Archive for category: Global Poverty

Key articles and information on global poverty.

,

9 Facts about Poverty in the United States

10 Facts About Poverty in the United States
While the U.S. is one of the most advanced countries in the world, this does not exempt the nation from struggling with poverty. Issues like food insecurity and homelessness continue to pervade communities in America. Forty million people in the U.S. are living in poverty and the U.N. estimates that almost half of this number are people living in deep poverty. In the text below 10 facts about poverty in the United States are presented.

9 Facts about Poverty in the U.S.

  1. Poverty affects women and people of color disproportionately in the U.S. African Americans have the highest poverty rates of any ethnic group, at 27.4 percent. Around 45.8 percent of black children under the age of 6 are living in poverty, compared to 14.5 percent of white children of the same age.
  2. The U.S. spends only 16.2 percent of its GDP on social programs, compared to 21.3 percent that similarly developed countries do. Social programs like veteran’s benefits and unemployment compensation can make a huge difference in a country’s rates of poverty. An increased amount of spending on these programs has the potential to significantly decrease the number of people in the U.S. living in poverty.
  3. The U.S. is 36th out of 175 developed countries in rates of childhood poverty. This report considered factors like the dropout from school rates, adolescent birth rates and access to quality food. The U.S. has particularly high rates of teen pregnancy and child mortality in comparison to other developed countries.
  4. Rates of child poverty in rural areas are higher than in urban areas in more than 85 percent of states in the U.S. One of the facts about poverty in the United States that is most striking is that one in four children in rural areas in America live in poverty, compared to one in five in urban areas. Southern states have the highest rates of child poverty in the U.S.
  5. Various nonprofit organizations, such as Save the Children, are at work in the U.S. The organization works to give childhoods back to children who have been deprived of this because of their living circumstances. Save the Children has been at work in the U.S. since the Great Depression.
  6. Child poverty rates in the U.S. hit a record low in 2016, at 15.6 percent. This dip is said to be attributed to government programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), previously known as food stamps. The success of programs like SNAP proves that the U.S. should be spending more on public assistance.
  7. The U.S. has one of the largest wealth inequality gaps in the world. The wealthiest 1 percent of households in America own more than 40 percent of the nation’s wealth. In recent decades this gap has gotten even wider. This vast inequality is bad for the American economy and even more detrimental to poor households with no upward mobility.
  8. The affordable housing crisis in the U.S. contributes to high levels of homelessness, especially in major cities. Large cities with the highest living costs often have the highest levels of homelessness. Iowa and Nebraska, two of the cheapest states for housing in America, have the lowest levels of homelessness in the country.
  9. The number of homeless Americans is growing. Rates of homelessness jumped by 9 percent in 2017. The U.S. fiscal plan for 2019 has $8.8 billion of proposed budget cuts for the Department of Housing and Development, so the issue does not seem to be ameliorating in the upcoming years.

Since the U.S. is such an advanced country, issues like poverty often go ignored despite their prevalence. Many of these 10 facts about poverty in the United States are unknown by the American public. With increased awareness in the American population, the nation has the potential to learn to work together and achieve lower rates of poverty across the board.

– Amelia Merchant
Photo: Unsplash

,

What Role Can the Private Sector Play in Poverty Alleviation?

What Role Can the Private Sector Play in Poverty Alleviation?
The private sector constitutes a large portion of wealth and job creation in most countries, rendering it a powerful social tool that can be used to alleviate poverty and promote the wellbeing of the general public. Unfortunately, historically, this tool has been used to promote the interests of private actors.

The interests of private actors and the interests of the public have often come in contradiction, particularly as the world has globalized. However, the alignment of public and private interests is possible when you consider that those living in extreme poverty represent a largely untapped and mismanaged resource for a lot of private actors. When determining what role the private sector can play in poverty alleviation, it must be understood that poor corporate labor practices have contributed greatly to global poverty and proper practices have the ability to reverse it.

