Global Responsibility for Global Poverty - Literature review Example

Global Poverty: Global responsibility? (Name) (Course) (Institution) (Instructor) Date Besley and Burgess (2002) perceive poverty as one of the major challenges of humankind in the 21st century. Poverty can be defined as the noticeable deficiency of wellbeing. It is basically the inability to satisfy an individual’s basic needs due to lack of income to buy and services or lack of access to such services. People living in poverty lack basic necessities including food, clothing, housing, health, literacy and information. In spite of a high and developing world average income, billions of people are still fated to severe poverty which is manifested by ill health, low life expectancy, illiteracy, dependency, social exclusion, and effective enslavement (Pogge, 2005). This is attributed to the disparities between the developed and the developing world. The World Bank estimated as in the year 2005, that 44 per cent of the world populations lives below $2 a day, a figure that is continuously increasing (Pogge, 2005). Pogge further states that, poverty related deaths amount to about 18 million, which is a third of human deaths annually. This is about 270 million lost lives ever since the end of Wold War. Social justice according to Miller (2003) is the distribution of good and bad (the advantages and disadvantages) in the society and most importantly, the way the good and the bad are spread in the society. Moreover, social justice is focused on how resources are distributed to people by social institutions. Examples of the advantages related to social justice according to Miller include jobs, education, property, medical care, money, housing, security, care for elderly etc. while disadvantages include things such as dangerous work, military service and other hardships. Consequently, poverty can be perceived as an outcome of unequal distribution of resources the good and the bad (advantages and the disadvantages) in the society. As such, poverty in the society is an issue of social justice that affects people universally depending on the way resources are distributed in the a particular society. This is the reason why poverty is not just an issue of a geographical region say, Africa, but it is a problem of the entire universe. It is possible to find poor people in developed world depending on the definition of poverty in the various countries. Common good on the other hand entail doing what will bring good to majority. The issue of poverty calls for charity which is the desire of common good. The will to common good and effort to it is a requirement of justice. In the catholic perspective, as put by Pope XVI, the more people strive towards securing a common good consistent to the real needs of others, the more effectively they learn to love them (Pope Benedict XVI, 2009). Considering the face of poverty and the dehumanizing it causes to mankind, alleviating it becomes an important part of the global society. Various stakeholders have developed various approaches in dealing with the issue of poverty. No doubt this objective is praiseworthy, but the issue remains the means for attaining this objective. The stakeholders that will be discussed for the purpose of this essay include Peter Singers’ utilitarianism solution to poverty, government aids, Christians, capitalism, local charities and volunteers, and critique of unjust structures. Peter Singer’s utilitarianism is the perspective that, our actions are judged in regard to their consequences. In his argument regarding poverty, singer argues that, there are poor people somewhere in the world, because there are others spending more than they need (Singer, 1999). In his popular example, he uses an example of a drowning child. He argues that, anyone would save a drowning child at any cost even though they may not know the child. In this regard, Singer believes that people who are fortunate in life to have basics should be able to spare some money by abstaining from unnecessary things and donate the money to charities so that it can save lives of other people elsewhere (Pogge, 2005). In his perspective it means that poor people would benefit and the world need not lose a life due to poverty related causes. This calls for one to sacrifice their luxurious lifestyle to achieve this. Local charity and volunteers is another perspective towards poverty alleviation. It is the belief that, charity begins at home. It is an ideology put forth by philosopher Judith who believes that in the need to eradicate poverty, proximity is more significant than need. This belief is also shared by St. Thomas Aquinas and neo Darwinism. Poverty in this view can be reduced if only we would care for those people around us who are in need. By donating charities and volunteering to help people in need, poverty can be a thing of the past. According to altruism perspective which supports charity, people often help others depending on the relationship they have or the benefit they are likely to get from such an interaction, hence this may not be the best way to eradicate poverty as it may have strings attached. In addition, capitalism perspective focuses on the issue of poverty from a free market position. Introduced by Friedman capitalism is founded on the view that, unrestrained economic systems will encourage competition, which will in turn cause price regulation and a growth of opportunities as more people are able to consume the produced goods. The capitalist model however is also blamed for increased global poverty. Capital owners are the greatest beneficiaries under the capitalist system. They possess the power and are able to control labour and hence wages in maximizing production and profits without necessarily offering value for the input labour, hence impoverished labourers. Essentially there are eight ways through which capitalism creates poverty according to White (2005); they include the creation of the pre-conditions; minor commodity production and trade; (petty) commodification; harmful commodities and waste; technological change and unemployment; pauperising crises; climate-change related pauperisation; and the un-required and incapacitated dependent human body under capitalism (White, 2005). Government aid is a perspective which seeks to eradicate poverty through redistribution of government assistance. This form of aid is not voluntary as the government uses policies to tax and ensure that citizens contribute to the larger poverty reduction projects. Proponents of this notion believe that, poverty can never be eradicated in the world unless large amounts of capital are invested in development of infrastructure and the provision of essential goods (Lüsted, 2010). This is due to the fact that, capitalists cannot exploit this investments and unreliability of local charities which are constricted on local issues. Hence, governments ought to include funding for international aid in their budgets. This perspective faces ethical issues as many people believe that donating money to poverty eradication is entirely voluntary and should not be imposed on citizens. The Christian perspective holds that, poverty is as a result of poor economic policies and government structures that lead to uneven acquisition and distribution of wealth (World Council of Churches, 2006). As such, churches compel the various authorities