Grim Facts on Global Poverty

The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) recently released its Human Development Report 2003, which emphasises goals established in the Millennium Declaration of 2000. These goals, which ideally are to be met by 2015, include halving poverty and hunger rates and reducing child mortality by two-thirds.

It is not clear that those goals can be met. Granted, some countries, even poor ones, have done well by many measures. China, India, Ghana, and Vietnam stand out. And some take solace in the fact that only 23% of the global population lives on less than US$1 a day, compared with 30% in 1990. However, in the last decade, matters are actually worse for many nations and have more or less stagnated for a great many others:

• 1.2 billion people worldwide live on less than US$1 a day and 2.8 billion live on less than US$2.
• 54 countries are poorer, as measured by per capita G.D.P. In Sub-Saharan Africa, per-capita G.D.P. has falling in 20 nations. It fell in 17 nations in Eastern Europe, 6 in Latin America, and 6 in East Asia and the Pacific.
• The rate of hunger has increased in 21 nations.
• The proportion of children who die under the age of 5 has risen in 14 nations. Only three nations with adequate statistics narrowed the gap in child mortality between the rich and the poor in the 1990's.
• The development index itself, which almost always rises over time, fell in 21 nations. In the 1980's, it declined in only four nations.

What has gone wrong? Aside from generally slow growth, the spread of AIDS has been a setback, as has the collapse of Soviet-style economies. However, critics cite the "corruption, lack of follow-through and cookie-cutter policies" that have impeded development projects. But, others say, the call for good governance is no panacea, either. How can one tell before the fact? How do you enforce good governance even if you can define it?

This author points to the West's role in contributing to the inferior performance of poor nations. Beyond trade barriers, he says, advanced nations with highly educated populations and sophisticated technologies have an inherent advantage. He claims that these nations are somewhat responsible for helping developing nations that are trapped because they cannot afford the public investment in transportation, education, health and agricultural techniques that would enable them to benefit from new capital, technologies, and skilled labour. Indeed, President Bush announced an increase in annual aid to 0.15% of national income by 2006. Belgium pledged 0.4% per year by 2010, France 0.5% by 2007 and Sweden 1% by 2006. "Money is never the only solution. But if Western nations find the will, odds are much higher they will find the way."

Source

Push Journal, Daily News Feed, 07/08/2003.