Posts

,

BRICS Summit 2017: Another Step to Poverty Alleviation

BRICS Summit
The BRICS nations—Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa—account for a massive 30 percent of world’s GDP and a high proportion of international growth. These nations are key players on the world stage. The annual BRICS summit has helped galvanize a wide array of infrastructure projects, trade and poverty alleviation initiatives to ensure equitable and sustainable growth. BRICS is bolstering the capacities and capabilities of rising markets by tapping into their potentials.

The New Development Bank (NDB) and Contingent Reserve Arrangement is contributing much to improving social security nets, bettering infrastructure networks and regulating governance. Each country is dedicating a fixed proportion to the BRICS Development Bank. The NDB has allocated over $1.4 billion to support four projects each in China, Russia and India. Over the course of 2017, more than $30 billion will be channeled toward supporting projects in other key realms.

Similarly, the BRICS Business Council helps strengthen cooperation among BRICS countries in e-commerce, technical development and agenda-setting.

The BRICS bloc works to integrate a number of global, national and regional development projects and agendas together, like the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals and the African Union 2063 Agenda.

BRICS countries are capitalizing on their positions to encourage trade liberalization within the bloc, especially in regards to increasing efficiency and overcoming red tape and bureaucratic weaknesses often associated with free trade.

The BRICS bloc strengthens positions of countries in Eurasia. In 2017 alone, it was reported that levels of trade between BRICS nations increased exponentially. Shipments to and from countries are reaching record heights. The growth of the manufacturing sector and e-commerce has increased exponentially.

The bloc is also working collaboratively towards safeguarding the future by securing employment in the manufacturing sector and cushioning technology.

The recent 2017 BRICS Summit held in Xiamen, China covered issues ranging from employment, commerce and finance, innovation and technology to reforms of the United Nations Security Council and improving counter-terrorism measures.

As the BRICS bloc often invites many non-BRICs members to observe annual proceedings, it could possibly lead to the inclusion of more developing countries in future. For the recent BRICS summit, China invited countries such Tajikistan, Mexico, Thailand, Kenya and Egypt. The bloc wants to expand its potential and scope in future.

However, even within BRICS nations, there are differences in aspects such as wealth distribution, growth rate and population control. China and India boast exponential growth rates, while countries such as Russia have been experiencing slower growth rates at present.

As a host to this year’s BRICS Summit, China pledged $76.4 million for a BRICS economic and technology cooperation agenda. President Xi Jinping also pledged $4 million to the NDB. China’s Belt and Road Initiative was an important part of the discourse, seeing as it has gained much traction globally since its inception.

South African President, Jacob Zuma, focused on the implementation of the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals 2030 to eradicate poverty at the 2017 BRICS Summit.

Zuma spoke about the work of the African Union (AU) in this realm. The AU recently announced the opening of the African Regional Centre. Moreover, Zuma is also confident about the progress of the 23rd Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention of Climate Change.

At the BRICS Summit, Prime Minister Narendra Modi was particularly concerned with tackling poverty and corruption, bolstering clean energy sectors, and ensuring gender parity. India recently joined the Shanghai Cooperation to ensure more social stability and economic security.

Prime Minister Modi unveiled 10 “noble commitments” concerning key aspects like counter-terrorism, cybersecurity and disaster management. The BRICS commitment could also bring India closer toward normalizing relations with China, especially after the Doklam border conflict.

Russia and India agreed to collaboratively work toward easing the War in Afghanistan. The leaders also focused on fortifying energy efficiency, tourism and improving youth exchanges, bilateral trade, and boosting investment in an integrated manner.

Furthermore, Brazilian President Michel Termer aimed to secure more foreign investment during the course of the BRICS summit this year to possibly counter Brazil’s current period of languid growth. Termer expressed his wish to channel investment toward infrastructure projects and diversifying markets.

Overall, future BRICS Summits will pave the way for pioneering global development initiatives and will be an important framework for governance and policymaking in the future, as it is essential that developing superpowers be immune to economic headwinds. It will also be the foundation for future agendas in the evolving world dynamic.

– Shivani Ekkanath

Photo: Flickr

Why Is Thailand Poor?

Why is Thailand PoorEven though Thailand is considered a development success story, it is still in the category of a developing nation. Between the 1980s and 2015, poverty in Thailand has greatly declined from 67 percent to 7.2 percent. However, the country’s growth slowed between 2005 and 2015 to an average of 3.5 percent. Currently, 10.5 percent of Thailand’s population is living below the poverty line.

Why is Thailand poor? The reason that Thailand remains poor is imbalanced development. Due to the critical poverty rate of Thailand in the 1960s, emphasis was put on industrialization to boost the economy. This industrialization caused rapid economic growth and poverty reduction, but development was not widespread. To support industrial production, resources were centralized to the capital and surrounding urban areas, thus depriving rural areas. Because of this, 80 percent of poor people living in rural areas as of 2014.