Corporate Social Responsibility

Those living in poverty, particularly extreme poverty, are often surrounded by economic deprivation, including unemployment, low wages and a lack of investment from private actors. Corporate social responsibility is one of the many avenues that can be taken to bring the structures and goals of the private sector in line with the needs of the public.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a business model of private accountability to the public, meaning that businesses and corporations incorporate practices that create positive social impacts domestically and throughout the world. CSR is a broad concept, allowing it to manifest itself in several different ways. There is certainly room for error in the implementation of CSR practices, but when carried out effectively, CSR can serve as a sharp tool for alleviating poverty while also increasing a corporation’s bottom line.

Patagonia: A Model for Effective Corporate Social Responsibility

The apparel industry is one of the most competitive in the private sector. With that competition, there has historically been a “race to the bottom.” Organizations have looked to manufacture in places with the most lenient regulations on worker rights, wages and environmental waste. These places, non-coincidentally, tend to be the most impoverished. However, this has not been the case within Patagonia.

Patagonia has been integrating CSR into its business model since its conception in 1973. The corporation operates in several nations around the world, with portions of its manufacturing happening in Sri Lanka, Mexico, Thailand and more. The company has prioritized its Fair Trade Certifications, paying a premium on top of the costs that they already incur. This money goes straight into the hands of factory workers who get to vote on its use. This not only ensures that Patagonia’s workers are well compensated but also that the most pressing needs of the community are met.

At the Hirdaramani Mihilia CKT Factory, workers decided to spend their premium on a daycare. For many women in the factory, employment would not be possible without it. The piece of mind workers get from knowing that their kids are not only safe but progressing in their development, allows for more diligent and quality work in the factory.

What Role Can the Private Sector Play in Poverty Alleviation?

Fair Trade USA CEO, Paul Rice, stated that the organization has to “prove that fair trade is good for business.” Patagonia is one of its partner companies that is doing just that for them. Patagonia has more Fair Trade Certified styles than any other apparel brand, and it is expanding every year. In 2017, 30 percent of its product was fair trade certified, indicating that there is plenty of room for further expansion, but also that expanding the scale of CSR practices can be sustainable for business as well—even when its competitors do not engage in the same practices.

Consumer awareness of the Fair Trade Certified seal has almost doubled to 63 percent since 2008. As the world has globalized and the reality of billions of people living on less than two dollars a day has become common knowledge, consumers have begun to pay greater attention to how their goods are made. Corporate responsibility is becoming the standard, and as consumers, governments and most importantly corporations themselves continue to promote and enforce that standard, the number of exploited and impoverished workers will fall.

Today, transparency and responsibility translate into dollars. More consumers are willing to pay for goods that they know were made ethically, employee turnover is lowest at corporations that integrate CSR and workers in developing countries perform better when their wages and standard of living are adequate. More than 1,250 corporations have recognized this to be true and that number is sure to increase in the coming years. So what role can the private sector play in poverty alleviation? The answer is, quite simply, a large one and one that can also benefit their business as well as the public.

– Julius Long
Photo: Flickr

Prison Systems in Developing Nations: Basic Human Rights

Prison Systems in Developing Nations: Poverty Compromises Basic Human Rights
The global imprisonment rate has surpassed the rate of the world population growth, increasing by nearly 20 percent from 2000 to 2015. In 2016, the Institute for Criminal Policy Research estimated the global prison population to be around 10.35 million.

The Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (CCPCJ) is a governing body within The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). In 2016, the CCPCJ reported that, out of the 198 countries on which there is data, prisons in 114 of them were filled past capacity. Of these, 78 had occupancy rates over 120 percent with 52 of those being over 150 percent. In the Philippines, where overcrowding is the worst, the occupancy level is over 450 percent.

The Issue of Overcrowded Prisons in Developing Nations

Overcrowding disproportionately affects the prison systems in developing nations, with the highest rates in Central America, South Asia and East, Central and West Africa. In 2013, The European Court of Human Rights ruled that the conditions created by overcrowding qualified as torture and/or inhuman treatment. Prisoners in overcrowded facilities are especially vulnerable.

In 2017, The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights listed violence and abuse as by-products of overcrowding, and evidence suggests that the consequences are actually much more extensive. Generally, prisoners experience high rates of mental illness and premature death. Unsanitary prison conditions make them more vulnerable to infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and HIV with prisoners being five times more likely than the general public to contract the latter.

