Earlier this month, the Canadian government passed the Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act (ESTMA), an energy transparency law that aims to shed more light on the financial activity of energy companies in foreign countries. The law applies to nearly 2,000 energy companies that are registered in Canada or listed on Toronto’s stock exchange and will require them to publish detailed records of payments made to foreign governments.
The ESTMA came just before the G7 Summit on June 7, and is the product of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s commitment at the 2013 G8 Summit to establish stricter standards for the reporting of financial activity by Canadian extractive companies.
The stated purpose of the law is “to foster better transparency to ensure that the resource extractive industries support proper development in the countries where they operate, while at the same time making it harder to conceal illicit payments.” According to Canadian Securities Law, the Act will require affected companies to report any payments made in relation to the commercial development of oil, gas or minerals that exceed either the amount prescribed by regulation or $100,000 on a number of types of payments, including royalties, production entitlements, dividends and infrastructure improvement funding.
While a similar U.S. transparency law has existed since a 2010 amendment to the Dodd-Frank Act, no rules have been officially implemented for extractive industry activity abroad. The Securities and Exchange Commission threw out regulations written in 2013 after a lawsuit from the American Petroleum Institute – the oil industry’s principal U.S. lobbying organization – claimed the regulations were too punitive for its member companies. In the fall of 2014, Oxfam International filed its own lawsuit against the SEC for failure to implement previously mandated regulations and expects a decision “any day now” on whether or not a federal court will set a timeline for the SEC.
As of now, the majority of the world’s largest oil companies, including Exxon Mobil and Chevron, are nor required to report payments made to foreign governments.
For civilians in oil-rich countries, the detriments for allowing foreign energy corporations to extract their resources often outweigh the benefits they realize for hosting them.
“In many countries that are rich in oil, gas and other non-renewable natural resources, the communities from whose territory the resources are extracted bear the brunt of environmental and human rights impacts associated with extractive activity but see few tangible benefits,” said EarthRights International (ERI) in a statement in 2014. “We, along with our partners in Burma and elsewhere, believe that knowing what governments receive from extractive companies is an important step for communities to hold governments responsible for the use of natural resource revenues and to advocate for a fair share of the benefits.”
Since 2009 ERI has worked with Oxfam and other members of the Publish What You Pay Us (PWYP) coalition to fight for revenue transparency in the extractive industry. The stated mission of the PWYP is to “[help] citizens of resource-rich developing countries hold their governments accountable for the management of revenues from the oil, gas and mining industries.”
“Natural resource revenues are an important source of income for governments of over 50 developing countries,” states the PWYP coalition. “When properly managed these revenues should serve as a basis for poverty reduction, economic growth and development rather than exacerbating corruption, conflict and social divisiveness.”
Proponents of stricter oversight of extractive industries note that a lack of financial transparency raises doubts as to how much civilians in host countries benefit from the extraction of their resources by foreign energy companies. Detailed records published by energy companies will reveal more precisely who is benefiting from extractive industry spending and whether – and to what degree – recipient governments use that spending to benefit their own people.
– Zach VeShancey
Sources: Canadian Securities Law, Devex, Earthrights, Publish What you Pay
Photo: The Star
China’s War on Poverty
The rhetorical phrase “War on Poverty” is commonly used to describe programs and policies aimed at reducing or eliminating poverty. It has been used in the context of United States politics but is now also being applied by the media to Chinese efforts to reduce poverty, especially in rural areas. China has experienced a meteoric rise to economic prominence in a few decades, yet much of the country lies in the past, still experiencing economic hardship without the benefits of the recent successes. What is China doing to fight poverty?
Hundreds of millions of people have been salvaged from poverty since China’s rise to prominence, however, in 2012, China’s GDP per capita was less than other developing countries, including Iraq and Colombia. Part of this statistic lies with the fact that the Chinese economy has to sustain a huge number of people, but another reason for this surprising statistic is that economic growth in China has benefited some more than others. Specifically, those in urban areas have tended to gain more from recent economic advances than those in rural China.
In the past, the millions lifted out of poverty in China were a result in part of strong economic growth. Additionally, less people are working in agriculture and moving into other businesses and improving human capital systems. Anti-poverty actions by the government also played a role but perhaps have not been enough.
In the 1990s, China changed its definition of poverty to a level that was about two-thirds of the international standard, artificially lowering its poverty statistics. However, China has also thrown billions of dollars at the problem in the form of subsidized loans, grants and programs such as “Food For Work,” which aimed to stimulate the economic situation of the poor while at the same time improving infrastructure for water systems and roads.