Concentration of development in urban areas means a lack of investment in rural Thailand. For example, Bangkok houses only 10 percent of the population, but it contributes more than 50 percent of Thailand’s GDP. Highlighting the inequality, rural areas have a poverty rate of 13.9 percent compared to 7.7 percent in urban areas.

In answering the question “Why is Thailand poor?” one must look at the disparity between development in urban and rural areas. Poor people living in rural areas have very limited access to public services that could help them out of poverty. To gain access, rural poor persons must be able to afford both the service and transport to urban areas.

Education is an example. Many rural poor people cannot afford education more than the six years of compulsory schooling. The enrollment rate for “tertiary education” was reported as 18 percent in rural areas compared to 39.5 percent in urban. Due to lack of education, many rural poor people are under-qualified for higher paying positions, perpetuating a vicious cycle.

In recognition of the disparity, Thailand has created a 20-year economic plan to bring the nation to developed country status. The reforms aim to bring economic stability, equal economic opportunities, competitiveness and effective government bureaucracies. To reach its goal, Thailand needs to overcome what is constraining growth in rural areas and maintain widespread growth.

Poverty in Thailand, despite its success in development, reveals the need for further research into poverty alleviation. Approaches to ending global poverty should keep in mind the complexity of the problem.

– Haley Hurtt

Photo: Flickr

Reducing Poverty in Nepal

Poverty in Nepal
Poverty in Nepal has experienced a steady decline since the 1990s. The country’s efforts to further reduce poverty will build off existing success, population growth control and using sustainable development goals to promote development.

Between 1995 and 2015, Nepal’s poverty rate declined by an estimated 2.2-3.2 percentage points each year. The national poverty rate in 1995 was 41.8%, a figure that was reduced to 21.2% in 2015. The main drivers of Nepal’s poverty decline are remittances from migration, more diverse labor income and slowed population growth.

Migration remittances increased from less than 1% to 29% of Nepal’s GDP between the late 1990s and 2014. Remittances have caused wage increases within Nepal and driven demand for non-food items and services, generating employment in more diverse industries.

Population growth control has been a main fixture of the government as a means to combat poverty in Nepal. The country’s population doubled between 1960 and 1990 and was expected to double again between 1990 and 2015. However, beginning in the 1990s, the average number of births for a Nepali woman dropped from six in the 1970s to two in 2014, slowing population growth.

Population growth still hinders progress in Nepal’s more rural regions, where the number of births has not declined. In Nepal’s mountains, hills and Terai plains regions, there is insufficient land to accommodate the livelihoods for an increasing number of people. The Nepali government is continuing to make population growth control a central tenant of its poverty reduction plans by promoting a two-child family as the norm.

While progress is underway, natural disaster hinders Nepal’s growth. The 2015 earthquake pushed 700,000 Nepalis under the poverty line. Recovery is ongoing and can appear slow. Distribution of aid is often uneven and cash grants needed for reconstruction have been distributed slowly and in small increments.

While there are areas of recovery in need of improvement, international support programs show hope for regrowth. The U.N. Development Program has implemented cash-for-work programs and supported the restoration of micro-enterprises, both of which build individual recovery and community resilience. Sustained commitment to the SDGs will facilitate earthquake recovery and continued poverty reduction in Nepal. Two main objectives of earthquake recovery are poverty eradication and gender equality, both of which align with the SDGs.

In order to promote sustained growth, Nepal must frame its commitment to the SDGs in a national context. “What works for Bolivia might not work for Nepal,” says UNDP resident representative in Nepal, Valerie Julliand. Identifying the precise ways in which the SDGs can benefit Nepali citizens will facilitate their implementation and enable further poverty reduction.

Between the Nepali government’s plans and programs enacted by international organizations, Nepal is progressing towards sustained economic growth and poverty reduction. Poverty in Nepal has experienced a steady decline in recent decades and continued commitment to earthquake recovery and the SDGs proves promising for the country’s development.

– McKenna Lux

Photo: Flickr

Germany and Its Dedication to Improving Welfare Efforts

Germany and Its Dedication to Improving Welfare Efforts

Although Germany is experiencing record-low unemployment and the economy has been improving over the years, overall poverty in Germany is increasing. Since Germany’s reunification in 1990, the poverty rate has never been higher than its current state. Ulrich Schneider — chief executive of Germany’s Equal Welfare Organization — was quoted in an article by the “Deutsche Welle” saying “Poverty has never been as high and the regional disunity has never run as deep.”

In 2013, a survey titled “Living in Europe” released results showing that 16.2 million people in Germany were victims of poverty. That astounding number makes up 20.3% of the German population. As previously stated, poverty in Germany has been increasing over the years and the statistics only support that fact. The percentage of the impoverished German population has ranged from 19.6 to 21.9 since 2008. The poverty issue in Germany has affected men and women alike, but it has affected children more than anything.

