View previous stories
	Are Global Poverty Reduction Strategies Enough? by Francine Mestrum Global Social Justice   Poverty reduction strategies and universal targets do not in themselves represent a complete development agenda.   In 2005, at the MDG+5 summit, a controversial text was adopted calling for the implementation of the MDGs but without any reference to the UN conferences of the 1990s. On the positive side, we have to mention a reference to the need of ‘ambitious national development strategies’ and to ‘innovative sources of financing’ as well as to ‘efforts to reduce capital flight and measures to curb illicit transfer of funds’.   However, in its preparatory report to the summit (‘In larger freedom’), Secretary-General Kofi Annan had pointed to the fact that the MDGs ‘clearly do not in themselves represent a complete development agenda. They do not directly encompass some of the broader issues covered by the conferences of the 1990s, nor do they address … growing inequality’. Nevertheless, economic and social development had disappeared from the agenda.   No Reliable Data   One of the major problems with the poverty reduction policies of international organizations is a serious lack of reliable data. The World Bank is the only provider of statistics on global poverty, but it constantly changes its methodology and ‘corrects’ its failures. In 2000, poverty lines were changed and extreme poverty in Subsaharan Africa rose from 39.1 to 49,7 %; a new estimate for extreme poverty in 1980 gave 1,482 billion people instead of the former 800 million. In 2007 it modified its estimates again for a whole series of countries. Apparently it had ‘overestimated’ the Chinese economy with 40 % and Indian economy with 25 %. It once again introduced new poverty lines, this time 1,25 $ a day for extreme poverty and 2,50 $ a day for poverty.   According to the UNDP in its Human Development Report of 2005, 67 countries were lacking any data on its population living with less than 1 $ a day, and 93 countries were lacking trend data. Today, 118 countries have data on two different moments on 16 of the 60 MDG indicators. In 2003 there were only 4. The most recent UN Report on the World Social Situation (‘Re-thinking Poverty’) states that either Chinese poverty is underestimated, or poverty rates in other countries are overestimated.   Be that as it may, according to the latest statistics of 2008, global extreme poverty is declining and there is a serious chance that the MDGs will be met by 2015. Is that a major a achievement? No, it is not. Because this ‘progress’ is exclusively due to the declining poverty in China and India. China had already met the MDGs in 2000, at the moment the MDGs were adopted and it was decided the reference year was going to be 1990. Secondly, the extreme poverty rates are only very slowly declining for Subsaharan Africa (from 50,8 % in 1981 to 50,4 % in 2005) while the number of extremely poor people has been rising (from 202 million in 1981 to 384,2 million in 2005). Instead of halving extreme poverty between 1990 and 2015 (in percentage), one can almost speak of doubling extreme poverty from 1981 to 2005 (in number of people).   The second problem with the MDGs and other poverty reduction policies, like the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) of the World Bank and the IMF, is that they do not require any change in the neoliberal policies the Bretton Woods institutions are still imposing. Even if there is a kind of ‘consensus’ on the end of the ‘Washington Consensus’, conditionality has hardly changed, free trade is still considered as the alpha and omega of growth, liberalization, privatizations and deregulation are still on the agenda, fiscal deficits and inflation are still perceived as the worst enemies. As an evaluation document of 2007 of the IMF revealed, a consequence is that most aid poor countries receive cannot even be spent but has to be put in the reserves.   As from 1990, the year in which the World Bank proposed its new poverty reduction policies, the analysis of its poverty conceptualizations made clear that they were perfectly compatible with its neoliberal philosophy. In fact they were meant to forget about social protection and social security, both seen as a matter of ‘vested interests’ of the non poor workers in the formal sector. Social expenditures had to go to those ‘who really need it’. Income and income inequality were neglected if not willingly forgotten. Poverty became a problem of individuals without access to markets. And markets were the mechanisms that would lift the poor out of poverty.   In this way, poverty reduction became a matter of redistribution from the non poor to the poor instead of from the rich to the poor. And poverty reduction became the human face of neoliberal globalization.   Economic and Social Development   Ten years after their introduction, neither the MDGs nor the PRSPs are wholly successful. What is clear today and should have been clear to all in 2000 is that poverty reduction is only possible as the result of a successful economic and social development process. And these were totally forgotten. Today, the UN Secretariat and several of its organizations are again promoting the idea of economic and social development, promoted by a developmental state. They rightly defend the development of productive capacity, selective protectionist policies, flexible trade mechanisms and most of all transformative social policies beyond poverty reduction. Universal policies are indeed more efficient than targeted measures to the poor and should not cost more than about 4 % of national incomes. Social policies and economic policies go hand in hand and reinforce each other. Unfortunately, the World Bank and the IMF still see social policies as being residual.   Finally, development aid is rather meaningless if in the meantime debt servicing, capital flight and tax evasion are dragging ten times more money out of poor countries than aid can pour in. At any rate, the aid system will have to be seriously remodeled. It is still donor-driven and highly fragmented. A global system based on global taxes could be more generous and more efficient.   Another World Is Possible   It seems as if the whole development world is at a crossroads. Will the lessons of the recent crisis and of thirty years of growing inequality be learned? Will neoliberal policies prevail or will the UN approach of a developmental state with coherent economic and social development be adopted? Will the climate crisis be taken into account and will the wealthy North accept it also has to redesign its development paradigm?   These are difficult questions that cannot be answered right away. One thing however should be clear: poverty is not a problem of poor people but of the whole of society and of the international community. It means the problem has to be tackled at the national and at the global level. Development and inequality, ecological consciousness, self-determination and redistribution are an inherent part of it. Visit the related web page
	UN officials urge greater efforts to help least developed countries by Noeleen Heyzer Economic & Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific   18 January 2010   Senior United Nations officials today called for greater efforts to help the world’s poorest countries meet their development targets, as a three-day meeting kicked off in Dhaka, Bangladesh, to examine a decade of assistance to this group of nations.   Ministers and senior government officials from 15 States classed as least developed countries (LDCs) met to assess and develop a regional position for Asia and the Pacific ahead of a global review next year in Turkey on progress made since the adoption of the Brussels Programme of Action to assist LDCs.   Adopted in May 2001, the Programme provides a framework for action to help LDCs progress toward halving the proportion of people living in extreme poverty and hunger by 2015 and promote the sustainable development of these countries.   Noeleen Heyzer, the Executive Secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), noted that the recent global food, fuel and financial crises took a heavy toll on LDCs, threatening to roll back their hard-won development gains.   She emphasized greater connectivity among countries in Asia and the Pacific to create new markets, and endorsed more cooperation among countries of the South to sustain growth and development in the region’s LDCs.   In addition, Ms. Heyzer stressed the need for financial assistance from donors, and underscored the need for monitoring to ensure that the pledges reached their intended targets.   Cheick Sidi Diarra, UN High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States, said the triple crises showed just how fragile LDC economies remain.   Next year’s review conference, he said, will provide an opportunity for LDCs, development partners and others “to forge a clear vision, based on universal values, moral and ethical imperatives, and the requirements of fairness and equity, to enable the 800 million people in LDCs get out of poverty and onto the path to sustainable development.”   Among the issues this week’s meeting is addressing are concerns related to reducing poverty and hunger by promoting sustainable and inclusive development in the LDCs; promoting food security through sustainable agriculture; and enhancing the share of LDCs in global trade, aid and financial flows and promoting their productive capacity.   Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Kiribati, Laos, Maldives, Myanmar, Nepal, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, Vanuatu and Yemen are participating in the meeting.
	View more stories