Whether poverty reduction government programs like Food For Work were strong factors behind China’s first burst of poverty reduction between the 1970s and the late 1990s is hard to determine. Some believe that China’s staggering growth in those decades was the biggest driver for poverty reduction. If that is the case, then a slowdown in the Chinese economy (still at 7% growth approximately) could hurt the reduction in poverty unless new government programs can pick up the slack.
As previously mentioned, many of the poor in China have already benefited from economic growth, but many more are still impoverished. In the past month, President Xi Jinping reaffirmed the government’s responsibility to fight poverty in rural areas while at a conference about China’s 13th Five-Year Plan. A rash of suicides among children in a rural area of China and the death of five homeless children in 2012 (carbon monoxide poisoning from lighting a fire in a trash container where they were taking shelter) has caused hard questions to be asked and for government officials to talk about action. Recognition of the continuing problem by the Chinese government is a positive sign. The additional fact that the Chinese economy is becoming more dependent on a consumer class sheds light on the need for the Chinese economy to pull more out of poverty and into the consumption class. China’s war on poverty — the incentive to work towards ending poverty — is apparent, from both a public relations standpoint and an economic one.
– Martin Yim
Sources: Reuters, The Diplomat, Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, IMF, Asia Society
Photo: Yibada
How Ghana Reduced Hunger and Malnutrition
At the 39th session of the Conference of Member States of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) held in Milan, Italy this June, Ghana was given an award from the FAO for reducing the level of its malnourished population from 7 million in the early 1990s to less than 1 million today.
Ghana is one of the 72 countries that have managed to reduce its level of people suffering from hunger to less than 5% of the population. Ghana has also seen a significant decrease in poverty. As Feed the Future states, Ghana’s GDP growth rate has grown from 4% in 2002 to 8% in 2012, as poverty was reduced from 52% to 28%.
Ghana’s success at decreasing the level of the population in poverty has made it the first Sub-Saharan African country to meet the Millennium Development Goal of halving extreme poverty by 2015. This decline in poverty has led to a corresponding decline in levels of hunger and malnutrition. In 1990, 27% of the Ghanaian population was malnourished. By 2005, this number fell to less than 5%. The level of malnutrition in children has also reduced — it has been halved from the 1980s to today.
Ghana was able to drastically decrease poverty and hunger by investing in its agricultural sector. Ten percent of the Ghanaian budget is devoted to its agricultural sector, which, as The Gates Foundation states, has led to a steady growth in Ghana’s agricultural productivity of almost 5% each year since 1985. Ghana has also significantly increased its production of cocoa, allowing it to increase exports.
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) states that besides agricultural growth, there are also other factors which helped to drive much of the population out of poverty. For example, the government of Ghana has introduced special social intervention plans which increase spending on programs that target the poor and vulnerable.
The south of Ghana is the country’s main agricultural area, which has led to a disparity in poverty between the north and the south. The poverty rates in the north are double than those in the south. In order to help decrease this poverty gap, Ghana has established four main interventions. The first is the adoption of security measures which help to end longstanding civil conflicts and attract private investment. The government also increased the number of resources it gives to the Savannah Accelerated Development Authority (SADA), an agency which works to plan a development agenda for the northern ecological zone in Ghana. Ghana has also augmented its infrastructure, providing more access to rural areas, and worked to help social intervention programs such as the Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty (LEAP).
The gap between the poverty levels in the north and south of Ghana is worrisome, but the four interventions that the government established should help decrease poverty in the north and help the country overall. Ghana’s ability to decrease its level of hunger is remarkable and suggests that other countries that wish to reduce hunger and malnutrition should be prepared to invest heavily in their agricultural sector.
– Ashrita Rau
Sources: Impatient Optimists, Action Aid USA, UNDP, Feed the Future, Ghana Business News, Ministry of Food and Agriculture
Photo: World Food Programme
Canadian Energy Transparency Law Sets Example for US Policymakers
Earlier this month, the Canadian government passed the Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act (ESTMA), an energy transparency law that aims to shed more light on the financial activity of energy companies in foreign countries. The law applies to nearly 2,000 energy companies that are registered in Canada or listed on Toronto’s stock exchange and will require them to publish detailed records of payments made to foreign governments.
The ESTMA came just before the G7 Summit on June 7, and is the product of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s commitment at the 2013 G8 Summit to establish stricter standards for the reporting of financial activity by Canadian extractive companies.
