You may have never heard of Corporate Social Responsibility or Corporate Shared Value, but you have more than likely come across the products TOMS shoes, Newman’s Own or a slew of other companies who contribute goods to the impoverished with every purchase you make.
Many of these companies have taken advantage of new business models that consider a “triple bottom line,” instead of the traditional single bottom line-profit. A triple bottom line does not abandon the importance of profit margins, but incorporates the importance of social and environmental concerns in their business practices. For too long, international and even local corporations have continued the practice of making money at the expense of the most vulnerable populations, and often simultaneously consume or contaminate the basic resources these populations need to survive.
Wouldn’t it be remarkable if every purchase we made helped alleviate poverty? The following is a brief guide to help you not only understand how businesses can contribute to the greater social welfare of the impoverished, but to help you choose which businesses you invest in. After all, our money is one of our most powerful resources for implementing change.
1. Contribute to Sustainable Infrastructure
Is the business promising to donate 5% of all proceeds to a charitable organization that helps provide education to children in need, or are they claiming to donate one jacket for each one you purchase? There are many business models that fall under the category of “socially responsible,” but very few businesses implement sustainable ones.
Sustainable strategies have the added advantage of not only providing one-time support, but providing the tools necessary for people to empower themselves and break the cycle of poverty altogether. Businesses who invest in programs or initiatives designed to build sustainable infrastructures, which the poor can utilize to better their financial and social circumstances, inevitably end up having a much greater impact.
Such practices as “buy one, give one” models do not necessarily accomplish this. In fact, many companies who utilize “buy one, give one” models need poor people without their product in order to sell their product.
2. Pay Attention to Supply Chains
Earning a living wage in working conditions that respect human rights is essential to alleviating rates of global poverty. However, in today’s globalized economy, it’s hard to know where exactly the product you buy is being made and in what kind of conditions it was produced.
Though the company may be based out of the U.S., the raw supplies may be imported and the product manufactured in South East Asia via numerous factories with no association to one another. Despite the barriers, there are mechanisms available for consumers and businesses to identify supply chains behind the products they purchase to ensure the fair and respectable treatment of the workers who produce it.
Those businesses who have taken the extra effort to guarantee ethical supply chains usually will indicate so on their website. There are also organizations such as the United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) who can help you locate such businesses, as well as online shopping sites such as fashiongchange.org that claim to only allow businesses to operate through their website if they meet certain socially responsible prerequisites.
3. Work with Local NGOs
Businesses who work with local NGOs (local, as in where their product is manufactured) have a higher probability of not only adhering to sustainable practices, but also actually addressing the most pressing problems of that region. If a business donates high-strength eye glasses to a population that suffers from an unusually high percentage of cataracts, the business would most likely categorize this effort as socially responsible.
However, what they might not know is that the high presence of cataracts is largely due to malnutrition. Cooperation with local nonprofits increases the amount of knowledge businesses have about the population they are trying to help, and increases the likelihood that their efforts do not bypass the actual causes of the problem they attempt to alleviate.
During the holiday season there is often a sharp increase in charitable donations. However, using the above guidelines, you can also ensure the gifts you purchase make an equal, if not greater impact on those who need it the most.
– Jamison Crowell
Sources: New York Times, Huffington Post
Photo: Global Envision
The Culture of Poverty
There is a prevailing belief that people living in poverty- people who struggle to survive on a day-to-day basis- are somehow all alike in their mentalities and circumstances. According to this conviction, impoverished individuals are of not only their own socioeconomic class, but essentially, also of their own breed as distinct entities from mainstream, above-poverty line Americans. Disturbingly, this myth known as the culture of poverty has infiltrated many cultural institutions in America, such as education, government, and even entertainment.
An important question to investigate is the origins of this faulty poverty paradigm. How exactly did this flawed yet widely-prevailing notion of America’s poor develop? For starters, the phrase “culture of poverty” traces back to 1961 in Oscar Lewis’ book “The Children of Sanchez” in which Lewis explored small Hispanic communities. In his ethnographic observations, Lewis noted that these communities were violent, disjointed, and short-sighted, proposing that perhaps these characteristics are applicable to all impoverished groups. Decades after the publication of Sanchez, Lewis’ findings, rather being associated with the nation’s poor, are used to define the nation’s poor.
