Martin Luther King and Ivan Illyich give two very strong, yet seemingly opposing views about aiding someone from afar. While King suggests it is our duty to help, Illyich states that it is our duty to stay away before causing any more harm. How can aid be given that truly helps the recipients? Is that even possible?
King’s philosophy on the subject was taken from a letter written when he was placed in Birmingham Jail after participating in a nonviolent protest which he traveled from Atlanta to take part in. His skeletal argument was that one cannot rest if there is injustice anywhere and we have the right and duty to eliminate injustice for the sake of everyone.
Ivan Illyich expressed his view while speaking at the Conference InterAmerican Student Projects in Mexico, boldly telling his entire audience that what they are doing (volunteering abroad) was foolish and not helping anyone.
Although the arguments suggest opposite viewpoints, I don’t think the two authors would entirely disagree with each other.
Ivan Illyich gives very specific reasons for why “Latin American Do-gooders” are harming more than helping. Economically, the money used to operate groups of Americans going abroad could be put directly into the country they would be serving, rather than adding a “feel-good” factor for Americans.
Emotionally, those going abroad to serve are rarely educated about the culture in which they are serving and are diving in headfirst to areas where they are unwanted “there is also a gulf between what you feel and what the Mexican people feel that is incomparably greater.” He recognizes that their intentions are pure, but states that good intentions are not enough, the title of the speech being “To Hell with Good Intentions.”
Illyich would not have “called King out” on his work away from home or even his reasoning behind it. King does make many general statements about how fighting injustice that directly affects you is not good enough, but his efforts, in his situation, would have been justified by Illyich.
King opens up answering the question to why he was in Birmingham Jail, why he bothered visiting Birmingham, and already separates himself from the Illyich “Do-gooder.” King was invited by an organization he was affiliated with. From the start, King had a direct link to his cause and an invitation for entry.
King was not coming into the situation with an absence of true empathy, blinded by his need to help. He was fighting the same injustices he was personally facing at the time. In his letter, he states:
“When you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never knowing what to expect next, and plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodyness” — then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait.”
Martin Luther King would pass Illyich’s standards for having the right to aid others: he was aiding a cause he was directly affected by. But how can others pass those standards? Or do we even need to have the “approval” of Ivan Illyich, when we could just go by King’s standards of aiding other people?
The root of both arguments come from the standards of solidarity amongst people. King argues that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” and “whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly”, overall implying that we must stick together as mankind and should not be satisfied when our fellow man is troubled.
Illyich’s argument, while suggesting the opposite action as King’s, uses the lack of solidarity to argue his point: we should stay away from “helping” others, because we don’t truly know what they need, and in the end we cause more harm than good:
“If you have any sense of responsibility at all, stay with your riots here at home. Work for the coming elections: you will know what you are doing, why you are doing it and how to communicate with those to whom you speak.”
What it comes down to is how connected one feels with those they are working with. Do we see them as fellow people trying to make ends meet or do we see them as victims who can only be helped by an outside hand? Are we working with equal partners or charity recipients?
Not only is it important to know what aid recipients are going through, but it is equally important to know the economic and cultural impact being made through the work being done, which is where Illyich’s intended audience usually falls short. It is impossible to truly see through the eyes of others and to know exactly how they feel about the help coming in, but the least that can be done is to do everything in your power to understand the impact being made.
If international aid is done thoughtfully, then the good intentions being done are not backed only by empty deeds.
– Courtney Prentice
Sources: Swaraj, University of Pennsylvania
Photo: Robbbeck
What is AmeriCares?
A good way to learn about an aid organization is to see it at work on a current issue. AmeriCares is one of the organizations currently sending aid to countries affected by the recent West African Ebola outbreak.
Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone are directly involved in what is being called the largest recorded Ebola outbreak in history. At least 700 people have already died, with 1,300 more infected. What’s worse, there is no vaccine for Ebola and the fatality rate is almost 60 percent.
AmeriCares has sent three shipments of emergency medical equipment to the affected countries. The delivery weighed 2,700 pounds and included tens of thousands of surgical masks and caps, gloves and various medical supplies.