Research by The U.S. Department of State and Penal Reform International (PRI) links overcrowding to malnutrition, lack of clean water and sanitation, inadequate health care, lack of accommodation for the disabled, mistreatment of prisoners, corruption of prison staff and insufficient legal protection; all of which contribute to even lower states of mental health. Those who are poor or of a national, ethnic, religious or linguistic minority are the most afflicted since they are both more likely to be imprisoned and given longer sentences.

The Effects of Poverty on the Prison Systems

According to the CCPCJ, prison systems in developing nations experience higher rates of overcrowding despite having much lower imprisonment rates than high-income nations, and only in part due to lower capacities. Poverty and instability leave these countries lacking in the resources necessary to address critical situations. In their 2018 analysis of global prison trends, PRI also cites outdated legislation, corruption, and insufficiently trained staff as barriers to addressing shortcomings.

The CCPCJ measures corruption by the percentage of survey respondents within a given country who say they have paid a bribe within the past 12 months. In their 2013 data, fewer than 10 percent of respondents in high-income countries had paid bribes to any public officials. In low-income countries, more than 50 percent had bribed a judiciary official, and more than 60 percent had bribed a member of the police. PRI additionally reported instances of family members bribing prison staff to ensure that prisoners receive basic provisions, including food.

Similarly, high percentages of pre-trial detainees within the prison population of a developing country indicate systemic flaws that slow the processing of cases. For example, The World Prison Brief estimated in early 2017 that 71.1 percent of Haitian prisoners were still awaiting trial. In Liberia in 2012, The U.S. Department of State reported cases in which pre-trial detention lasted longer than the maximum possible sentence for the alleged crime.

Improvements Being Made to Reduce Overcrowding

The latest data from the CCPCJ shows progress in that the rates of pre-trial detainees had decreased in Africa and Asia between 2003 and 2014. In this period, Africa’s rate was reduced from around 45 percent to 38 percent, and Asia’s fell to 40 percent from just over 50 percent.

The UNODC is at the forefront of international initiatives that foster such progress. The Office strives to uphold The U.N. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and works to ensure legal safeguards that protect their rights. Prison reform projects address non-custodial alternatives to imprisonment, flaws in criminal justice legislation, inadequate training of prison staff, prisoner reintegration into society and poor prison conditions.

With the help of the UNODC, countries have begun to more strategically and comprehensively address corruption within their criminal justice systems, with 17 of them adopting national anti-corruption policies in 2015 alone. In the same year, The U.N. General Assembly adopted the Sustainable Development Goals. With these goals in place, the development of prison systems in developing nations will remain a priority until at least 2030.

– Ashley Wagner
Photo: Flickr

,

Living in Extreme Poverty: A Global Decline

Living in Extreme Poverty: A Global Decline
Less than 40 years ago, close to 42 percent of the world’s population was living in extreme poverty. People living under these conditions often cannot buy basic necessities like food and do not have access to clean water. They face starvation and disease on a daily basis.

However, in 2018, the world has become a better place, slowly but surely. By today’s reckoning, fewer people than ever before are living in extreme poverty, and it is something to celebrate. Though there is still a lot of work to be accomplished, the fact of the matter is that extreme poverty is declining everywhere.

Decades of Extreme Poverty Decline

The current standard of determining extreme poverty is whether someone is living on less than $1.90 per day. There is often debate over whether extreme poverty is truly ending or if contemporary standards for determining poverty rates are too low. Current research has determined that extreme poverty rates are declining no matter what amount per day is being used. 

Despite the negative effects of the 2008-2009 financial crisis on the global economy, the world community has made significant strides towards ending extreme poverty. A report published by The World Bank in 2016 found that from 1981 to 1990, the percentage of those living in extreme poverty had declined from 42 percent to 35 percent.

The later study published that from 1990 to 2013, the number of people living in extreme poverty had reduced to 10.7 percent, meaning that, in those two decades, about 1.1 billion people around the world clambered out of extreme poverty.  

Between 2008 and 2013, The World Bank found that earnings increased by 40 percent for those living in extreme poverty. And just between 2012 and 2013, the number of those living in extreme poverty dropped by 100 million people. After 2016, that number lowered to 9.1 percent.

Crucial Steps to Reducing Extreme Poverty

Using data identified as beneficial in lowering a country’s poverty rate, The World Bank boiled their findings down to six crucial steps that a country could make to lower their poverty rates.