However, Lewis’ work is not the sole contributor to engineering the modern-day culture of poverty myth. Researchers propose that this myth is actually a conglomerate of smaller stereotypes regarding the poor. These stereotypes have managed to remain extant in America through multiple platforms such as media and entertainment in which excessive focus is placed on negative traits that, although universal, have been used to strictly classify the impoverished.
Two poverty myths in particular have been extensively circulated throughout society. For instance, poor people are commonly regarded as unmotivated and unfocused. However, there is no direct empirical evidence that the poor have weaker work ethics than others who are more socioeconomically well off. According to the Economic Policy Institute, since many impoverished adults, especially those with children, hold more than one job, and therefore work more hours per week than other Americans.
Furthermore, poor parents are often regarded as having little regard or interest in the academic well-being of their children due to their perceived lack of care for the institution of education as a whole. However, although low-income parents value their child’s success as much as higher-income parents, they are less likely to attend school functions. This trend is not necessarily due to differences in attitudes but is more likely due to differences in availability. Since lower-income parents spend more hours per week at work, they have less free time to allocate outside of the work-place.
Therefore, the culture of poverty is not an accurate reflection of the poor, but rather, reflects cultural stereotypes that have no true basis in fact. Many social forces such as social mobility and government assistance (or lack of) play a role in shaping poverty. However, it is important to note that inheritance can work both ways. An individual can inherit his or her family’s wealth just as easily as an individual can inherit his or her family’s poverty.
– Phoebe Pradhan
Sources: ASCD, NPR
Photo: New York Times
Mixed Policy for Banks in India
Raghuram Rajan took office as the governor of India’s central bank in September. His liberal vision of India’s financial sector was meant to boost economic growth and help the poor. In 1969, India’s former prime minister, Indira Gandhi, nationalized most of the banks in India. Since India’s presidential election in 1969, there have been many reforms to the country’s banking system, but the system is a mix of new liberal policies and right-wing conservative policies, creating an ambiguous mixture that is India’s current banking system.
The Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) hybrid system may promote social inequality and create an unstable economic atmosphere. Many problems plague India’s banking sector, including bad debts, low bank reserves and mediocre capital levels and the fact that only 35 percent of adults have bank accounts.
At least half of all rupee trading is abroad, and two large foreign banks in India have operations that are 1.9 times bigger than their local counterparts. RBI’s hybrid system may promote social inequality and create an unstable economic atmosphere. The difficulty and lack of opportunities to save money perpetuates poverty and makes it hard for the government to collect taxes.
The RBI’s growing independence has led to the Bank no longer setting the interest rates that banks must charge. However, the system controls the assignment of credit, requiring banks to invest 23 percent of their deposits in government bonds and save an additional four percent with the RBI.
The rules that govern the debt market mean 58 percent of banking system deposits are based on government preference. Rajan’s position at the RBI creates hope for extending finance to more Indians. New banking laws will make it easier for foreign banks to expand, provided that they set up local subsidiaries that the Indian government can regulate easily. One of Rajan’s goals is to methodically end the way that banks are forced to purchase government debt. In addition, Rajan has vowed to make new rules that will stop business magnates from exploiting the country’s fragile banking system and force banks to recognize debts that would otherwise sour.
– Daren Gottlieb
Sources: The Economist, Rediff News
Global Unemployment
Many countries measure their unemployment rate differently. However, unemployed people are individuals who are actively seeking for job but could not obtain jobs. Reason for unemployment varies from economy downturn, and changes of particular industry to lack of required skills.
In third world countries, global unemployment is cause by overpopulation and lack of education. Unemployment rate is one of the biggest indicators of the economy, but it is also one of the biggest indicators of poverty. Countries with high unemployment rate normally have high level of poverty.
An example of the relationship between poverty and unemployment rate is Greece. In 2008, Greece unemployment rate was 7.7%, but after the economics crisis, the unemployment rate rose to 23.8% in 2012. The same situation is spotted in Spain. Spain’s unemployment rate in 2012 is 24.9%. Even though these numbers are high, but African countries are at alarming levels. Some high unemployment rates in Africa are: Kenya (40%), Congo (49.1%), and Djibouti (59.5%).