Support like this is desperately needed in the affected countries, as they are lacking in medical equipment and supplies. Liberia and Sierra Leone have stated that the demand for intravenous fluids is rapidly outnumbering the supply.
Luckily, in conjunction with Baxter International Inc., AmeriCares is sending enough intravenous fluid for 3,000 patients. This should cover everyone affected in both countries for the near future.
AmeriCares is a U.S. based non-profit founded in 1982. Its main goal is to provide direct aid assistance during times of crisis. According to their website, they “deliver medicines, medical supplies and humanitarian aid to a trusted network of clinics, hospitals and health care providers around the world.”
Even though direct aid during times of crisis is its main form of support, it still tries to foster sustainable healthcare practices and to “increase capacity, improve quality and provide more access to health care in the world’s poorest countries.”
This means giving medicine and medical attention to people that would otherwise not be able to afford it. For example, in Romania a boy with hemophilia was given the treatment of Factor VIII so that he could live a normal life. Or in Cambodia, where a woman with breast cancer now has access to the medicine and equipment necessary for her treatment.
AmeriCares’ website has dozens of examples of the everyday lives it changes by simply allowing for access to medical facilities and supplies.
Besides the recent Ebola outbreak, AmeriCares is working on other current crises: it has delivered $19.7 million in relief aid to the Philippines in response to the destruction caused by Typhoon Haiyan. It states that its money is used for, “medicines and medical supplies, antibiotics, chronic care meds, bandages, nutritional supplements, blankets and other relief supplies for hospitals and health centers.” AmeriCares sends volunteers to help in the relief effort, as well.
AmeriCares is also active in the Syrian Conflict. In June 2013, it sent a response team to Jordan and Turkey to assess the situation of Syrian refugees. So far, $2 million have been sent in medical aid for the refugee camps.
The amount of medical aid sent will help around 67,000 people affected by this crisis.
– Eleni Marino
Sources: The Guardian, It’s Relevant, AmeriCares, Charity Navigator
Photo: New York CBS
Martin Luther King and Ivan Illyich on Aid
Martin Luther King and Ivan Illyich give two very strong, yet seemingly opposing views about aiding someone from afar. While King suggests it is our duty to help, Illyich states that it is our duty to stay away before causing any more harm. How can aid be given that truly helps the recipients? Is that even possible?
King’s philosophy on the subject was taken from a letter written when he was placed in Birmingham Jail after participating in a nonviolent protest which he traveled from Atlanta to take part in. His skeletal argument was that one cannot rest if there is injustice anywhere and we have the right and duty to eliminate injustice for the sake of everyone.
Ivan Illyich expressed his view while speaking at the Conference InterAmerican Student Projects in Mexico, boldly telling his entire audience that what they are doing (volunteering abroad) was foolish and not helping anyone.
Although the arguments suggest opposite viewpoints, I don’t think the two authors would entirely disagree with each other.
Ivan Illyich gives very specific reasons for why “Latin American Do-gooders” are harming more than helping. Economically, the money used to operate groups of Americans going abroad could be put directly into the country they would be serving, rather than adding a “feel-good” factor for Americans.
Emotionally, those going abroad to serve are rarely educated about the culture in which they are serving and are diving in headfirst to areas where they are unwanted “there is also a gulf between what you feel and what the Mexican people feel that is incomparably greater.” He recognizes that their intentions are pure, but states that good intentions are not enough, the title of the speech being “To Hell with Good Intentions.”
Illyich would not have “called King out” on his work away from home or even his reasoning behind it. King does make many general statements about how fighting injustice that directly affects you is not good enough, but his efforts, in his situation, would have been justified by Illyich.
King opens up answering the question to why he was in Birmingham Jail, why he bothered visiting Birmingham, and already separates himself from the Illyich “Do-gooder.” King was invited by an organization he was affiliated with. From the start, King had a direct link to his cause and an invitation for entry.
King was not coming into the situation with an absence of true empathy, blinded by his need to help. He was fighting the same injustices he was personally facing at the time. In his letter, he states:
“When you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never knowing what to expect next, and plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of “nobodyness” — then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait.”
