No, they're in post-colonial conditions and intentionally prevented from developing economically via a relationship of economic dependence on the imperial core. And as a result, they can't produce their own chemotherapy, insulin etc. and have to import it from developed parts of the world system.
If the imperial core spontaneously disappeared, they would begin developing - and that development would take the form of centralization and specialization and state-driven investment in underdeveloped sectors. Look at what Burkina Faso is doing right now for example: they went from contracts with French companies to export gold and uranium for a thousandth of their market value to now climbing the value chain by developing their own gold refineries.
To keep the example but circle back to the original point: If you lived in a future Burkina Faso that successfully developed its economy, proposing that they go back to small-scale production with worse economies of scale would be a step backwards, and yes the logical conclusion of that in any country is hunter-gatherers. There can be other important learnings from doing this as a constrained experiment within a development model, like resiliency. But thinking this is a development model in itself is a cargo cult mentality that misunderstands industrial production as some evil external imposition on humanity rather than the system that proved most effective at feeding the most people.
Depending on how solar progresses, along with other renewables, "grid power" may become as archaic as running copper lines to people's houses so their phone can ring.