In the United States, the unemployment rate is only 7.7% in 2013, but it results in slow economic recovery and more people each day is living under poverty level. With only half of the population employed, these countries do not have enough income to distribute among all their citizens.
Half of the people are unable to support themselves with adequate shelters, food, and medical supply. In developed countries such as the United States, the government offers welfare for unemployed citizens to maintain the standard of living. However, in developing countries, welfare programs do not exist or are very limited. Unemployed individuals are struggling every for their basic needs.
When the world economy is recording due to the emerging market, many people are still suffering from the impact of the economic crisis.
– Phong Pham
Sources: Huffingtion Post, International Labour Organization, Trading Economics, Global Finance
The Pork Barrel Scandal: A Storm Amid a Storm
As relief efforts to victims of Typhoon Haiyan, locally known as Typhoon Yolanda, continue, Philippine legislators are currently being tried for corruption charges regarding misuse of public funds.
Dubbed the “pork barrel scandal,” lawmakers amassed funds aimed to impress local constituents into stimulus programs. Primary among these were the Priority Development Assistant Fund (PDAF) and Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP), programs discovered to be non-existent NGOs publicized to alleviate poverty and invest in public infrastructure.
In reality, the pork barrel funds ended up in the coffers of five senators and 23 congresspersons. Notable among these is the alleged ringleader Janet Lim-Napoles, owner of the JLN Group of Companies. Napoles is reported to have used the funds to purchase real estate in Los Angeles.
In light of the pork barrel scandal, doubts are cast in relation to President Benigno Aquino III’s image as an enemy of corruption and it hinders efforts for further economic reform. Aquino ran on a ticket to fight corruption in 2010 – evoking his mother, Corazon Aquino’s successes against the corrupt-ridden regime of Ferdinand Marcos in the 1980s.
Aquino himself is being accused of bribing legislators’ loyalty. Around $500 million of discretionary funds for projects were dropped, an amount meant for Haiyan reconstruction.
Transparency regarding the use of governmental funds, particularly disaster relief efforts, is not a new problem. In 2009, local officials were accused of having stolen $20.7 million intended for restoring storm-ravaged northern Luzon through nongovernmental institutions.
Additionally, as stated in a report by the World Bank, addressing the links between poverty and vulnerability by the government, through proper measures and projects, could have prevented further disaster.
And yet, Malacañang emphasizes good governance and faith in relief structures. The Foreign Aid Transparency Hub (FAiTH) was established by the Department of Finance and Department of Foreign Affairs in order to better monitor and track disaster aid. The FAiTH webpage (https://www.gov.ph/faith/#) consists of a list of donor countries and organizations. The site elaborates upon the amount given and the respective organizations to which they are given. FAiTH is comprised of seven different departments within the federal government.
As the country with the largest Catholic inhabitants in Asia, faith gives hope amidst the death toll of over 5,000 with many more displaced. Faith in the idea of good government, however, is, literally, standing trial.
– Miles Abadilla
Sources: The Republic of the Philippines, The Independent, Huffingtion Post, Reuters, NBC
How Can Businesses Alleviate Poverty?
You may have never heard of Corporate Social Responsibility or Corporate Shared Value, but you have more than likely come across the products TOMS shoes, Newman’s Own or a slew of other companies who contribute goods to the impoverished with every purchase you make.
Many of these companies have taken advantage of new business models that consider a “triple bottom line,” instead of the traditional single bottom line-profit. A triple bottom line does not abandon the importance of profit margins, but incorporates the importance of social and environmental concerns in their business practices. For too long, international and even local corporations have continued the practice of making money at the expense of the most vulnerable populations, and often simultaneously consume or contaminate the basic resources these populations need to survive.
Wouldn’t it be remarkable if every purchase we made helped alleviate poverty? The following is a brief guide to help you not only understand how businesses can contribute to the greater social welfare of the impoverished, but to help you choose which businesses you invest in. After all, our money is one of our most powerful resources for implementing change.
1. Contribute to Sustainable Infrastructure
Is the business promising to donate 5% of all proceeds to a charitable organization that helps provide education to children in need, or are they claiming to donate one jacket for each one you purchase? There are many business models that fall under the category of “socially responsible,” but very few businesses implement sustainable ones.