  • Universal health coverage
  • Universal access to quality education
  • Making cash transfers to poor families
  • Rural infrastructure — especially roads and electrification
  • Progressive taxation
  • Early childhood development and nutrition

The World Bank study noted that the most significant declines in extreme poverty came from the Pacific Islands and East Asia. Approximately 50 percent of those still living in extreme poverty today will be found in Sub-Saharan Africa. This region of the world will require the highest amount of foreign aid and relief efforts looking into the future.

How To Help

Those individuals who are fortunate enough to live in areas of the world predominantly above the poverty line can do their part by contacting their representatives at both the local and national level. Furthermore, continued support through foreign aid is crucial to the ongoing development of regions that need help the most. Today, it’s estimated that 775 million people still live below the poverty line, often on less than $1.90 a day. The global effort is getting closer to eliminating that number every day.

– Jason Crosby
Photo: Flickr

, ,

Activism’s Impact on Poverty Around the World

Activism's Impact on Poverty Around the World
A lot of this world’s success in bridging social and economic gaps between people can be accredited to the activists and advocates all around the world. Every day, there are millions of people working endlessly to improve societies by bringing awareness to global issues by educating, protesting and speaking out.

According to The American Press Institute, activists are more likely to be successful in their careers and personal lives because they are more engaged with the news and they use social media to stay informed and take action. Activism is a necessity in not only improving society but improving our social lives as well; without social connections, activism becomes harder to achieve. To learn more about the significance of activism, below are three occasions that activism has had an impact on poverty.

Three Times Activism Has Had an Impact on Poverty

ONE. Cofounded by Bono, Bobby Shriver and many other activists, ONE is a campaign with nearly nine million people from around the globe fighting extreme poverty and treatable diseases. ONE stands against poverty through various actions, including lobbying world leaders, creating grassroots campaigns, protesting and educating people all around the world, making ONE one of the most successful campaigns worldwide. To top it off, ONE is operated almost entirely on foundations, individual philanthropists and businesses instead of using government and public funding.

ONE’s impact on poverty:

  • It has raised $37.5 billion to fight health initiatives and diseases such as AIDS, TB and Malaria.
  • It has secured legislation in The U.S., E.U. and Canada to fight corruption and assure that money from oil and gas revenues be used towards fighting poverty.
  • It has increased advocacy and developmental assistance globally by $35.7 billion between 2005 and 2014.
  • It helped pass U.S. legislation on the Electricity Africa Act of 2016 by having hundreds of thousands of ONE members email and call Congress as well as sign petitions and write letters for four months.

Global Giving. Global Giving is the largest crowdfunding community in the world, bringing together nonprofit organizations, donors and companies in all around the world to help people everywhere access the right tools they need to be successful. Global Giving aims to help other organizations that also fight poverty and such by allowing donors to use the Global Giving site to donate to other charities.

In February 2000, Mari Kuraishi and Dennis Whittle, founders of Global Giving, gathered together more than 300 participants from different backgrounds with a mutual goal of changing the world for the better. 

Global Giving’s impact on poverty:

  • In 2002, Global Giving created a new funding platform that resulted in 763,640 donors, $324 million in donations to charities and 19,368 projects funded across 170 countries.
  • It has improved funding for more than 69 percent of Global Giving’s partners.
  • In the last year, Global Giving provided an extra $13.6 million in funds to its partners that had made improvements.

Poor People’s Campaign. Organized by Martin Luther King Jr. and carried out by Ralph Abernathy after King’s assassination, the main focus of The Poor People’s Campaign was to have economic justice in America, giving everyone what they need to survive.

After King’s death, thousands traveled to and built “Resurrection City,” made up of 3,000 wooden tents where they camped out until they were evicted after 42 days. Resurrection City was intended to focus on fighting poverty and bridging social and economic gaps between “The People.” According to The Smithsonian, although the camp was eventually shut down, the camp brought awareness to global issues and had a significant impact on America.

Poor People’s Campaign’s impact on poverty:

  • Food programs were started in 1,000 counties.
  • A food program for mothers and children had been put in process by the end of the year.
  • Congress devoted $243 million to expand and improve school lunches for poor children.