Martin Luther King would pass Illyich’s standards for having the right to aid others: he was aiding a cause he was directly affected by. But how can others pass those standards? Or do we even need to have the “approval” of Ivan Illyich, when we could just go by King’s standards of aiding other people?
The root of both arguments come from the standards of solidarity amongst people. King argues that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” and “whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly”, overall implying that we must stick together as mankind and should not be satisfied when our fellow man is troubled.
Illyich’s argument, while suggesting the opposite action as King’s, uses the lack of solidarity to argue his point: we should stay away from “helping” others, because we don’t truly know what they need, and in the end we cause more harm than good:
“If you have any sense of responsibility at all, stay with your riots here at home. Work for the coming elections: you will know what you are doing, why you are doing it and how to communicate with those to whom you speak.”
What it comes down to is how connected one feels with those they are working with. Do we see them as fellow people trying to make ends meet or do we see them as victims who can only be helped by an outside hand? Are we working with equal partners or charity recipients?
Not only is it important to know what aid recipients are going through, but it is equally important to know the economic and cultural impact being made through the work being done, which is where Illyich’s intended audience usually falls short. It is impossible to truly see through the eyes of others and to know exactly how they feel about the help coming in, but the least that can be done is to do everything in your power to understand the impact being made.
If international aid is done thoughtfully, then the good intentions being done are not backed only by empty deeds.
– Courtney Prentice
Sources: Swaraj, University of Pennsylvania
Photo: Robbbeck
Humans of New York: UN Millennium Project
Supported by the Millennium Development Goals Advocacy Group, photographer and founder of Humans of New York Brandon Stanton has taken his portrait project to a global scale.
Stanton will be photographing people in ten different countries and says that, “It would be rather foolish to claim that these portraits and stories somehow represent ‘the world’ or humanity as a whole. The point of the trip is not to ‘say’ anything about the world. But rather to visit some far away places, and listen to as many people as possible.”
Stanton explains that one of the main objectives of the tour is to raise awareness and prompt action to complete the Millennium Development Goals, to be accomplished by 2015. The Millennium Development Goals include the following:
1.
To eradicate extreme hunger and poverty
2.
To achieve universal primary education
3.
To promote gender equality and empower women
4.
To reduce child mortality
5.
To improve maternal health
6.
To combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases
7.
To ensure environmental sustainability
8.
To enhance and increase global partnership for development
Stanton began his journey in Iraq and has since traveled to Jordan. He will venture next to the Democratic Republic of Congo, then travel to Kenya and then his trip will lead him to Uganda. His only stop in Europe will be in Ukraine. He will then go to India, following which he will be in Vietnam, and then he will photograph in Ecuador. His last stop as of now is in the Amazon – but at the end of the tour, if he has the time and resources, he will go to photograph in El Salvador.
Stanton remarked on the Humans of New York website that on his trip, “In addition to telling stories of individuals, we hope this trip may in some way help to inspire a global perspective, while bringing awareness to the challenges that we all need to tackle together.”
-Jordyn Horowitz
Sources: United Nations, Humans of New York, ABC
Photo: The Epoch Times
Understanding the UN: Peacekeeping
The United Nations has been deploying peacekeeping missions since the U.N. Truce and Supervision Organization mission in 1948 which monitored the Armistice Agreement between Israel and neighboring Arab countries. Since 1948, U.N. peacekeeping has evolved to better respond to the world’s ever-changing and increasingly complex conflicts. What started off as a peace monitoring mechanism has become a major international actor in stabilization and development efforts in some of the world’s most volatile and protracted conflicts.
U.N. peacekeeping is managed through the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, which was established to succeed the U.N. Office of Special Political Affairs in 1992 under Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. The DPKO may only deploy a peacekeeping mission after receiving the mandate through Security Council resolutions and missions may only be updated or changed through Security Council resolutions. There are three types of peacekeeping personnel that make up mission teams: uniformed personnel including military troops, police and military observers, civilian personnel both local and international and U.N. Volunteers.