The stated purpose of the law is “to foster better transparency to ensure that the resource extractive industries support proper development in the countries where they operate, while at the same time making it harder to conceal illicit payments.” According to Canadian Securities Law, the Act will require affected companies to report any payments made in relation to the commercial development of oil, gas or minerals that exceed either the amount prescribed by regulation or $100,000 on a number of types of payments, including royalties, production entitlements, dividends and infrastructure improvement funding.
While a similar U.S. transparency law has existed since a 2010 amendment to the Dodd-Frank Act, no rules have been officially implemented for extractive industry activity abroad. The Securities and Exchange Commission threw out regulations written in 2013 after a lawsuit from the American Petroleum Institute – the oil industry’s principal U.S. lobbying organization – claimed the regulations were too punitive for its member companies. In the fall of 2014, Oxfam International filed its own lawsuit against the SEC for failure to implement previously mandated regulations and expects a decision “any day now” on whether or not a federal court will set a timeline for the SEC.
As of now, the majority of the world’s largest oil companies, including Exxon Mobil and Chevron, are nor required to report payments made to foreign governments.
For civilians in oil-rich countries, the detriments for allowing foreign energy corporations to extract their resources often outweigh the benefits they realize for hosting them.
“In many countries that are rich in oil, gas and other non-renewable natural resources, the communities from whose territory the resources are extracted bear the brunt of environmental and human rights impacts associated with extractive activity but see few tangible benefits,” said EarthRights International (ERI) in a statement in 2014. “We, along with our partners in Burma and elsewhere, believe that knowing what governments receive from extractive companies is an important step for communities to hold governments responsible for the use of natural resource revenues and to advocate for a fair share of the benefits.”
Since 2009 ERI has worked with Oxfam and other members of the Publish What You Pay Us (PWYP) coalition to fight for revenue transparency in the extractive industry. The stated mission of the PWYP is to “[help] citizens of resource-rich developing countries hold their governments accountable for the management of revenues from the oil, gas and mining industries.”
“Natural resource revenues are an important source of income for governments of over 50 developing countries,” states the PWYP coalition. “When properly managed these revenues should serve as a basis for poverty reduction, economic growth and development rather than exacerbating corruption, conflict and social divisiveness.”
Proponents of stricter oversight of extractive industries note that a lack of financial transparency raises doubts as to how much civilians in host countries benefit from the extraction of their resources by foreign energy companies. Detailed records published by energy companies will reveal more precisely who is benefiting from extractive industry spending and whether – and to what degree – recipient governments use that spending to benefit their own people.
– Zach VeShancey
Sources: Canadian Securities Law, Devex, Earthrights, Publish What you Pay
Photo: The Star
Poverty and hunger are often accepted as issues that have little hope of going away completely because they are so widespread. In reality, however, it is quite the opposite. For example, the world produces more than enough food to feed everyone, which could, in turn, lead to dissolving global hunger and some aspects of global poverty.
The World Health Organization reported that between 2006 and 2008, there was enough food available to feed everyone in the world 2,790 calories each day. This amount increased from the 1960’s by 570 calories person/day.
The availability of food to those in poverty has decreased the percentage of chronically malnourished people from 34% in the 1970’s to 15% at the turn of the 21st century.
Despite this increase in available calories and decrease of impoverished people, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization found in studies from 2012 to 2014 that “805 million people of the 7.3 billion people in the world, or one in nine, were [are] suffering from chronic undernourishment.”
Of that 805 million still undernourished people, 11 million reside in developed countries; however, the other 794 million people are from developing countries.
With enough food available to feed everyone, the question remains: why is the food not being distributed more equitably to those suffering from hunger and malnutrition?
A multitude of reasons go into why the food available is not reaching those who need it. The ability (or lack thereof) to mobilize the food is at the forefront. The cost of shipping food can greatly restrict its ability to be transported to areas in need. However, developed countries waste 222 million tons of food each year. That wasted food requires transportation to landfills. Rather than moving food to landfills, the money to move it could be directed to transporting it to people in need.
The 222 million tons of food wasted each year by developed countries is equal to “the entire net food production of sub-Saharan Africa,” according to World Environment Day. Making that wasted food available to those impoverished and hungry would drastically improve lives around the world.
A lack of healthcare and education also impacts the poverty rates around the world. Entering the 21st century with a billion people unable to read makes the possibility of rising out of poverty more difficult for individuals.