Make A Change

Activism is vital in making social and economic changes because it requires people to act. Without acting and being the change in the world that we want to see, very little is accomplished. It all starts within. As Michael Jackson said, “if you want to make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and make a change.”

– Kristen Uedoi
Photo: Flickr

Internet Censorship in Russia and China

8. Internet Censorship in Russia and China
Internet access has become a vital source of information and awareness around the world in the past decade. While more than 50 percent of the world’s population remains without internet access, countries with large populations such as India and China have a massive and growing user base. 

While theoretically advancing their countries not only technologically but politically and socially as well, government restrictions on the right to post or access certain types of information can seriously curtail these benefits. Technology has long been a catalyst for change; however, when restricted, technology can quickly become a tool used for the suppression of human rights such as freedom of expression, free speech and freedom of assembly. 

Studies have determined three key points for promoting internet access across the globe: foreign investment, a focus on the community rather than individual access and no government monopolization of the newly emerging market. Today, government monopolization has the potential to become synonymous with internet censorship. 

Internet Censorship in China

China has more than 750 million internet users, and every user deals with internet censorship. Known as the ‘Great Firewall,’ China’s series of internet filters is one of the most comprehensive systems in the world, restricting citizens’ access to hundreds of internet sites.

Prior to 2017, many internet users in China were able to circumvent the Great Firewall using Virtual Private Networks, or VPNs, which provide users with browsing capabilities private from their internet providers. However, within the past year, the number of VPNs able to slip through China’s restrictions has decreased substantially. 

Government monopolization of news outlets in China has led to internet censorship, sometimes to the point of misinformation. In 2017, new legislation in China required all online news sources to be fully monitored by government-approved editors and writers. This enables the government to block legitimate news stories that run counter to the government’s position while also allowing them to push misinformation and propaganda through news websites, giving them complete control of the country’s narrative. 

Internet Censorship in Russia

Russia, another country suffering from serious internet censorship, followed closely behind China in banning VPNs so as to further restrict access to web pages not approved by the government. Without their own Great Firewall, Russia focused on banning specific sites. In 2017, approximately 244 web pages were blocked every day. 

Beyond blocking individual sites, or even entire categories such as news outlets, both Russia and China enforce severe internet censorship on individual citizens. For example, in newly enforced restrictions, China requires internet users to register for online communication sites with their real names. This enables them to hold individuals accountable for what is said in previously private settings. 

These restrictions are typically put in place under the guise of stemming extremist speech, but they can be, and often are, used to block or discourage any speech that the government wishes to suppress. Russian citizens have seen a drastic increase in threats, physical assaults and imprisonment associated with internet censorship on the individual level. Writing, posting or sharing information and opinions on topics such as Russian-occupied Crimea, religious freedom or Syria can result in up to 12 years in jail. 

Censorship: A Human Rights Violation

Those dealing with internet censorship in both Russia and China are in fact experiencing human rights violations. In China, freedom of expression in one of the last safe places—online communities—is closely monitored and used against individuals; in Russia, freedom of expression has become unsafe and restricted to a point worse than anything seen since the Soviet era.  

While technology is often viewed as a large component of a nation’s ability to improve the lives of its citizens, internet censorship creates an environment of control and misinformation. More vital to the wellbeing of people and, by extension, the country they live in, are necessary freedoms such as freedom of expression and speech.

Through the restrictions Russia, China and other countries place on their citizens access to information on the internet, governments have the opportunity to trap people in a cycle of misinformation and silence, thereby negating the once-positive effects of internet access. 

Overcoming Internet Censorship

Citizens in these restrictive countries are growing stronger in their opposition to this violation of their rights. In Russia, the number of protests concerning freedom of speech, religion and assembly has continued increasing. In China, many citizens continue to find ways to circumvent the Great Firewall.

The freedom of internet access has the potential to overtake the negative effects of internet censorship, so long as individuals, communities and countries continue to work towards honesty and open communication across the globe. Simply through our knowledge of internet censorship in countries such as Russia and China, the growing issue of human rights violations is being more openly discussed, and thereby, empowering many people in those countries to continue to fight against the oppression.