Sustainable strategies have the added advantage of not only providing one-time support, but providing the tools necessary for people to empower themselves and break the cycle of poverty altogether. Businesses who invest in programs or initiatives designed to build sustainable infrastructures, which the poor can utilize to better their financial and social circumstances, inevitably end up having a much greater impact.
Such practices as “buy one, give one” models do not necessarily accomplish this. In fact, many companies who utilize “buy one, give one” models need poor people without their product in order to sell their product.
2. Pay Attention to Supply Chains
Earning a living wage in working conditions that respect human rights is essential to alleviating rates of global poverty. However, in today’s globalized economy, it’s hard to know where exactly the product you buy is being made and in what kind of conditions it was produced.
Though the company may be based out of the U.S., the raw supplies may be imported and the product manufactured in South East Asia via numerous factories with no association to one another. Despite the barriers, there are mechanisms available for consumers and businesses to identify supply chains behind the products they purchase to ensure the fair and respectable treatment of the workers who produce it.
Those businesses who have taken the extra effort to guarantee ethical supply chains usually will indicate so on their website. There are also organizations such as the United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) who can help you locate such businesses, as well as online shopping sites such as fashiongchange.org that claim to only allow businesses to operate through their website if they meet certain socially responsible prerequisites.
3. Work with Local NGOs
Businesses who work with local NGOs (local, as in where their product is manufactured) have a higher probability of not only adhering to sustainable practices, but also actually addressing the most pressing problems of that region. If a business donates high-strength eye glasses to a population that suffers from an unusually high percentage of cataracts, the business would most likely categorize this effort as socially responsible.
However, what they might not know is that the high presence of cataracts is largely due to malnutrition. Cooperation with local nonprofits increases the amount of knowledge businesses have about the population they are trying to help, and increases the likelihood that their efforts do not bypass the actual causes of the problem they attempt to alleviate.
During the holiday season there is often a sharp increase in charitable donations. However, using the above guidelines, you can also ensure the gifts you purchase make an equal, if not greater impact on those who need it the most.
– Jamison Crowell
Sources: New York Times, Huffington Post
Photo: Global Envision
Human Trafficking in the Philippines
New Jersey Congressman Chris Smith and his congressional team traveled to the Philippines earlier this week to meet with victims, aid workers and government officials in the regions hit by Super Typhoon Hayian. The U.S. government has spent $50 million in emergency aid to the Philippines, providing much needed food, water and emergency medical care. However Smith says that rising human trafficking in the Philippines is also a major issue. The Philippines is a large source for both sex and labor human trafficking. The poor are especially vulnerable to human trafficking in the aftermath of natural disasters when they have lost their homes as well as their communities and are looking for a way out.
Congressman Ed Royce hosted a house committee on foreign affairs hearing in Fullerton California on November 27, 2013. One of the speakers was Angela Guanzon, who traveled to the U.S. from the Philippines in 2006 in hopes of a better life. “I worked 18 hour days and had to sleep on the floor in a hallway,” Guanzon said. “My co-workers and I were threatened if we tried to escape.”
Human trafficking is what the State Department, law enforcement officials and NGOs are calling “modern day slavery.” Following narcotics, it is the second most profitable criminal enterprise worldwide and the Philippines has the second largest victim population. Many poverty stricken Filipino women leave their families in the hope supporting them from abroad.
Approximately 1 million Filipino men and women migrate each year, currently there are 10 million Filipinos living abroad. Many of these workers are subject to forced labor and harsh conditions, not just in the U.S., but in Asia and the Middle East as well. Women who work in domestic positions often suffer violence, sexual abuse and rape. Traffickers use local recruiters in villages and urban centers who often pretend to be representatives of government sponsored employment agencies. Furthermore, victims are required to pay “recruitment fees” that leave the workers vulnerable to forced labor, debt bondage and prostitution.
Many Filipinos live in poverty and are often swayed by recruiters who offer work and a better life. Furthermore, the vast majority of victims are also women and girls; 300,000-400,000 are women and 60,000 -100,00 are children; over 80% are females under the age of 18.
To combat this, the Philippines government created the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003 and has made minor improvements since then. For example, it increased funding to the anti-trafficking agency from $230,000 to $1.5 million and went from eight full time staff members to 37. They were also able to repatriate 514 Filipinos from Syria in the winter of 2012, 90% of whom were trafficked. Even with an upgraded version of the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003, much work still needs to be done in the Philippines and in the U.S. to ensure that women and the poor in the Philippines are not vulnerable to modern day slavery.
