At a recent seminar at Ramjas College of Delhi University, a student asked, “What can I do to help end poverty in South Asia?” Questions like this, and the experience of teaching a course on South Asian Development at Georgetown University’s Public Policy Institute have inspired me to engage more with students on a discussion about ending poverty in South Asia. On November 15th, I will be making a presentation from Bangladesh and students from other countries in the region will be connected via video conference. Anybody else can follow the discussion as it happens on this blog.
South Asia can eliminate poverty in a generation. To achieve this goal, we need to accelerate and sustain economic growth, make it more inclusive, strengthen human development and improve governance. A daunting task—but it can be done. This goal is particularly important for young people, since this is the South Asia they will inherit and leave to their children. What do you think? Can young people play a role in making this dream a reality? And what should we be doing differently?
I encourage visitors of this blog to post comments and questions before November 15th. We will address them together on that day.
Mariam Claeson
Tue, 11/20/2007 - 05:47
This is a comment to all young who belong to a poor or underdeveloped nation. Compare any developed economy with an underdeveloped - what is the secret that some are more developed and others can not achieve the same level. If Pakistan has many poor, and India can not achieve its targeted anti-poverty goal, or Afghanistan can not end the war torn land poverty and stability - it is the lack of institutions; political stability; and the strong political will towards development.
The problem is not how we define poverty, but it is how should we define a government and an administration that can end the poverty, no matter what level or what kind of measurement it has been defined with. If the World Bank estimates $1 or $2 poverty line, shall we sit back and do as little to raise it to $1.5 or $2.5 to end the poverty incidence? I believe that reducing the poverty of the population means reducing the poverty of our institutions, our political leaders, the government administration, and the young population - TO KNOW, TO UNDERSTAND what needs to be done; for when you know what to do and how to do it, you will do it.
As long as there is corruption, and no political well in a country, it all becomes a political game and economic development would remain a benchmark that will only be on the tables as documents and nothing more. Find the root of how to end your poverty, you know your country and you should know how to solve it.
Sat, 11/17/2007 - 02:21
Sir, We have 50 odd in the forbes billionares list from India. Biggest of them all ;Mukesh ambani is constructing a house for rupees 4000 crores(27 storey building with 600 servants to look after his six family members!!!).He gifted a Boeing business jet to his wife on karwah cauthday!! While Japanese bank is helping India to eradicate Dharavi slum in the same mumbai city with rupees 4500 crores by giving 225 sq feet of dwelling for each of the 10 lakh families. The money world bank is pouring is going into these millionares who indulge in conspicous consumption. Bush gifted 10 billion to Musharaff and the very mention of america is bringing hatered in the minds of Pakistanies. Same will happen to world bank,WHO etc if they follow the policy of making new bigcats in India. The mental health budget of India for a population of 1 billion which was 19 crores was increased to 198 crores and now a measely 480 crores after the erawady tragedy of 25 burning of mentallyill.Not a single AIIMS like hospital in other state capitals.NIMHANS (mental health)WAS constructed in 1950 AND ITS CURRENT ANNUAL BUDGET IS 50 CRORES and people from northeast throng this hospital located in bangalore. What world bank does is to fatten the already fat Indian fat cats to the level of Buffet and gates without inculcating their GIVING FOR THE POOR.
Please find out how much money is being distributed to DISABLED DUE TO MENTALLYILL BY THE MINISTRY OF sOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT. 1. Health ministry covers the mental health budget.2.disabled due to mental illness (who cannot be cured or treated) are covered by Ministry of social justice.3.the cost of medicines is controlled by the minsitry of petroleum. concessions by ministry fo railways!!! Now you know why mentallyill are abondoned and allowed to wander the streets of india. By the way there are no Chinese in the first 50 in the forbes list but there is no poor as in india also in China!!