Currently, there are 17 different peacekeeping missions around the world ranging in size depending on the nature and scale of the conflict. The largest is the U.N. Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which employs over 20,000 personnel and has been operating in various forms since 1999. The mission in Congo also represents a departure from the normal rules and procedures of peacekeeping. Due to necessity and the nature of the Congolese conflict, the first ever “offensive” peacekeeping mission called the Intervention Brigade was launched in 2013 in order to more effectively address instability in the eastern region caused by various rebel groups and militias.
There are three rules to all traditional peacekeeping missions: (1) all parties of the conflict must consent to the deployment of peacekeepers in the area, (2) peacekeepers must remain neutral at all times and take neither side in the conflict, they serve merely as a buffer zone, and (3) peacekeepers may use force only in instances of self-defense or in defense of the Security Council mandate. All uniformed personnel are affiliated with the U.N. Member States. There is no U.N. standing army, so the U.N. depends on the contributions and donations of its Member States to carry out its missions, particularly in the form of uniformed personnel.
Today, U.N. peacekeeping missions are much more than just a buffer zone between two warring parties, peacekeepers are a central part of the stabilization and early reconstruction efforts of the areas where they are deployed. Peacekeepers are actively engaged in rebuilding the rule of law, justice and corrections systems, strengthening social and civil conditions, assisting with elections, aiding security sector reforms, carrying out demining activities and education programs about the dangers of landmines, promoting gender equality and the empowerment of women, protecting civilians, protecting children in conflict areas, assisting with Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration activities and fostering and maintaining respect for human rights.
Peacekeeping missions are a crucial part of the immediate post-war reconstruction phase in countries which are frequently prone to conflict. They are a valuable asset to development efforts in areas that are home to some of the most vulnerable populations on earth.
– Erin Sullivan
Sources: NY Times, United Nations, United Nations 2, United Nations 3, United Nations 4, United Nations 5, United Nations 6
Photo: NY Times
UN Concerned About Refugees in Libya
As the security situation quickly deteriorates in Libya, the United Nations says it is very concerned about the safety of asylum-seekers and refugees in Libya who are stranded in areas under heavy fighting.
U.N. Refugee Agency spokesperson Ariane Rummery said UNHCR is receiving calls from the mostly Palestinian and Syrian refugees in Libya who need assistance. About 37,000 people are recorded with UNHCR in Tripoli and Benghazi, areas of heavy violence between the military and insurgents.
“In Tripoli alone, more than 150 people from Eritrea, Somalia and other countries have phoned our protection hotline seeking help with medicines or a safer place to stay.”
UNHCR is especially concerned about one Palestinian and three Syrians who are trapped in between Libya and Egypt. They are asking Egyptian authorities to give the group access to food and water.
Rummery also said refugees in Libya see leaving as their only option. Many Libyan refugees are trying to leave the country by sea. The airport in Tripoli has been unavailable for days. Tunisia and Egypt are inaccessible for refugees, so the sea is the only way out. Smugglers are making use of the situation as these desperate people risk their lives to leave Libya and take the dangerous journey across the Mediterranean to Europe.
“We recently heard of a group of 500 Syrians who left in about three boats toward Italy from Benghazi, and this is a new and much more dangerous journey because it takes longer to reach Italy. Over 1,000 people have died in the Mediterranean this year and the latest casualties drowned last week off Al-Khums, which is about 100 kilometers (62 miles) east of Tripoli.”
UNHCR is advising Libyan authorities to lessen exit visa restrictions to let people leave Libya. They are also calling for Egypt and Tunisia to open their borders to the people trying to escape violence.
While the fighting continues in Libya, a newly elected parliament has met in hopes that they can bring peace. Libya has experience violent conflict since the 2011 uprising that overthrew Muammar al-Qadhafi.
– Colleen Moore
Sources: United Nations, UPI, Voice of America
Photo: United Nations
Hunger in Djibouti
Djibouti is a small country on the Eastern coast of Africa populated by malnourished people. Because of its location, Djibouti is a shipping hub for Eastern Africa, and so it has a large urban population. Still, a World Food Programme Emergency Food Security Assessment in 2012 found that three-fourths of assessed households were “severely or moderately food insecure.”