In a similar way, healthcare hinders the ability of individuals and families to rise out of poverty. When that individual or a family member is sick and unable to work and help the family, it makes feeding the family that much more difficult.
Food, education and healthcare all come back to one another in the world of poverty. As they each improve, it allows for people to worry less about where they are going to get their next meal. As long as food that could feed those in need is going to waste, and the healthcare and education the poor deserve is not being provided, poverty will continue to exist.
– Katherine Wyant
Sources: Global Issues, 2015 World Hunger and Poverty Facts and Statistics
Photo: Pearls of Profundity
Who Are the Biggest Philanthropists in the World?
1. Warren Buffet: One of the world’s richest people says he views his money as “claim checks” on society that he can turn into consumption to improve the gross domestic product. In 2006, Buffet pledged stocks worth about $30 billion to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the largest charitable contribution of all time. He often auctions himself off for dinner on eBay, raising close to $1 million dollars per meal. He plans to donate his fortune once he dies because he believes great wealth should not pass from one generation to the next but instead should move out into the world to make a more lasting, widespread impact.
2. Bill and Melinda Gates: The founder of Microsoft and grandfather of the tech start-up world, Bill Gates is the co-founder of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the wealthiest charity in the world with assets estimated at $34.6 billion. Gates has cited David Rockefeller as a major influence on his philanthropic work and has extensively studied the Rockefeller Family’s charitable pursuits. Gates and his wife Melinda have donated over $28 billion to charity and plan on donating 95% of their fortune when they die.
3. Sir Ka-shing Li: Hong Kong business magnate Ka-Shing Li is the richest man in Asia, with his companies comprising 15% of the market cap on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. However, Li is best known for leading a no-frills lifestyle and donating about $1.3 billion of his wealth to charity. Most of his donations go to universities around the world, such as Hong Kong Polytechnic University, the University of California, Berkley, Stanford University and the University of Alberta. He also founded Shantou University near his hometown of Chaozhou. Li’s charitable work has earned him the Grand Bauhinia Medal, the highest honor in Hong Kong, the Order of the British Empire and the Legion of Honor.
4. Chuck Feeney: Baseball executive and businessman, Feeney founded The Atlantic Philanthropies, one of the largest foundations in the world. Atlantic has donated more than $6.2 billion since 1982 to social projects in Australia, Bermuda, Northern Ireland, South Africa, the United States and Vietnam. The foundation is the largest funder of aging and immigration reform in the United States and has given numerous gifts to Feeney’s alma mater, Cornell University. Feeney’s philosophy is “Giving While Living.”
5. George Soros: Hungarian-born business magnate and investor, Soros gave away $8 billion between 1979 and 2011, mainly to peaceful political movements and educational institutions. In the 1970s, Soros funded black students in South Africa to attend university under apartheid and worked to promote democracy in post-Soviet states. His foundation, Open Society Foundations, helped assist the transition to capitalism in his native Hungary and gave large funds to Central European University in Budapest. Soros also donated $100 million toward increased Internet access in rural Russian universities and $50 million toward the Millennium Promise. Soros’s political activism has long spurred his charitable work.
These philanthropists have dedicated their lives and fortunes to humanitarian causes throughout the world and can serve as an inspiration to all of us to give back and fuel the causes and institutions in which we most steadfastly believe.
– Jenny Wheeler
Sources: GeorgeSoros.com, Forbes
Photo: BBC News
New Training for Global Health Workers Announced by USAID
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) unveiled a free and readily accessible resource for mobile devices that have an Internet connection. The training tool, named “ORB,” is the first of its kind.
The launch follows criticism of USAID by a panel comprised of business and development leaders last year. Mainly, the panel cited the agency for management problems, including insufficient coordination, accountability and progress-measuring data collection.
In April, Representative Christopher Smith (R-N.J.) introduced H.R. 1567 in an effort to ensure that Congress is doing all it can to assist USAID in saving impoverished lives around the world. The bill, which was unanimously approved by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, would compel USAID to create clear, measurable and transparent goals.
In addition, the bill calls for an approach that would “improve nutritional outcomes, especially for women and children.” More than 6 million children under 5 years of age die from preventable and treatable causes every year, with more than half of these deaths attributed to malnutrition. For developing countries encountering these issues, global health workers are the primary, and sometimes only, source of healthcare, but they often lack the necessary training and support.