Fri, 11/16/2007 - 00:01
Okay, I know it's too late to get this question in under the wire for your November 15 dialogue. And anyway, I don't count as a young person, at least not by some definitions. (Maybe others, if they are sufficiently generous!) But as something to think about for a possible future blog post:
My special interest, personally and I hope someday professionally as well, is with people with disabilities in developing countries who are striving to escape poverty and achieve full participation in society. As a World Bank employee (though NOT working directly on disability issues), I am already aware that the World Bank has been working toward integrating disability concerns across all regions and all sectors, in pretty much the same principles as gender issues have also been integrated across the board. What I am curious about, however, is the extent to which World Bank Group staff working in the field--particularly in country offices--feel a sense of "ownership" toward the need to include the concerns of poor disabled people in all the projects they do. To what extent do they proactively seek out DPOs (Disabled People's Organizations) in the countries where they work to find out from them what barriers World Bank projects may be inadvertently creating and how they can be effectively removed? (Any development professionals reading this who need help finding local DPOs in the countries where they work can consult some of the organizations in my blogroll at We Can Do, or they can start with the organizations listed in my blog post entitled "Finding Local Disability Organizations.") To what extent do front-line staff see disability issues as being THEIR issues as well, even if they never intend to specialize in the topic?
Thanks.
http://wecando.wordpress.com
Sidenote: I don't know if you realized this, but the Captcha Validation you have is inaccessible to users who are blind or dyslexic. I wonder if you could look into incorporating alternate approaches to distinguishing humans from robots. Audio captchas would include blind and dyslexic people--but would exclude people who are deaf or who have central auditory processing disorders.
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 12:08 ‘Monga’, the seasonal povery: Hello, my name is Siddique Hayat Khan. I’m a University teacher. My students often ask me what the World Bank is doing to solve our seasonal poverty called ‘Monga’. As you may know every year we experience a seasonal poverty in the northern districts (five northern districts). It occurs in the months of Sep – Oct. The northern districts are characterized by high degree of income inequality. Majority of the population are landless, marginal farmers who have almost no savings. They live entirely on farming related works. During the monga season there is no job available; the plantation, weeding and other works are complete; all they do is wait for the harvest time to come. These two months are the most difficult time of the year for them. They have no income, no savings to make ends meet. Unable to feed their families, they are sometimes forced to sell off their cattle and other belongings or borrow money at an exorbitant interest that goes as high as 100%. Sometimes they sell their labor in advance to the landlords at a price much lower than the market price. While we discuss this issue today, the hapless farmers are still passing through the hardest time, but no visible steps have been taken in this regard. I think the World Bank along with other development partners can take up initiative to end this rather easy problem. All, these people need is employment generation for the interim period. International development partners can mobilize the private sector and NGOs to set up small create jobs like handicrafts, fishing, nursery, and other small ventures in those areas.Environment poverty: Flood and river erosion is creating hundreds of thousands of poverty each year. Things are getting worse every year with the deterioration of the ecosystem. Millions of people are becoming homeless and are pouring into the cities for job and shelter giving rise to urban poverty. Again, no significant steps have been taken to address this problem. We would like to know what the World Bank thinks in this regards.
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 08:55 Who is Poor ? A number of approaches determine by the scholars like (a) means testing, (b) indicator testing and (c) self-targeting are suggested . My question is among the above defined approaches which will be a good and effective approach for determining the Poor in South Asia ?
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 03:02
The findings of the Jury of Independent People's Tribunal on World Bank, Delhi, India, shows that the negative impacts of the world bank's policies on the poor in India have been more than the positive impacts.
As the first step towards eradicating poverty in South Asia how about closing the World Bank ?
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 03:02
1. How does the World bank define eradication of poverty? Does it only mean that there are less poeple living with less than 1 dollar per day - and are they satisfied when these people instead live with 1.5 dollar per day? What about other indicators besides income?
2. How does the WB want to achieve an equal distribution of wealth in the South Asian countries? Is this the purpose of the WB at all?
3.What is in general the legitimacy of the WB to take so much influence in the world?
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 02:53 If the World Bank wants to eradicate poverty in South Asia, why don't they address the key structure that is keeping millions of South Asian farmers in poverty - and leading thousands to commit suicide every year - which is the system of agricultural subsidies in the USA and European countries? Two suggestions: either the World Bank should lobby the WTO and these countries, or should provide subsidies to South Asian farmers to counterbalance the EU Common Agricultural Policy etc.
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 02:49
What are the strategies to address the structural factors that cause poverty? We consider following structural factors that cause poverty in South Asia:
- political instability, civil war and army leadership
- debt crisis
- the power of multinationals
- no support and protection of local agriculture ex the import of low-priced products
- bad health policy ex vertical programs in India
- low education
- lack of jobs and permanent employment
Why is de World Bank focussing on cost-effectiveness packages health care instead of comprehensive health care?
