Sources
of information: The End of
Poverty, Jeffrey Sachs
The official
websites of the organizations
Bailing Out
the Poor, William Easterly
During the
presentation, we highlighted the scenario of poverty in Sauri, Kenya and in the
slums of Mumbai, India. We also discussed the possible solutions to the poverty
there. Several donor organizations ( IMF, World Bank, UNDP, USAID) have been
working to help eliminate extreme poverty throughout the world. We discussed
their programs and the extent to which they have been successful.
Most of the problems in Sauri, Kenya seem to
be related to health and agriculture. The donors need to invest on the Big Five
development interventions: agricultural input, investment in basic health,
investment in education, power transport and communication, and safe drinking
water and sanitation. They also need to ensure that the aid reaches the
village, not freeze within government's corruption. Inhabitants in the slums of
Mumbai need to be educated about their rights to all facilities that other
people in Mumbai enjoy.
The IMF (since 1945) and the World Bank (since
1944) provide low interest loans and grants to countries in financial crisis.
UNDP (since 1965) is more awareness based and tackles issues like capacity
development, women empowerment, disease prevention and environmental
conservation. USAID (since 1961) has been providing economic, development and
humanitarian assistance around the world.
Although there are many organizations
working to eliminate poverty, not every one of them has the efficient policies
and programs; therefore, the end of poverty is still not within the grasp. The
IMF, for example, faced problems at times due to bad decisions made.
Eliminating poverty needs fine planning, far-sightedness, wise investments and
global collaboration.
Comment 1 from Aysen: Sachs calculated the total cost of putting into action the Big Five in a community. In a setting such as Mumbai, it would cost approximately $350,000/year- a reasonable price to sustain a healthy and functional community. Sachs also mentioned how investments made in places like Sauri and Mumbai would flourish because of the present foundation. People that live in these villages are extremely active and driven. However, they are stuck in a “poverty trap” and cannot maximize their skills due to their lack of resources. The children in Kenya are extremely studious, but also severely undernourished, as they, on average, can afford only one meal per day. Similarly, the people in Mumbai, however uneducated, are active in their communities and are struggling to find a voice. Sachs shares, from his visits to these countries, that there are many people in poverty that are more than ready to do something about it. What other organizations and nations need to do is help them get a “foothold on the ladder”, that is, help them in the beginning of their journey towards a thriving society. How to do so is the question that Sachs, Easterly and the organizations have addressed. To eradicate poverty, investments should be made in the Big Five and organizations such as IMF and UNDP should make sure to follow through with the initiatives they are taking and goals they have made.
ReplyDeleteComment from Zander: The countries and regions that are in so-called "poverty traps" that need international funding are not being efficient whatsoever. Much of this money goes to waste, especially since there are no stable governments or regimes in place to ensure that economic growth is occurring, or that the economy is in fact moving in the right direction. The problem with organizations like the IMF is that they are just providing financial assistance, and the most all of the time they do not get a return for the investment they made in these struggling nations. These countries need political and humanitarian assistance much more than they need that financial assistance. Sure, the large grants can help, but they are not being implanted or worked into the struggling economies in the way that they should be (let alone if they have an economy at all). This is why I'd say USAID is a more effective organization. The only problem with USAID is that they are not on the same magnitude as the IMF and are not an international organization. They are funded by the US government, but they need to be funded by other nations as well as private investors in order to be truly successful. These countries need structure more than they need money. They need economic policies, fiscal and monetary. More importantly, they need stable governments to make eradicating poverty a reality. It is merely just a fantasy if these struggling nations and organizations like the IMF are all talk. They need to physically be doing more within the political systems to make sure economic growth is occurring.
ReplyDelete