This is where the new USAID training comes in. The tool consists of a library of over 200 resources in 13 different languages that can help train health workers all over the world. The agency is anticipating the library will be able to support up to 100,000 frontline global health workers by 2017 with its easy-to-use, open source content.
The hope is that the new USAID training will improve the quality and reach of previous training efforts, leading to more knowledgeable, confident workers who will then alter the outcome of health matters for the more than 10 million women and children they currently service.
– Matt Wotus
Sources: The Library of Congress, Pittsburgh Post Gazette, USAID 1, USAID 2
Photo: USAID
Foreign Aid Decreases the Likelihood of Terrorist Attacks
FDI allows developed nations to invest in developing nations in the form of foreign aid. FDI is critical for the economies of the developing and developed nations, as developing countries need support until they can economically sustain themselves. If these developing nations fail due to a cause such as terrorist attacks, the developed nations that have invested in them experience a drop in stocks that, in turn, can negatively impact citizens.
Economists Sandler Enders and Adolfo Sachsida found in a study that “terrorist attacks lowered U.S. FDI by 1 percent in nations that belong to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) but had no statistically significant effect in non-OECD nations.”
Due to recent rapid globalization, no disease, repression or crime is isolated from the rest of the world.
First world countries are not immune to terrorism. The 9/11 attacks, the Charlie Hebdo shooting and the Tunisia museum attack are proof of the international impact these terror groups can have (and seek to achieve). Limiting their abilities and presence in the countries from which they originate would then of course be sensible.
Al-Qa’ida, Boko Haram and ISIS – all major terror groups in developing countries with which the world is familiar. These developing countries are more susceptible to terrorist groups arising because of rampant impoverishment. As Susan Rice, author of “The Threat of Global Poverty” attests, poverty “creates conditions conducive to transnational criminal enterprises and terrorist activity.”
Insecurities in developing nations often leave individuals feeling desperate and hopeless. As individuals become more penurious, they are more inclined to join radical alternatives to sustain themselves and their families.
These struggling nations are less established and unable to prevent terrorist groups from rising to power because of financial hindrances.
In a recent study conducted by the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development, it was found that “a country at $250 GDP per capita has on average a 15 percent risk of internal conflict over five years, while a country at $5,000 per capita has a risk of less than 1 percent.”
Multiple developed nations have set foreign aid funds; however, they are often minimal amounts that are only enough for a nation’s government to survive, rather than thrive. By investing enough in developing countries, developed nations can reduce human suffering, curtail the chances of terrorist groups forming and support the domestic economy through the expansion of markets.
– Katherine Wyant
Sources: Center for the National Interest, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Photo: The Jerusalem Post
How Many Senators Are There?
What are the requirements for being a senator?
A senator must be at least 30-years-old and is required to have been a U.S. citizen for nine years. A senator must also be a resident of the state that he or she represents. Once elected, a senator stays in office for six years.
Elections for the Senate occur every two years, when one-third of the Congressional branch is up for reelection. After a senator’s six-year term ends, he or she can run for reelection an unlimited number of times. At the beginning of the 114th Congress, the average length of service for current senators was 9.7 years.
What does a senator do?
Legislative business takes up most of a senator’s time. Senators work in committees, such as the Foreign Relations Committee and the Budget Committee, to handle legislative matters. When a committee favors a bill, it meets with experts and executive agencies to gather information before adding amendments or changing the bill’s language. Committees can then report out legislation to the full Senate, where debates take place.
Senators also handle executive business when in session. Specifically, the Senate has the power to rule on treaties that the president proposes. Senators also vote to approve or deny cabinet, ambassador and Supreme Court justice appointments.
Who are my senators?
Who your senators are depends on your state of residence. Find my Senators.
How many minorities are represented in the Senate? How many women?
The current 114th Congress is the most diverse in history. However, out of 100 senators, just six belong to racial or ethnic minorities: three Hispanic, two African-American, and one Asian-American. Twenty women currently serve in the Senate, which is three more than served in the 112th Congress. There was no increase in the number of female senators between the 113th and 114th Congresses.
– Caitlin Harrison
Sources: New York Times,United States Senate, United States Senate 2, United States Senate 3,United States Senate 4,United States Senate 5 United States Senate 6, Federation of American Scientists, U.S. Consulate
Photo: United States Senate
OpenStreetMap Simplifies Nepal Earthquake Relief
The OpenStreetMap Foundation is a nonprofit organization whose goal is to enable people to freely develop geospatial data. In short, it is the Wikipedia of mapping. Entirely operated on volunteer power, any individual can map an area of their choice to add and maintain data. OpenStreetMap is open data, meaning anyone can use it as long as they are credited.