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 02:48 What is the World Bank's response to the recent comments of Nobel Laureate Professor Yunnis' on the track record of the World Bank, in particular his statement that the World Bank "has failed to fulfil its commitment"?
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 00:32
Hi,
It is evident that most of the big concepts about development are well understood and that there exists a general concern over the materially poor populations, not only in South Asia but in all developing countries.
However, most of us generally focus our analyses about material poverty and development at the macro level. Nonetheless, the quickest and most efficient results have concentrated and been executed at the local level (a popular example is that of Muhammad Yunus's microcredit concept of lending to poor entrepreneurs).
Therefore, the suggestion is to move away from discussing the big development concepts -without discarding their necessity or imporance, of course- and to begin to focus on what has worked -and is working- on the field for the materially poor. This is the most pragmatic way to learn about development. In addition, we must always remember that these "people" have many resources that do not necessarily need to change while we "conceive" how to bring development for them: intelligence, knowledge about their reality and context, a language(s), land, skills, an identity, a history, among others.
And in this line, we must not fall on creating dependence on them and must completely avoid paternalistic approaches. The materially poor can and want to do many things so lets allow the to be the main actors on their development. They have survived poverty for many generations and hence they have the most appropriate strategies (and the experience) to teach us how to devise with them the policies to facilitate their access to the necessary opportunities and resources that may translate into more money in their pockets. Thus, it is more feasible to act at the local level.
Renzo
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 00:31
Hi,
It is evident that most of the big concepts about development are well understood and that there exists a general concern over the materially poor populations, not only in South Asia but in all developing countries.
However, most of us generally focus our analyses about material poverty and development at the macro level. Nonetheless, the quickest and most efficient results have concentrated and been executed at the local level (a popular example is that of Muhammad Yunus's microcredit concept of lending to poor entrepreneurs).
Therefore, the suggestion is to move away from discussing the big development concepts -without discarding their necessity or imporance, of course- and to begin to focus on what has worked -and is working- on the field for the materially poor. This is the most pragmatic way to learn about development. In addition, we must always remember that these "people" have many resources that do not necessarily need to change while we "conceive" how to bring development for them: intelligence, knowledge about their reality and context, a language(s), land, skills, an identity, a history, among others.
And in this line, we must not fall on creating dependence on them and must completely avoid paternalistic approaches. The materially poor can and want to do many things so lets allow the to be the main actors on their development. They have survived poverty for many generations and hence they have the most appropriate strategies (and the experience) to teach us how to devise with them the policies to facilitate their access to the necessary opportunities and resources that may translate into more money in their pockets. Thus, it is more feasible to act at the local level.
Renzo
Wed, 11/14/2007 - 23:40
It seems that the WB and other development and aid agencies focus too much on getting institutions right for economic growth and poverty reduction. No doubt, good institutions do matter for smoothing out econoimc activities and to reach optimal outcomes. However, don't you think that given the percentage of population engaged in agriculture, it is vital to focus first on enhancing agricultural production and market (yes, I am also talking about trade, discriminatory and distortionary subsidies, availability of hybrid seeds, among others) before we hone in getting institutions right?
Of course, I do not resonate Gregory Clark's views that institutions do not matter for growth (remember his new book: A Farewell to Alms). Institutions do matter in finetuning erratic and fickle financial market, to improve governance, efficiency, etc. Getting institutions right in places where certain standards can be enforced to streamline erratic ones would be a good policy to pursue.
But, what if agricultural community have their own kind of institutions (traditional, evolutionary, and endogenous) and given that they are optimal based on their social fabric and living style, is it not a mistake to try to put a common standard on the quality of institutions across societies and countries? I think if we focus on providing credits, setting up agriculture markets, facilitating supply of hybrid seeds, and improving trade prospects, then reducing poverty in a country like Nepal, where more than 70 percent of the population depend on agriculture, in a generation would not be a great deal.
Also, can't we follow the Cuban model of Urban Agriculture to increase production. This seems efficient, consumes less resources, keeps land from deteriorating and losing its quality, and most importantly helps farmers raise income, a key determinant of poverty. Temporary redistribution of unused land for the landless would immensly help them. Won't it be more easier to achieve the reducing poverty goals if we focus on these aspects and temporary redistribution of unused land (initial endowments also matter) for the landless and those who do not have sufficient land to eak out a living?
