Firstly, do yous agree that this is true?
I find it a very general rule, in Europe anyway, the poorer the area the better the food.
And if so, why?
My theory is that it relates to industrialisation. Developed countries, they are developed because their cultures are focused on efficiency. They are endlessly searching for ways to do things more cheaply.
So you find farms, distributers, shops and restaurants, all trying to minimise their costs quite aggressively. They are not interested in quality. They have no pride in their work.
Poor countries are poor because the focus too much on quality and not enough on finding the cheapest possible way to do things.
Does this explanation extend to other cultural elements apart from food?
Its hard to say. A lot of big cities like London, San Francisco, Paris etc have some of the best food in the world, most of it imported, but still spectacular. Meanwhile the street food in any given poorer city in Mexico or Indonesia will also be great. It becomes a quest for something that’s not processed as you say, and more “authentic”, which is becoming increasingly harder to find in late capitalism with its obsession with cost cutting and vertically integrated suppliers.
Restaurants ( or things like bakeries, wineries, breweries ) are one of those things tho that can somewhat avoid that process, because their constant capital costs are smaller than a lot of other industries. You pretty much just need a location and a kitchen ( or a street kitchen ), not a factory with industrial machinery or large tracts of land. Someone making street tacos, can do a much better job than a chain, and have similar or even less costs.