In rural areas, where one-third of Djibouti’s population lives, there is a severe hunger crisis. One in five children aged one to four years is malnourished and, in the rural areas, about 70,000 people were food insecure in 2012. In the slums, Arhiba and Balbala, there is a high rate of child mortality from malnutrition.This is in part due to the fact that the country has very little natural resources and there have been recurring severe droughts in the region.
Additionally, in recent years Djibouti suffered from a cholera epidemic. The droughts have damaged food production from crops and livestock in rural areas, and because the rural villages are spread out across the country, it is difficult for aid organizations to send food and healthcare to each community.
Many rural families have moved to cities in search of work and a better life. However, work is often difficult to find and, with more people migrating to the cities, the unemployment rate has increased quickly. Other rural families are fleeing to the slums to escape the harsh conditions of rural life.
Most households are receiving assistance, without which they could not survive. Fewsnet found in a 2012-2013 report that, in some areas, “households are marginally able to meet minimum food needs only through accelerated depletion of livelihood assets and adoption of unsustainable coping strategies such as charcoal sales.”
Prices and unemployment are rising as the droughts continue. The people of Djibouti need strategies for clean water, agriculture, health and nutrition. Until these needs are met, World Food Programme, Action Against Hunger and other organizations and governments are working to provide citizens with basic needs and helping the government develop programs for sustainability.
-Kimmi Ligh
Sources: Relief Web, Action Against Hunger, World Food Programme, The Guardian
Photo: Flickr
Pollution in Nigeria Ignored
Amnesty International has recently released a report claiming that United Nations Environmental Programme’s 2011 recommendations for pollution cleanup in the Ogoniland region of Nigeria have been ignored.
In 2011, UNEP found that pollution in Nigeria was caused by government negligence and, specifically, by the oil company Shell. UNEP was commissioned by Shell to review the area in an attempt to convince the locals to allow for their return.
Shell left the Ogoniland in 1993 amid a wave of protests. The company has been trying to reconcile with the locals ever since.
However, the UNEP report did not produce findings favorable to Shell, as it stated that people in Ogoniland have “been living with chronic pollution all their lives.”
For example, drinking water was found to have high levels of the known carcinogen benzene, and the amount was 900 hundred times higher than what the World Health Organization considers safe.
The UNEP concluded that it would take 25-30 years to clean up the oil pollution left behind by Shell.
Three years later, yet another watchdog organization is saying that pollution is still a serious problem in Ogoniland.
Amnesty international led a joint report with Friends of The Earth Europe, Center for Environment, Human Rights and Development, Environmental Rights Action and Platform to say that “in the three years since UNEP’s study was published, the government of Nigeria and Shell have taken almost no meaningful action to implement its recommendations.”
Recommended measures like emergency water supplies were said to be “erratic” by the locals. Water was infrequent and often smelled bad.
Shell has been slow to decommission much of the equipment they left behind in 1993. This equipment is subject to corrosions, which contributes to further pollution.
There are also continuing oil spills, but Shell blames the government. Shell believes the spills occur because gangs break the pipelines to steal the crude oil, and it is the governments responsibility to deal with this.
Amnesty International and other groups involved in the joint report call for Shell to stop making excuses and take responsibility for the devastation they have brought upon Ogoniland and its people. This situation is far worse than what a brief summary can explain. To see the full report, click here.
– Eleni Marino
Sources: Amnesty International, The Guardian
Photo: The Guardian
What is the MMR Vaccine?
Measles, mumps and rubella are all viral diseases that can interrupt the development of children and adolescents. Accessing reliable information about the MMR vaccine is the most cost-effective method to increasing its uptake.
The MMR vaccine is recommended in childhood. The three-in-one vaccine is necessary for most children to enter school and can be given as early as 11-15 months, and children should get two doses. In addition, adults born after 1956 or 18 years or older should also receive one dose of the vaccination unless they have already had all three diseases.