In April of 2015, mappers leaped into action to help with the Nepal earthquake. Within hours, volunteers had Nepal mapped in much greater detail than ever before. Using areal imagery, GPS devices and low-tech field maps, the OpenStreetMap volunteers created a thorough and accurate map for disaster relief organizations to use.
The Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team partners with relief organizations to map the areas that need immediate aid the most. Because of these efforts, disaster relief organizations can act quickly with knowledge of how to locate people at risk and how to best deliver goods and services.
Halfway across the world, a couple of civil engineering students at the University of Washington chipped in using OpenStreetMaps to help with Nepalese disaster relief. One graduate student James Lew describes his experience saying, “There’s a tendency to want to do the major cities and the infrastructure that’s closest to the major highways, but as you get further and further out, there’s still houses out there that are disconnected. It’s really cool to draw a box around them and say, ‘there’s a family here, don’t forget them.’”
Mapping has a profound role in humanitarian aid. Kathmandu Living Labs (KLL) is a small nonprofit that creates active “crisis maps” using OpenStreetMap data and real-time data submission. KLL created Quakemap.org that allows people in the field to report in real-time what areas need the most aid. KLL then highlights the areas, showing humanitarian aid organizations where they should focus their attention.
Although the organization is small, KLL’s live crisis map has been incredibly valuable to nongovernmental organizations, the local government and even the Nepalese Army in the weeks after the earthquake. Real-time mapping has given relief workers a new edge in delivering quick and efficient help after a crisis.
– Hannah Resnick
Sources: Forbes, Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team, Kathmandu Living Labs, University of Washington
Photo: Kathmandu Living Labs
Cash Incentive Improves Malawian Girls’ School Attendance
Global poverty is connected to the lack of access to education that many young girls face. In Malawi, a program offers cash incentives to young girls and their families in order to encourage school attendance. The results have exceeded expectations of the girls’ school attendance, and there are also additional health benefits for these young women.
Young girls are often not encouraged to attend school because their parents do not understand the value of education for girls or would prefer for them to help out at home. A recent extreme case in Pakistan is a clear example. A father strangled his three girls to death because he did not want to “waste money” on their education and felt that the girls were a burden to his family.
While stories such as this one are shocking, the conditional cash transfer program in Malawi works to help alleviate the barriers to education for young girls and their families. On the other hand, the father of the young girls in Pakistan refused to provide them with any money, and their school fees had to be paid for by their maternal grandparents.
The Zomba Cash Transfer program in southern Malawi offers girls and young women aged 13 to 22 and their parents up to $15 per month if the girls attend school regularly. An additional group in the study received the money without conditions, and a control group did not receive any money.
Improvements in school attendance were observed after 18 months. There was no significant difference between the two groups that received the cash payments, suggesting that education can be valued without forced restrictions if families can afford to send their children to school.
In addition to the increased school attendance, there were changes in the sexual behavior of these young girls. Girls had less sex and chose safer, younger partners. Child marriage and teenage pregnancy were also reduced. Most significantly, the International Center for Research on Women states that there was a “reduction by 60 percent of HIV prevalence rate and [a decrease of the] HSV2 (herpes simplex virus) infection.”
The program targeted 23,561 households in seven of Malawi’s districts and has the potential to be scaled up even further. In addition to sending their children to school, families used the money to buy food, medicine and farming supplies, and to travel to the hospital to buy antiretroviral drugs to treat HIV/AIDS. The money can help lift families out of poverty and empower young girls. With proper education, these girls can then participate fully in society and help break the devastating cycle of poverty for their own children.
David Bull, Executive Director of UNICEF U.K., believes that investing in education for girls benefits everyone in society. Girls will specifically benefit from the obtainment of skills to participate in society and protect themselves. However, businesses will also be able to hire more qualified women and broaden their customer base. When half of a country’s population is prevented from participating fully in the economy, economic growth will be stunted.
Global health and development, as well as the protection of human rights for girls, are central global goals. While conditional cash transfer programs need to be further evaluated to understand their sustainability and long-term effects, there is promise for great improvements in gender equality.
– Iliana Lang
Sources: Boston University, Daily Mail, The Guardian, International Center for Research on Women, National Center for Biotechnology Information, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Photo: Camfed