It is now accepted that development economics is a failed God. This is true both in terms of theoretical constructs and policy inputs. It now transpires that efforts by economists like Robert Solow to capture the essentials of growth in a mathematical or econometric formula were misdirected. Today the World Bank’s Commission on Growth and Development asserts that there is no generic formula for growth. Secondly, a recent critical appraisal of the much touted WB’s World Development Reports (WDRs) has demonstrated that these were empty vessels offering little meaningful inputs for development policy formulation. Where do we go from here?
Writing in Tribune about Duncan Green’s monumental volume “From Poverty to Power”, Andrew Dodgshan explains “Duncan Green Uses numerous case studies to demonstrate this book is not merely an academic textbook but a manual for real, practical and lasting social change”. (Revised and enlarged Edition published in 2012). Duncan Green has been in the business of international development for 30 years. He was Head of Research in Oxfam for eight years. The book explores many ways in which poverty is being fought through the empowerment of people whose deprivations relate ultimately to their helplessness. The book discusses a number of different types of initiatives across the world that have enhanced and expanded powers of the powerless. There are case studies from diverse backgrounds. Brazil, Bolivia, Philippines Israel, Egypt China, Gautemala, Papua, New Guinea and so on. Distilling these experiences, the author has attempted to prepare a manual for alleviation of poverty.
First, the road to alleviation of poverty or development more generally, lies through the state. History has amply demonstrated that no country has prospered without active state intervention and participation. Effective state is a pre-requisite. “By effective states, we mean states that can guarantee security and the rule of law, and can design and implement an effective strategy to ensure inclusive economic growth Effective states often known as “development states” must be accountable to citizens and able to guarantee their rights”.
Secondly, state is not the only instrument for tackling poverty. What the book calls “active citizenship” can be another effective way of seeking and securing solutions for the pervasive problem of poverty “By active citizenship we mean that combination of rights and obligations that link individuals to the state, including paying taxes, obeying laws and exercising the full range of political, civil and social rights. Active citizens use these rights to improve the quality of political or civil life, through involvement in the formal economy or formal politics or through the sort of collective action that historically has allowed poor and excluded groups to make their voices heard”.
Most development practitioners now acknowledge the centrality of citizenship and the state to alleviation of poverty. This also brings into focus the need to grapple with the critical role of politics in development. This takes us to the third point namely a “social contract” – a deal whether explicit or implicit that builds confidence and trust between citizens and the state. Finally, the book recognizes the case for including private sector as a third pillar in the structure, along with the state and citizens. This is because it drives economic growth by creating jobs, transferring knowledge and technology.
Oxfam’s experience on the ground suggests that some such combination of the three factors mentioned above lies at the heart of attempts to build a humane and sustainable development path – tackling inequality and poverty during the course of the current century.
While Oxfam’s efforts to channel the moral outrage that global poverty evokes into effective action based on solid case studies, are welcome, it is necessary to pose the question. To what extent have we succeeded?
The dimensions of global inequality are formidable. The income of the world’s 500 richest billionaires exceeds that of its poorest 416 million people. Every three minutes somewhere in the developing world, two women die needlessly in childbirth or pregnancy: Over 40 children are killed by avoidable diseases like diarrhea or malaria. Is there enough moral repugnance at the world’s yawning social and economic divides? A system that allows 850 million people to go hungry, while an epidemic of obesity caused by over-feeding blights millions of lives in rich countries is sick.
Poverty thus is not merely an economic disease, but a moral, ethical and social disease. Amartya Sen who has written a Foreword to this book quotes with approval Bernard Shaw: “The greatest of evils and the worst of crimes is poverty”. Nearer home, Mahatma Gandhi has given us a more graphic spectre of what poverty is about. Bhiku Parekh has admirably encapsuled the poverty profile as sketched by the Mahatma in the following paragraph:
“…. Poverty dehumanises human beings, wastes the potential and deprives their lives of all sense of meaning and purpose. It is one of the worst violence that human beings can commit against other human beings. It is as bad as killing, and even worse for the fact that it is silent, slow and invisible, and arouses no anger and is outside the purview of anyone’s direct responsibility. As long as even one person is starved, is malnourished, or lacks decent housing, the social order stands indicted, lacking legitimacy. Basic human needs have the first claim on society’s resources and it is an obligation to arrange its economic affairs in a manner that the needs of all members are met”.
Are we heeding to the advice of the Mahatma? Not at all. Despite all the euphoria about the Indian economy being in the high growth trajectory in recent years, India continues to be the abode of the largest number of under-fed and undernourished people in the world. Indian policy maker’s insensitiveness to this situation was reflected in the fact that India exported a huge quantity of 27 million tonnes of rice and wheat during the three consecutive years 2001-02 to 2003-04. The same policy makers who cut down subsidy on domestic consumption of foodgrains had no qualms about subsidising exports of rice and wheat. I had occasion to write: “If the Mahatma were alive today, he would have conducted a mass satyagraha against such thoughtless policy of exports of foodgrains. Active citizenship could perhaps have helped. Or take the recent case of mid-day meal scheme being sabotaged in Maharashtra. The unholy alliance between unscrupulous contractors and bureaucrats resulted in the supply of sub-standard food to school children. But where is the outrage?
The answer is simple. We have not inculcated the appropriate values into our society.
DR.N.A. MUJUMDAR