– Lisa Toole
Sources: CNN, NJ.com, ABS CBN, HumanTrafficking.org
Photo: The Guardian
Why the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy May be Right For You
Picture yourself: you are walking among a beautiful collection of distinguished brick buildings. Snow covers the ground as you gaze upon the seemingly endless trees that dot the walkway. You breathe a sigh of satisfaction and say to yourself “this is the perfect place to fight poverty.”
Welcome to the University of Michigan and the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy. Located in Ann Arbor, MI (known affectionately as Tree Town, USA), U of M is one of the nation’s premiere public universities. Many are familiar with the Michigan Wolverines football team, and their stadium, the “Big House,” that holds over 109,000 screaming fans. However, one of the universities true gems is the Ford School.
Named in honor of former U.S. President Gerald Ford, a Michigan alumnus, the Ford School offers a B.A. in Public Policy for undergraduates in addition to a Master of Public Policy and Master of Public Administration for graduate students. The school also has over 16 joint M.A. and PhD programs with other graduate programs in the university, including Economics, Political Science, and Sociology.
A stated strength of the Ford School is in combating poverty. The National Poverty Center is housed in the Ford School and is funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The National Poverty Center trains students in poverty research, publishes briefs and analyses to be used in government forums, and runs national seminars to discuss issues of poverty.
In addition to poverty research, the Ford School is devoted to global development. Students pursuing an M.P.P. spend the summer between their first and second year pursuing an internship directly related to policy issues. 27% of students complete their internships abroad, while 30% work in Washington D.C. for an internationally related program. Additionally, the School houses the International Policy Center, which promotes interdisciplinary research in various global issues.
If you are interested in honing your skills in fighting global poverty, the Ford School of Public Policy may be the place for you.
– Taylor Diamond
Sources: Ford School of Public Policy, National Poverty Center
Britannica
Korea Boosts Contribution to Global Fund
The Korean Ministry of Health will contribute $6 million to the Global Fund for 2014-2016. An added $10 million will be paid by the Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs in annual installments of $2 million from 2013-2017 from a levy on all passengers leaving Korea on international flights. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria welcome this announcement from Korea, which is now doubling its contribution over the next three years.
Introduced in 2007, this 1,000 won (US $0.95) levy, known as the Global Poverty Eradication Tax, was primarily used to contribute financial resources in order to fight poverty and disease in impoverished nations. For the 2011-2013 period, the Republic of Korea pledged $6 million. It is now nearly tripling that past commitment.
“The Republic of Korea is a trend-setter in the use of innovative funding methods to help fight the three diseases,” said Mark Dybul, Executive Director of the Global Fund. “In doubling its contribution, Korea is also leading the way for other G20 countries to follow.”
This contribution is a huge step ahead for the Republic of Korea, perhaps leading it on a path to achieving great power status. So far, it has contributed $19 million since it began providing financial support to the Global Fund in 2004. Perhaps this increase comes from the help that the Republic of Korea itself has received from the Global Fund. Since 2010, Global Fund grants in the Republic of Korea have funded the diagnosis and treatment of 120,000 cases of TB and the distribution of 710,000 mosquito nets.
“I hope that the decision of the Government of the Republic of Korea will help strengthen cooperation between my country and the Global Fund in financing for development in new and innovative ways in our fight against AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.” said SHIN Dong-ik, Deputy Minister for Multilateral and Global Affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea.
– Sonia Aviv
Sources: Vaccine News, The Global Fund, Business Wire
Photo: CTV News
Are Anti-Narcotics Campaigns Enough for Afghanistan?
Foreign agricultural experts and the United Nations are scrambling to control the growth of a lesser-known tool of the Taliban regime – the poppy.
Production of heroin’s precursor has increased forty-fold since the War on Terror began in 2001. Afghanistan produces an estimated 90% of the world’s opium, largely due to the economic stability it affords poor farmers who cannot cover production costs by cultivating other plants.