to be accountable for poverty of the citizens. In a biblical perspective, Christians are challenged to help the needy, by sharing what they have (World Council of Churches, 2006). Poverty is an issue whose concern is unrelenting. Various scholars and experts have tried to come up with varying principles that promote human flourishing by reducing poverty. Institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are dedicated towards poverty eradication through policy formulation and regulations through funding of countries in need of monetary aid. The World Bank is a development institution which gives resources, technical aid and policy advice to governments of countries with high levels of poverty (Hillman, 2002). The main aim is to eradicate poverty in the world. This institution uses various models in an effort to achieve growth and boost human life (Schweickart, 2008). Nevertheless, this is seen as by critics as a way of controlling poor countries by the developed countries, who through this institutions impose conditions. In essence, these institutions have not achieved much in alleviating poverty despite development levels being realized in the countries that they assist. This is due to the fact that, the political systems in the country remain oppressive to the poor. Social capital is also a principle that can be applied to combat poverty. Social capital refers to a collective asset a feature of communities as opposed to an individual property. In this regard, individuals contribute and are able to use it, but do not own it. Social capital is not an alternate to offering greater financial resources and public services to unfortunate communities, but rather forms a critical means to boost such resources and make more effective use of them (Warren, Thompson, and Saegert, n.d). Social capital plays a certain significant role in making sure that, the elements of personal welfare that an individual cannot solely provide such as security from public health and crime since it is a common good. Social assets of a community can enhance the safety, health, economic wellbeing, political participation, education, and quality of life of the poor communities. Since public support is perceived as destabilizing community responsibility, it is only logical to minimize public help and instead enhance community self-help, charitable and private support (Warren et al., n.d). The authors argue that, more wealthy communities have higher human and financial capital resources and their government such as schools, and hospitals are stable. Their social capital can be more effective since it is strengthened by these other resources. The notion of social capital holds that, no matter how robust and well organized their internal social capital develops; poor communities are not capable of solving their issues on their own. However, social capital can achieve poverty reduction through helping investment strategies function; since the poor can together collaborate with outside players, they stand a good chance of imposing the greater resources that are essential in combating poverty. In this manner, social capital offers the poor a foundation of political power. In a larger picture, social capital perceives the poor as active means in enhancing their communities (Warren et al., n.d). This is an approach that is of interest of common good as there are no hidden issues. Good governance has been a principle that has been advocated by all stakeholders in the effort to eradicate poverty. Good governance is the key to realization of equity and hence development. Highly indebted states are encouraged to take more parsimonious roles of governance linked issues. The countries are required to empower the poor by making sure that there are fair elections, that budgets are effective systems for managing government operations, and that there are pro poor policies and appropriate supportive institutions in place (Grindle and Mason, 2002). This has worked in realizing development as well, but the levels of poverty continue to rise in these countries. Governments are encouraged to adopt systems that ensure effective delivery of basic services, which can be realized through, clearly defined responsibilities, varied methods for ensuring accountability, committed civil servants, various modes of delivery, budgetary measures and local capacity (Grindle and Mason, 2002). Poverty is an issue that need to be approached in a perspective of common good and in light of social justice. If we need to empower others, it is for the common good. The efforts by rich nations to help poor nations have over the years failed to alleviate poverty due to lack of commitment to common good. There have always been strings attached in assisting the poor, which has not worked well in eradicating poverty. Nevertheless, the means of alleviating poverty lies in the hands of the poor themselves. Social capital as discussed in the essay offers a comprehensible answer to poverty eradication. Whereas utilitarianism, charity and volunteer, government aid, Christian perspective among other perspectives have failed to realize equity and improve human flourishing, social capital ensure that the poor are actively involved in what they believe in. In fact, the various stakeholders in the issue of poverty should focus largely on handons and not handouts in helping address the issue of poverty. Empowering the poor is the key to unlocking their potential to live a decent life and not providing them with their needs. This is not sustainable as evidenced in the current poverty situation in the world which continues to rise day in day out. References Besley, T. and Burgess, R. (2002). Halving Global Poverty, Department of Economics London School of Economics. Grindle, M.S. and Mason, S.E. (2002). Good Enough Governance: Poverty Reduction and Reform in Developing Countries. Prepared for Poverty Reduction Group of the World Bank. Hillman, A. (2002). The World Bank and the persistence of poverty in poor countries European Journal of Political Economy, 18: 783–795. Lüsted, M. (2010). Poverty. Edina, Minn: ABDO Pub. Miller, D. (2003). Principles of social justice. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Pogge, T. (2005). World Poverty and Human Rights, Ethics & International Affairs, 19, (1): 1-9. Pope XVI, (2009). Catholic Social Teaching on Poverty, an Option for the Poor, and the Common Good, Department of Justice, Peace and Human Development. Pope, S. J. (1991). “Aquinas on Almsgiving, Justice and Charity: An Interpretation and Re-assessment,” Heythrop Journal 32: 167-191. Schweickart, D. (2008). Global Poverty: Alternative Perspectives on What We Should Do and Why, Journal of Social Philosophy, 39 (4): 471–491. Singer, P. (1999). The Singer Solution to World Poverty. The New York Times, September 5, 1999. Warren, R. Thompson, P. and Saegert, S. The Role of Social Capital in Combating Poverty, Social Capital and Poor Communities. 1-28. White, B. H. (2005). Poverty and Capitalism. Working Paper Number 134: 1-14. World Council of Churches, (2006). Ecumenical conversation: Changing social and economic context retrieved October 18, 2012 from http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/assembly/porto-alegre-2006/3-preparatory-and-background-documents/ecumenical-conversations/changing-social-and-economic-context-ecumenical-conversations.html Read More