– Anna Lally
Photo: Flickr

Poverty: A Leading Cause of the Global Orphan Crisis

global orphan crisis
In 2015, there were 140 million orphans worldwide: 61 million in Asia, 52 million in Africa, 10 million in Latin America and the Caribbean, and 7.3 million in Central Asia and Eastern Europe. This constitutes a global orphan crisis and poverty is the leading cause.

The UN defines orphans as children who have lost either one or both parents. The vast majority of orphans still have a living parent and while many orphans live in orphanages, some still live with another family member. The UNICEF and numerous international organizations began classifying children with only one parent as orphans in the 1990s when the HIV/AIDS pandemic spread and began killing millions of parents around the world.

How Poverty Creates Orphans

HIV/AIDS is much more prevalent in impoverished countries than in developed countries. Single parents living with HIV/AIDS in developing countries may not have access to proper healthcare and subsequently may struggle to care for themselves and their children. Losing a parent can negatively impact a child’s access to food, shelter, education and healthcare. Losing the income of a parent, particularly that of the primary breadwinner, can be disastrous for a family and leave the living parent without enough money to care for his or her children.

Many parents living in poverty are unable to care for their children as they cannot afford food, clothing, shelter, healthcare and education. They are not able to adequately provide for their children, which leaves some to resort to placing their children in orphanages in the hopes that they will have better lives.

However, children in orphanages do not typically fare better than children raised in loving homes. Institutionalization can have many adverse impacts on a child. Orphanages often do not have enough caregivers to provide children with the amount of attention and love that children in healthy families receive.

Children are more likely to experience neglect or abuse when they grow up in institutions. They may experience malnutrition and stunted growth. They are also more likely to experience delayed development and behavioral problems. This stems from the trauma of their parents dying, leaving their birth families and from the lack of permanence in their lives.

How to Solve the Global Orphan Crisis

UNICEF and numerous organizations including Save the Children, World Without Orphans and Orphan Outreach argue that orphanages are not the best solution for children. They instead encourage governments to support families and communities that care for orphans and allocate less funding to orphanages.

The costs of running orphanages are typically much higher than what is needed to support families struggling to provide for their children. Not only is it less expensive, it is also more beneficial for the children to be raised in their family or community rather than in an institution. For children who have no parents, UNICEF and organizations that focus on the global orphan crisis promote foster care and adoption.

Countries all over the world have been following this advice, establishing family-style care centers and foster-care services and reuniting children with family when possible. Since 1989, the number of children in Romanian orphanages has dropped from 100,000 to about 7,000. Bulgaria’s orphan population decreased from 7,500 in 2011 to 1,200 today. Out of 460,000 orphans in China, only 88,000 now live in orphanages. Since 2012, all but 235 of Rwanda’s 3,323 children in orphanages have been reunited with their families, adopted or placed in foster families.

These numbers show great progress. However, the global orphan crisis is still a serious problem. Millions of children are still living in orphanages. To give these children a better chance to thrive, governments and private organizations around the world must support family-care. In addition, governments can provide medical care to areas with high HIV/AIDS prevalence rates, helping parents living with the disease to care better for their children.

Programs that pull families and communities out of poverty will help reduce the number of parents who send children to orphanages. Poverty alleviation efforts have a crucial role to play in relieving the global orphan crisis.

– Laura Turner
Photo: Flickr

Hurricane Maria Recovery Efforts in Puerto Rico: Then and Now

Puerto Rico
On September 20, 2017, tragedy struck the island territory of Puerto Rico with the landfall of Hurricane Maria. The people living there were faced with many consequences from the category 4 storm, including the temporary closure of schools and a cost of damage reaching $94 billion.

In the midst of an economic recession, this disaster left many poverty-stricken families without the means to survive. As the storm passes its one-year anniversary, Hurricane Maria recovery efforts in Puerto Rico are still in full force, and progress is being made each day.

The Initial Response

With sustained winds at 155 miles per hour along with catastrophic flooding, several trees, cell towers and homes were uprooted during the hurricane, causing a loss of electricity and lack of clean water or food. The initial response by The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was criticized. They faced a particularly difficult set of problems with hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, as well as wildfires in California. The organizational fatigue resulted in specific flaws in the preparation for hurricane season in Puerto Rico and the failure of having adequate supplies in the area.

