following relatively poor countries and often recipients of international and/or U.N. aid have built new capital cities:
1. Pakistan - Islamabad (replaced Rawalpindi)
2. Myanmar - Naypyidaw (replaced Yangon)
3. Tanzania - Dodoma (in process to replace Dar es Salaam)
4. Nigeria - Abuja (replaced Lagos)
5.Malawi-Lilong (Blantyre)
6.South Africa-Pretoria (J'Burg)
7.Brazil -Rio (Brasilia)
8.Ivory Coast -Yamossoukro (Abidjan)
9.Burma -Naypyidaw(Rangoon
It seems that these countries are desperately poor lands that do not have a new capital among the top of their needs lists. If I had to guess, these cities were built first so that the ruling classes would not have to put up with a teeming, crowded city such as Naypyidaw . Also, the cities, I believe, are major ego trips for the ruling classes.
To be fair, I am "equal opportunity" when it comes to building new capital cities. Let us base on USA,I think building Washington, D.C. was improvident. New York City as capital was just fine. However, the U.S. was receiving help from no one in those days, and federal resources were not expected to be used for social needs. Now it's a different story.
I think aid donors such as the U.N. and the U.S. should be very skeptical.
Worse enough apparently In Tanzania,it didn't totally come to fruition as the government ministers are not too comfortable with moving from Dar es Salaam. If that's the case, it's a waste of money and obviously not good. Tanzania doesn't really have the money to spare on building a new capital, so in this type of instance I'd say no Need of building new cities whiler around60,000 people die of hunger and hunger-related diseases every year, more than double the lives taken by AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis in 2010-2017. Every 10 seconds, a child dies from hunger.
No need of building Dodoma