Wed, 11/14/2007 - 13:39
People are not poor by their choice, not in any cases. Some people are poor because they do not try hard enough; some are poor because they are not sure how they can improve their lives, and there are people who are poor because external factors resist their economic growth. I would not necessarily say that people in Nepal are poor or people who are poor in Nepal are so because of all these reasons. The point I am trying to make here is simply that economic growth is constrained in Nepal. There is multitude of factors involved of course. Only last weekend, I was in a conference and I had a pretty long conversation with my friend back from school on this same issue. She was reemphasizing the point that people are to blame, people meaning Nepalese who have left Nepal either for further education or job abroad and have not come back recently to their home country. The brain-drain, as we call it, has been a major issue for the last decade, ever since the political situation got worse. Does everyone think the same? May be some of you do. I am not entirely sure if it is us who are to blame. I see more of weak governance that has failed to provide environment –external factors that is needed for an economic growth. I do not mean to imply that there has not been growth in recent years-see the investment banks that have increased over the years. It is also an issue of access to resources. Rich people are getting richer since they have access to resources and poor are getting poorer since the political instability has deprived them more. We are here talking about a growth of a nation, not just growth of an individual or a family. They might have something in common. What if peace is restored? What if political parties recognize the bigger picture and work together on establishing much needed stronger governance? I definitely see more people returning back to Nepal. Everyone knows that Nepal is extremely rich in natural resources-has a huge reserve potential for hydropower-rich biodiversity-an immense potential for renewable technologies-list can go on and on. There are Nepalese who are educated and technically competent, who can create a better nation, only if we still want to see a developed nation in our life time. I am not sure how many of us share this dream. Given the situation we are in now, just imagine how many hands do we need to go from this point to that dream forward we aspire for and how sooner do we want to get there? One, two, or may be thousands. Time and tide wait for no men and women. I know people who share this dream are still reluctant to go back. Yes, there might be many valid reasons and I can agree with some of them. So, my question is: how do we improve governance?
Wed, 11/14/2007 - 04:03 "Poverty, like beaty, lies in the eye of the beholder". Given the hetereogeneity of the South Asian countries , is it right to use same measurement scale of poverty for all countries? How far is it justified and logical? World Bank' poverty lines at $ 1 or $2 have been criticised and in that case, do we understand poverty as human poverty? I am curious to know what kind of scales are being used to measure and compare poverty in South Asia.
Wed, 11/14/2007 - 12:55
I hope you will be able to attend the seminar at BRAC University tomorrow, but just to answer your specific question: we use the poverty lines determined by each country. So strictly speaking they are not comparable across countries. When we refer to ending poverty in South Asia, therefore, we mean bringing the poverty rate in each country (according to the country's own poverty line) down to single digits.
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 08:52
You have indicated that you consider poverty line as defined by the country in measuring level of poverty in a country. As mentioned, this eliminates opportunities of comparing poverty levels in countries. Shouldn't you think of comparing apples with apples when discusing about the regional comparison of poverty. How can you discuss country X is poorer than country Y
Your comments are appreacited
Tue, 11/13/2007 - 19:22 Thanks for having this dialogue. I think the analysis shows this is a good opportunity for the countries of South Asia to reduce poverty, but the real question is whether the people in these countries are up to the task. The responsibility of development lies with poor countries themselves, and so many times we have seen opportunities wasted. Many times people blame politicians for focusing on the wrong issues, donors for funding wrong things, and even institutions like the World Bank for providing development funding that ends up in the wrong pockets. But what about each country’s responsibility to own its own mistakes and successes? The question you pose is important—“what can young people do?” because it brings the responsibility for success back to where it belongs: the people in each country. Organizations like the World Bank can help all they can, but in the end, it all depends on what kind of future the people in each country want to build for themselves, and especially for the less fortunate among them. It is always easier to blame others for what goes wrong instead of asking what we ourselves can make better for our own people.
Mon, 11/12/2007 - 19:01
Hello,
Thank you for putting up this blog post and offering to engage in dialogue.
1. I attended in New Delhi the Independent People's Tribunal on The World Bank Group a month of two ago. The preliminary report from the event, which is available here, has a number of strong accusations against the World Bank and its affiliated organizations. I have to ask how you respond to these claims that the World Bank has exacerbated social and economic problems in India through its activities over the past decades, rather than helped?
2. Why are poor people in rural areas being displaced in order to secure land for industrial developments by companies like POSCO, Tata and others? What do you think should be done about this?