FEMA emptied 80 percent of its Puerto Rico-based Caribbean Distribution Center in response to Hurricane Irma, landing just weeks before Maria. However, despite the lack of resources available, FEMA, along with local first responders, the government of Puerto Rico, The Department of Defense, The U.S. Coast Guard and many others began recovery efforts in Puerto Rico, providing food, water, first aid and other life-saving supplies. Furthermore, FEMA activated its “surge capacity force” with more than 640 federal employees temporarily leaving their jobs to support the efforts.

Recovery Through the Months

A month after Hurricane Maria hit, 80 percent of the island was without power and 30 percent was without drinking water. However, FEMA’s response efforts continued, becoming the largest and longest commodity delivery mission in the agency’s history. The agency provided 17 million gallons of potable water and 72 million liters of bottled water the months following.

More than 60 nongovernmental organizations and government partners were on the ground assisting less than a month after the tragedy. The Red Cross developed a recovery plan to assist with the most urgent requests, focusing on four key aspects- access to power, access to clean water, livelihood restoration and community health. With many families losing their homes and livelihoods because of income-generating crops being destroyed by the storm, The Red Cross aimed to help citizens restore their jobs and become more self-sufficient through microgrants to small businesses and training in agriculture and home reconstruction.

Hurricane Maria Recovery Efforts in Puerto Rico Today

On August 28, 2018, the catastrophic death toll was 2,975. This count makes Hurricane Maria one of the deadliest hurricanes in U.S. history and increases the pain each citizen continues to feel as a result. Though the community endures the heartbreak of Hurricane Maria every day, the progress since the tragedy has shown tremendous hope.

The island’s power authority says more than 95 percent of the population has restored electricity. All 68 hospitals are open, and efforts are being made to provide temporary facilities for the remaining damaged health clinics. More than 1,843 generators have been installed, and about 4,200 power line workers are working to repair transmission and distribution lines for the areas that have had an inconsistent power supply.

As the territory recuperates and works towards attracting tourism again, the citizens have expressed much resilience and hope. Though this may sound like a tragedy come and gone, the Hurricane Maria recovery efforts in Puerto Rico will reflect through each citizen every day.

– Beth Dowdy

Photo: Flickr

, ,

The Global Health Council Advances International Health Programs

Global Health
On August 2018, The Global Health Council welcomed the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) Extension Act of 2018 by the House of Representatives. This legislation reauthorizes PEPFAR for 5 years and is an example of bipartisan support for ending the HIV/AIDS epidemic and was sponsored by Representatives Barbara Lee (D-CA), Karen Bass (D-CA), Ed Royce (R-CA), Chris Smith (R-NJ), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), and Eliot Engel (D-NY).

Since 2003, PEPFAR has increased the likelihood of an AIDS-free world by providing more than 13.3 million people around the world with HIV treatments. This is but one example of The Global Health Council’s efforts to work with policymakers and community stakeholders to improve health worldwide.

What Is The Global Health Council?

Global Health Council is a nonprofit membership organization in The U.S. that identifies priority global health problems and reports them to an international and domestic audience. Formed in 1972 and originally called The National Council for International Health, The GHC’s primary intention is to ensure that all who strive to improve global health have the resources they need to do so. The initiatives and programs for which The Global Health Council advocates are funded primarily through membership dues, grants, and sponsorship funding.

Danielle Heiberg, Senior Manager, Policy & Advocacy of Global Health Council told The Borgen Project that The Global Health Council contributes to the implementation of health programs worldwide by supporting its members, who, in turn, work to implement the necessary programs. “Specifically, GHC provides its members with key resources, advocates on their behalf and amplifies their work through its varied communications channels,” Heiberg told The Borgen Project.

GHC is a membership-oriented organization that offers key stakeholders a platform for coordinated global health advocacy. Membership is offered to global health organizations and to individual global health professionals. Members receive important benefits, such as “high-level delegations and networking opportunities,” according to Heiberg. By creating a platform for the unification of global health issues and using the power of collaboration and collective action, The GHC uses advocacy to advance international health programs and policies, such as PEPFAR.

What Does The Global Health Council Do?

