WE CAN END WORLD POVERTY, IF WE WANT

By Eveline Herfkens and - - Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

NEW YORK, Oct 1 2004 (IPS) - In September 2000, 189 world leaders signed the Millennium Declaration, a global deal committing themselves to \’\’free our fellow men, women, and children from the abject and dehumanising conditions of extreme poverty\’\’ by 2015 by achieving the 8 Millennium Development Goals (MDG), writes Eveline Herfkens, Secretary-General\’s Executive Coordinator for the MDG and Netherlands Minister for Development Cooperation from 1998 to 2002. But there are real concerns about the rate and breadth of progress, which has been inadequate in still too many poor countries. . The goals are achievable: the world has the resources, and we know what to do. Even in Sub-Saharan Africa and the least-developed countries success is possible: Malawi, Rwanda and Tanzania will achieve goal 2 on basic education; Tanzania is also on track to achieving the water goal; Uganda and Senegal have reversed the AIDS pandemic; and Mozambique\’s child mortality goal might be in reach. In these countries the \’global deal\’ is in place: they have reasonably good policies, while the donor community has been relatively generous with aid and debt relief. If some of the poorest countries in Sub-Saharan Africa can achieve some of the goals, why would they not they be achievable everywhere? The real problem is that many government leaders come to the United Nations make beautiful speeches and promises and fly back to resume business as usual.

In September 2000, 189 world leaders signed the Millennium Declaration, a global deal committing themselves to ”free our fellow men, women, and children from the abject and dehumanising conditions of extreme poverty” by 2015 by achieving the 8 Millennium Development Goals (MDG), ranging from the promotion of education, maternal health and gender equality to slashing poverty and child mortality and eradicating HIV/aids and other deseases. Since then much progress has been made and some developing countries are reaching some of the eight goals ahead of schedule.

However, as the UN Secretary-General’s recently-released annual report on the implementation of the Millennium Declaration states, there are real concerns about the rate and breadth of progress, which has been inadequate in still too many poor countries. What has been lacking until now is the political will of many world leaders to deliver on their Millennium pledges to achieve the millennium development goals. With 10 more years to go the world needs a breakthrough.

The ‘global deal’ explicitly recognises in Goal 8, that eradicating poverty worldwide can only be achieved through a global effort. It is the primary responsibility of poor countries to work towards achieving the first seven goals. However, for poor countries to achieve the first seven goals, developed countries must deliver on their end of the bargain, through providing more and more effective aid, more sustainable debt relief, and fairer trade rules, well in advance of 2015.

Spending on the fight against global poverty declined dramatically in most rich countries in the 1990s, but was revived at the 2002 Monterrey Conference when these countries agreed to increase such spending. If their promises are fulfilled, Official Development Assistance (ODA) should rise substantially by 2006, though it would still fall well short of the additional aid needed to achieve the goals.

Five European countries (Sweden, Norway, Netherlands, Denmark, and Luxembourg) already surpassed the goal of ODA at the level of 0.7 percent of their GNP. Five countries committed to achieve that level by a concrete date (Ireland by 2007, Belgium by 2010, France, and Spain by 2012, and the UK by 2013), while the other EU members committed to achieve at least 0.33 percent in 2006 as a first step towards the goal. However, according to the same figures, by 2006 Canada will reach only 0.3 percent, Japan 0.22 percent, and the US 0.17 percent.

But delivering high-quality and more effective aid is as important as volume. Too much bilateral aid has been driven by strategic geo-political objectives to countries that do not need external concessional assistance. Moreover, often, aid is provided in ways that benefit the donor’s exporters and visibility and did not contribute to reducing poverty. Linking aid flows to achievements of the goals, strenghtens the pro-aid constituency by changing the image of ODA from giveaways that support corrupt regimes to concrete programs that can reduce child mortality or provide primary education. To increase aid effectiveness, donors should target poor countries, encourage increased ownership, harmonize their procedures, untie aid and make the goals the organizing focus of all aid.

International trade has a tremendous potential to reduce poverty worldwide and drive economic growth. World Bank estimates reveal that the repeal of rich-country trade barriers and subsidies in agriculture would improve global welfare by about $120 billion, and that a 1 percent increase in the developing countries’ share of world exports would lift 128 million people out of poverty. But present trade policies discriminate against developing countries and hinder poor-country participation in the global economy.

Three-quarters of the world’s 900 million poor live in rural areas and depend on agriculture or related activities. Rich countries provide massive support to their domestic agricultural producers — $300 billion annually — which in turn leads to worldwide overproduction, which depresses world prices, floods poor-country markets, and undermines incentives and earning opportunities for farmers in developing communities. Harmful import barriers and export subsidies have to be eliminated for the goals to be reached.

But even while rich countries fail to live up to their commitments there is no excuse for developing countries not to do a better job. For instance primary education is not expensive, even the poorest countries should be able to mobilise and prioritise domestic resources to get all their children to school. The goals needed to be integrated into all national plans, sectorial policies, and budgets at all levels.

The goals are achievable: the world has the resources, and we know what to do. Even in Sub-Saharan Africa and the least-developed countries success is possible: Malawi, Rwanda and Tanzania will achieve goal 2 on basic education; Tanzania is also on track to achieving the water goal; Uganda and Senegal have reversed the AIDS pandemic; and Mozambique’s child mortality goal might be in reach. In these countries the ‘global deal’ is in place: they have reasonably good policies, while the donor community has been relatively generous with aid and debt relief. If some of the poorest countries in Sub-Saharan Africa can achieve some of the goals, why would they not they be achievable everywhere?

The real problem is that many government leaders come to the United Nations make beautiful speeches and promises and fly back to resume business as usual. This was the case with the 0.7 percent promise 30 years ago and it is the case now with Millennium Declaration. It is the people in these countries who can hold their governments to account. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)