The MMR vaccine can be given at the same time as other vaccines. Young children (under 12 years) can get a combination of vaccines known as the MMRV (measles, mumps, rubella and chicken pox).
Upon receiving the vaccination, there are some risks involved, but most people who receive the vaccine do not develop any problems.
Mild issues can occur 6-14 days after receiving the vaccine and can include any of the following: fevers, mild rashes, and swelling of cheek/neck glands. Moderate issues can range from: seizures, stiffness/ pain in joints, temporary low platelet count that leads to a bleeding disorder (1 in every 30,000 doses). Some severe and very rare problems are: serious allergic reaction (1 in every million doses), deafness, permanent brain damage, and long-term seizures/comas. There is no evidence that the vaccine causes childhood autism.
All of these listed risks are small however, in comparison with the risks of contracting measles: severe illness, hospitalization and death. The vaccine itself has brought huge leaps in early childhood disease prevention, providing vaccination to over 500 million people worldwide in over 100 countries. Before the vaccine, mumps was the most common cause of viral meningitis in children and rubella caused terrible damage to unborn babies.
Now, both mumps and rubella are virtually non-existent in children.
The Measles Outbreak
With concern to the current measles outbreak of 2014, two doses are recommended because 2-5 percent of vaccinated people do not respond to their first dose. More than 99 percent of people develop immunity after
the second dose.
Out of the 593 confirmed cases of measles, very few were from people who had been vaccinated twice.
The virus itself can stay in the air for two hours after a person with measles symptoms have left the area and is spread by respiratory droplets. The people infected are contagious four days before and after receiving the rash.
International Outbreak
In the third world countries of the world, measles outbreaks have been spreading more freely, with thousands of cases. In the Philippines, there were 50,000 registered cases and 77 deaths. In Vietnam, there are at least
8,700 cases with 112 deaths in children. In Pakistan, over 30,000 people have caught measles and 290 people have died, with the number increasing daily for children alone. The effect of measles has been spreading due to a lack of proper vaccination, more vulnerable immune systems and misinformation (MMR vaccine may produce autism).
In Africa, the number of measles-related deaths have decreased by 91 percent due to a surge in immunization. However, cases have still been growing, a number well into the thousands.
The potential benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks. Parents should understand that the MMR vaccine is the best way to protect their children from these diseases, especially if traveling to an affected area, or the family resides in an affected area.
– Ashley Riley
Sources: About, About 2, CDC, CDC 2
Photo: Medimoon
Economic Growth: Will a Rising Tide Lift All Boats?
Developing countries around the world face the tremendous challenge of promoting sustainable growth while also reducing poverty and increasing the living standards of their populations.
Around the world, conventional wisdom holds that by focusing development policy on economic growth, inequality will be reduced and incomes of every segment of society will increase–a rising tide lifts all boats.
While poverty has been reduced dramatically all around the world (700 million fewer people live in conditions of extreme poverty in 2010 than in 1990), big challenges still exist to further reducing this number. One of these challenges is rising inequality within and between nations.
Listed below are three reasons why income inequality must be addressed in both the developed and developing world in order to ensure long-term economic growth benefits for everyone and not just a select few.
1. Economic growth is not always equal
China, one of the countries where poverty reduction has been dramatic, is astoundingly tolerant of large gaps in inequality in exchange for growth. Deng Xiaoping, a top Communist Party leader from 1978 to 1992 who initiated economic reforms, is thought to have acknowledged, “It is good for some people to get rich first.”
While this may be true in some cases or at the beginning of market reforms, recent studies undertaken in Indonesia, South Africa, India and China reveal an increase in the gap between the rich and poor. This gap in income inequality can not only prevent further reduction in poverty, but it also has long term implications in the ability of large parts of the population of each country to be able to contribute to the country’s economy and growth.
2. Education, health, and job creation policies must be pursued simultaneously with growth policies
In order for a country’s population to contribute to and participate in the country’s economy, individuals must have the skills. Pursuing policies only focused on increasing GDP may improve growth outlook in the short run. However, in the long run, without education initiatives to match, a large segment of the population will remain poor.