Since its inception, The GHC has worked towards advocating for strong global health policies, organizing and mobilizing stakeholders across geographic regions and improving health worldwide by building support. Although The GHC represents a range of global health issues, according to Heiberg, it makes global health security, global health financing, and health systems strengthening” a priority.

In addition to its current initiatives, The GHC’s efforts to advance global healthcare programs are noted in its organized calendar of events. The Global Health Council promotes awareness of global health issues by sharing news via social media, a bi-weekly newsletter, its website and by hosting events. “GHC also meets with U.S. Congressional staff and other government offices to advocate for sound policy and investments,” Heiberg said.

Most recently, The GHC has worked with the global health community to ensure there are U.S. investments going toward global health initiatives to have the maximum impact. The organization intends to implement and maintain a successful global health program by publishing join global health recommendations, promoting member or partner grassroots campaigns and consolidating global health funding.

“With the current administration placing less of an emphasis on foreign assistance, demonstrating how these investments and policies not only save lives around the world but also benefit Americans is crucial,” stated Heiberg. If organizations such as the Global Health Council continue to advocate for international health programs and policies, like PEPFAR, there is hope for improved health worldwide.

– Kara Roberts

Photo: Flickr

,

How Public Art Fights Global Poverty

Ars gratia artis“Ars gratia artis” the classicist may shout—“art for art’s sake!” Yet, there is often no way to divorce many pieces of art from the function and politics that they serve. When looking at art, “art for art’s sake” often rings false. This is particularly the case for many pieces of public art designed with the intention of raising awareness for a certain issue. Being open and receptive to this issue is often how public art fights global poverty.

Public Art and Communication

As a means of spreading awareness, public art is exceptional. Public art is often large, accessible and easily observed; its public nature proves distinctly advantageous in comparison to private art hidden away in homes or museums. Public art in cities with sizeable populations and heavy foot traffic has the potential to be seen by millions of people, such as the case for New York’s Public Art Fund, which exhibited Ai Weiwei’s “Good Fences Make Good Neighbors.”

The Public Art Fund’s mission is to bring to New York’s “broad audience” work on an “international scope and impact.” In other words, The Public Art Fund means to share important works of art with a large number of people often to raise awareness of certain issues.

On display from March to October 2018 is Yinka Shinobare’s “Wind Sculpture,” which addresses the movement of people, including the artist, whose childhood was split between England and West Africa across space and time. The piece asks empathy of its audience and for them consider the vast experiences of migrants around the world, an important statement amidst a global refugee crisis. “Wind Sculpture” offers viewers the chance to look at movement, using the wind as an adept metaphor for humanity. Thus, public art fights global poverty through its aspirational tone.

Another major piece of public art, Yoko Ono’s “Wish Tree”, allows passersby in various cities to share their aspirations for the future by attaching them to the branches of the eponymous tree. Themes emerge from the messages dangling from these trees: hope for peace and happiness and an overall sense of equality and camaraderie among people. Public art offers the chance to reflect on one’s hopes for the world and inspires the fight against global poverty.

Public Artists Sending A Message

Of course, as Banksy and The Guerrilla Girls have shown, it may be the case that public art fights global poverty in a more confrontational way. The Guerrilla Girls, active since the 1980s, have used street installations and posters to tackle political and social issues around the world often through clandestine means. They projected criticism of The Whitney Museum right on the side of the museum in 2015. Meanwhile, Banksy is an internationally renowned street artist. His art is noted for being controversial, but frequently addresses human rights issues and political corruption.

Perhaps one of the best examples of public art working as a form of global poverty advocacy is, however, The Water Tank Project, which is an exhibition using the water tanks above New York City to raise awareness of international water issues. The project also provides a platform both for emerging artists as well as New York public school students. It coincided with the founding of the “Trace the Tap” educational campaign, which provides a curriculum to teach students about water through ecological, social and economic perspectives among others. And, of course, the public art project features some incredibly beautiful murals decorating the walls of New York’s water tanks.

In a 3-year Gallup study, aesthetics such as public art and social spaces were found to be integral to community building and community attachment. This affirms the importance of public art. Moreover, with the rise of sustainable art, and with the shifting nature of international politics and the refugee crisis, there is a need for more public art. Public art fights global poverty, and, thus, it is a mainstay of urban development and U.S. culture.

– William Wilcox
Photo: Flickr