3. In what ways does the World Bank attempt to influence policy at the centre, at the state, and at local levels in South Asia, if at all, and to what ends? If you can give examples they would help.
4. Why are there farmer suicides? What do you think can be done about this?
5. Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka are currently in the middle of wars or unstable, while large swathes of India are enmeshed in various struggles from Maoist to regional autonomy-based. Is it possible for people-friendly economic development to happen in the region with this set up and, if so, how?
6. India has an extraordinarily unequal society in terms of wealth, with some of the wealthiest people in the world and hundreds of millions (going by measures aside from how many dollars a day people live on) who are extremely poor. What sort of development strategy would you prescribe that would address this problem?
Thanks very much for your time.
Thu, 11/08/2007 - 15:13
I was expecting more responses--and was looking forward to ideas people had.
As a young person I understand that student's question--what can we do? Especially in light of the enormity of challenges and the limited capabilities, knowledge, and opportunity we have in the field--what can be done that will allow for two things 1. creating sustainable change and 2. allow us to see the results of that change. I don't actually think #2 is so important, but as a young person who has worked in the service sector in South Asia I know it can become very discouraging when you don't see results. So having small projects on a micro-scale that allow for change to be seen and for a person to understand the effects of their work allows for more dedicated people in the field and while it does not result in macro change (necessary to truly eradicate poverty in South Asia) it begins creating the necessary resources for larger scale change.
The next step would be taking those small micro projects that have been successful and having people in other cities and towns replicate them keeping in mind local conditions--isn't this the whole point of a federalist state? I think that this is what makes the msot sense--keeping local conditions in mind but having a flexible plan that can overlay and expand or contract based on the needs of the locality.
Perhaps reaching out to students and getting them involved in projects in their community--I don't know how you incentivize this in South Asia. Still, getting folks involved in small projects that allow them to engage with the issues they see as most pressing will allow them to work in a field that they are interested in but for which they do not necessarily see the personal economic benefit. Seeing results in the field can be very inspiring, and while not an economic benefit allows for not purely altruistic people to still get something for their efforts--something that can go a way to help incentivize the process.
I think there are some interesting things beginning and going on. I look forward to hearing the other ideas (especially from folks who are interested and are in the area to actually do the hands-on work). If possible, can you also post about when you will be giving the presentation, so we have an idea of when to get on.
Thanks!
Sun, 11/11/2007 - 14:31 I think a lot can be done by young people to end poverty in South Asia, when we realize what's actually wrong with our countries.
Most of the time it's to do with policy.
i think changes can be made by changing attitudes of people, through advocacy and peer education. young people listen to other young people more than 'adults'. then with the correct amount of noise we can change policy, at least influence it.
benifits of Reforms are in our face, yet somehow we manage to not see it. we just need to throw in some light.
young people themselves got to realize that we are not just 'the future' we are very much the present, it's too bad if you are not interested in policy, governance or economics; these things are interested in you.
I am personally working on an a education programme in Sri Lanka which tackles some of these these issues, and yes i think it can be replicated.
Thu, 11/15/2007 - 05:43
The govt's need to think of all types of poverty based on various statistical data. Educational data shows one type of poverty. Yet I agree that we need to think of educational reforms to curb poverty. In addition to reforms, the policy makers also need to understand what prevents sending kids to school or not having poor hygenic conditions etc. Based this info, one need to develop poverty alleviation strategies. Therfore, you need to consider not only educational reforms but also other types of reforms as well
Fri, 11/16/2007 - 00:00
In my opinion, the only way to end poverty is raising income level of the general people through various means of income generating activities. To become economically prosperous, government should think on the following issues
First of all there should be strong policy which protect industries and business enterprises from violence, strike and other political interest.
Second is the politics, political stability is very important to increase production and conduct economic activities without any barriers.
The third is to recognize YOUNG People's energy; Greater the number of young people involve in the economic activity; the greater impact will leave for the generation to come. Young people's potentialities should be fully utilized and help them in participate in the decision and policy making level.
Mon, 11/05/2007 - 21:28 Economics is all about production, eficiency, disrtibution and pricing. The first two can be best when involved in free environment. A nation can grow if it provide condusive environment for create and add value in the product and services. The last two could be controlled by force. If the production iself is underperperorming, how national indexes will be improved? Pakistan will be loser in long run. It has proved that liberaised economy perform well, then it is only a sub-set of bigger political system. For any country, people's voice should not only listned but respected.