In the 1990s, Brazil pursued a pro-equity growth policy in which it provided grants to help boost education. Average years of school for the poor shot up and when growth hit; they too were able to take advantage of the better jobs.
Just as an overall boost in education and health is important, so is robust job creation. People must have the opportunity to input the skills they have learned back into the economy.
For this reason, inequality cannot be solved without government involvement. The market left as is does not ensure that growth is shared equally. A combination of strong government programs and a strong private sector ensures better opportunities for more people.
3. Positive GDP growth can hide underlying inequality
The main measure of inequality within a given country is through the gini coefficient. The gini coefficient is a variable that measures how equal a country’s income is with zero representing an instance where everyone’s income is exactly equal, and one representing an instance in which one person has all of the income and the rest have none.
In South Africa, while the government is vocally committed to fighting poverty and inequality, between 2003 and 2008 overall income inequality increased. During this period, South Africa’s gini coefficient rose from an already high .66 to .70 – one of the highest in the world. So despite an average GDP growth rate of 3.2 percent (1994-2012), steps still need to be taken to ensure that the bottom segment of society is able to contribute and benefit from that growth.
Today, nearly 80 percent of humanity lives on less than $10 per day and over 3 billion live on less than $2.50. High levels of inequality exacerbate problems of poverty and reduce opportunities for the poor to move beyond their circumstances. Fewer opportunities for children to rise up economically means that inequality becomes more exaggerated over time and can affect the social structure of a country – leading to unrest, crime and violence.
Developed and developing countries alike all face the challenge of reducing their gini coefficient while also promoting growth. While each country faces unique challenges, this is one problem that can benefit from collaboration at the international level. From the information above, it becomes clear that poverty cannot be fully eliminated without measures in place that simultaneously address income inequality.
– Andrea Blinkhorn
Sources: Science Mag, Global Issues, Global Issues 2, Politics of Poverty, United Nations, South Africa, Hvistendahl, M. (2014). While emerging economies boom, equality goes bust. Science,344(6186), 832-835.
Photo: PBS
Ukraine to Block Aid Envoy by Russia
Hundreds of trucks covered in white tarpaulin began rolling towards the Ukraine-Russia border recently, delivering aid from Russia to rebel-held portions of Eastern Ukraine. Ukrainian officials believe that the aid convoy is simply a “trojan horse,” designed to give rebels necessary arms and supplies to continue their fight against the Ukrainian army. Some reports have indicated that the convoy would stop at the border, and that the aid supplies would be unloaded and distributed to areas of need by the Red Cross.
According to the Russian foreign ministry, the aid delivery consists of 262 to 287 trucks and contains over 1,800 tons of “humanitarian supplies.” They specifically mentioned sleeping bags, medical equipment, electric generators and baby food. However, many in the west have been skeptical about the content and goals of the aid delivery.
The aid mission has caused many to fear an escalation in the already drawn out conflict. Western powers have repeatedly called the aid envoy a farce designed for Russian officials to sneak troops and/or weapons to the rebels, who have been losing ground to the Ukrainian military. Russia has denied these allegations, and has released statements declaring accusations by the West “absurd.” An official statement from Moscow said, “They continue to voice the absurd claim that the humanitarian convoy to help the civilian population of southeast Ukraine could be used as a pretext for Russian ‘military intervention.'”
The legitimacy of the aid envoy hinges on the Red Cross. Russian officials have claimed that the Red Cross has been coordinating with them on this mission, and that no military personnel or weapons are included. While the Red Cross has been working to help increase the amount of humanitarian aid being delivered into the region, they have denied involvement with this specific mission and have told news agencies that they have not been able to investigate the aid delivery.
Andre Loersch, the Red Cross spokesman in Kiev, told the media that “discussions are still ongoing” between them and Russia. He elaborated by saying, “The ICRC needs more details of what is in the convoy. The convoy is on the road and the ICRC has not had the opportunity to check what is inside.”
As of now, the aid convey still remains in limbo, with the full scope of its contents left unknown until the Red Cross investigates.
– Andre Gobbo
Sources: Al Jazeera, NY Times, ITV
Photo: Presstv