The drug trade perpetuates political instability and encourages violence, but also supports the livelihoods of local farmers, posing a curious catch-22 for U.S. and NATO officials for whom the approval and support of the local population is of paramount importance. Since 2002, the United States has spent over $7 billion to control the opium trade, in addition to providing troops to train local counternarcotics teams and sway local officials to eliminate poppy farming from their regions. At present, some 51,000 troops remain in Afghanistan.
Unfortunately, British and American agricultural advisers who encourage alternative crops do not have economics on their side. Opium production yields ten times the profit of cotton, for example, and represents approximately 15% of Afghanistan’s Gross National Product. According to the United Nations, Afghanistan’s drug-related exports accrue U.S. $2.5 billion annually. Since 2001, the opium trade has netted over $1 trillion dollars for organized crime (namely, the insurgency).
This “dirty money” is as addictive as the drug itself; the United States’ campaign against opium has failed to curb the market’s growth. A spokesperson for the Afghanistan Counternarcotic Ministry, Qayum Samir, estimates that 154,000 hectares of poppies will be planted this spring, an increase of 18% from the previous season. A sluggish economy has increased the income gap in Afghanistan, where the ruling elite has little interest in electing an anti-opium president in the coming election. As money becomes scarcer, cooperation with drug lords becomes a necessity for poor famers, who are further marginalized by the instability that results from increased power of insurgent leaders. What results is a self-perpetuating cycle of poppy production and corruption.
Critics of the West’s counternarcotics policies claim that previous anti-drug efforts have been “too little, too late.” Rampant poverty is the root of the problem; were poppy farmers economically self-sufficient, they could avoid manipulation by insurgents and produce other crops. Though the “woulda, coulda, shoulda” mentality cannot straighten out prior strategic missteps, going forward the U.S. could appropriate funding to fighting poverty in Afghanistan rather than controlling the opium issue from the back end.
The $7 billion doled out to the region by the Untied States in the last decade is nearly triple the entire operating budget of the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. The FAO emphasizes the necessity of sustainable food systems, public health and education as conduits for societal, economical and developmental change. Similarly, according to the Global Fund, this $7 billion would cover nearly half of the entire additional commitment needed to the reach the Millennium Development Goal to halve global poverty by 2015. Reaching this milestone would not only improve the livelihood of Afghanistan’s rural poor, but also provide them with the tools to resist coercion.
Recognizing the opium trade as a byproduct of deeper sociopolitical issues, namely widespread poverty, would allow the United States and other Western nations to develop targeted campaigns to nip Afghanistan’s poppy problem in the bud.
– Casey Ernstes
Sources: BBC, Global Research, FAO, Seattle Times, UN, World Bank, UNICEF USA
Shanghai’s Smog Creating Health Concerns
Officials in Shanghai are holding their order that children and elderly persons remain inside their homes, since the outdoor smog levels reached dangerously high levels on Friday December 6.
The Chinese government ordered a stop to construction and for factories to cut production following the warning. Flights were delayed and cars were ordered off the roads due the thick haze reducing visibility to 150 feet in certain areas. The city’s Air Quality Index rose above 500, “beyond index” for the first time in history.
The Air Quality Index is a scale from 0-500; a warning for people to stay indoors is typically given when the index surpasses 200. Two days after the government issued warning, the air was still considered “heavily polluted” by a local monitoring center, with an index rating of 238.
Smog is formed when mono-nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds react in the presence of sunlight. The main smog-causing sources are stationary industrial emissions and automobile exhaust. China’s rapidly increasing factory production, coal-burning plants and high use of automobiles are exceeding the few government regulations that are attempting to reduce air pollutants, creating a serious health issue for Shanghai’s citizens.
Shanghai’s dangerous particulate matter (PM) was 14 times higher than the World Health Organization’s recommended daily exposure. In circumstances such as these, health is the main concern. According to an article from National Public Radio, a local resident reported having a headache, coughing, and difficulty breathing while on her way to work.
PM is a complex combination of solid and liquid particles of organic and inorganic substances suspended in the air, affecting more people than any other pollutant according to the WHO. When inhaled, PM may interfere with gas exchange inside the lungs, causing cardiovascular and respiratory diseases after chronic exposure. Outdoor air pollution contributes to an estimated 1.3 million deaths per year, with those in middle-income countries disproportionately suffering.
– Maris Brummel
Sources: Bloomberg, NPR, WHO
Sources: The Atlantic City