In 2014, there were an estimated 1.9 million minors growing up in impoverished households in Germany. Surprisingly, that number shot up by 52,000 in the span of one year. This horrific statistic will haunt the lives of many for years to come. Statistics show “that 57.2 percent of children between the ages of seven and 15 had been supported by basic welfare for a period of at least three years.” Anette Stein — an expert working at the Bertelsmann Foundation — knows from work experience: “The longer that a child lives on welfare, the worse the consequences are.”

The consequences of welfare are horrible because welfare-dependent children are not just affected financially, but also physically and socially. Welfare dependent children have higher chances of struggling in social situations, struggling with health issues and struggling with education.

How Germany is Trying to Appease Poverty

Schneider is aware of Germany’s current status and has proposed to appease the situation by increasing welfare rates and creating more employment opportunities. It was decided in 2015 that in order to create thousands of new jobs for poverty-stricken German citizens, a substantial amount of money would have to be spent. Andre Nahles — a German Labor Minister — stated Germany “will use 2.7 billion euros ($3 billion) from the European Social Fund, plus 4.3 billion euros from within Germany.”

This plan will create 26 different programs within Germany and run until the year 2020. The German labor industry claims that almost 40% of the money will be invested in “the promotion of social integration and the battle against poverty.”

Although Germany is currently in a poor position, their current state does not come as much of a surprise. Statisticians have reported that the European Union as a whole is in worse shape than Germany. Twenty-four point five percent of the EU’s population is facing poverty and social exclusion. Additionally, “16.7 percent of the population was at risk of poverty, 9.6 percent significantly material-disadvantaged and 10.7 percent were living in households with very low labor market participation.”

Germany has a lot of improvements to make before it can get back on track as a country, but it is attacking its problems head-on. The Germans have not shied away from improving welfare efforts and have implemented plans for progression. With Germany’s economy on the rise and the unemployment rate on the decline, it should only be a matter of time before poverty in Germany takes a turn for the better.

– Terry J. Halloran

Photo: Flickr

, ,

10 Facts About Poverty in Uzbekistan

Poverty in Uzbekistan

Uzbekistan, formally known as the Republic of Uzbekistan, is a landlocked country in Central Asia. It is widely recognized for its beautiful mosques, stunning historical architecture and vibrant cultural heritage. The country has a rich history as a key stop along the ancient Silk Road, which has left a lasting legacy in its cities, such as Samarkand, Bukhara and Khiva.

Poverty in Uzbekistan is dropping. Though rarely making headlines, the country has seen sustained economic growth in the past several years. This progress is attributed to various reforms and investments aimed at modernizing the economy and improving living standards. If trends continue, Uzbekistan is expected to become a successful, developed country free from extreme poverty in the near future. Below are 10 facts about poverty in Uzbekistan and the progress made to alleviate it.

  1. In 2023, 11% of the population of approximately 36.5 million lived below the national poverty line, a drop from 14.1% in 2013.
  2. While Uzbekistan has experienced increased urbanization in recent years, 75% of those living in extreme poverty in Uzbekistan still live in rural areas. The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) has been working to reduce poverty in rural Uzbekistan. Its four projects in the country aim to increase rural prosperity sustainably and have impacted more than 98,000 households.
  3. Child health remains a hurdle to overcome, with 13 out of every 1,000 babies dying before their fifth birthday. In comparison, only six babies die in the first year of life on average in the United States (U.S.).
  4. Poverty in Uzbekistan is contradicted by the overall economic growth of about 5.9% in the last decade.
  5. In 2011, the World Bank reclassified Uzbekistan from a low-income country to a lower-middle-income country, which indicates that the country is making sustained progress toward development.
  6. Between 2001 and 2013, real wages doubled as job prospects improved.
  7. Literacy rate, often a prerequisite for growth and poverty reduction, has risen to 100% as of 2022.
  8. Foreign trade has quadrupled in the past 15 years, helping to improve household incomes across the country.
  9. Currently, Uzbekistan is the World Bank’s third-largest client in Europe and Central Asia. The World Bank has 27 projects in the country, all of which aim to improve Uzbekistan’s agricultural sector, energy, transport, health, education, water supply and sanitation. The projects also aim to improve both urban and rural infrastructure.
  10. To further reduce poverty and improve living conditions, Uzbekistan has set a goal of becoming an industrialized, upper-middle-income country by 2030. It aims to achieve this goal by modernizing its agricultural sector, reducing its ownership of state-owned assets and enterprises and addressing restraints in the financial markets.

With steady growth and economic improvements, Uzbekistan has positioned itself to become a successful, developed nation in the near future. As these improvements continue, poverty in Uzbekistan is anticipated to decline and living standards will significantly improve across the country.

– Sara Christensen

Photo: Flickr
Updated: June 06, 2024

, ,

How Small, Simple Actions can Lead to Poverty Alleviation

How Small, Simple Actions can Lead to Poverty Alleviation
For people who live in extreme poverty and do not have access to clean water, sanitation, health services, education or regular food supplies, any form of help can make a big difference. For example, building a well can greatly improve the standards of living of a whole community. There are other affordable and simple acts that can lead to poverty alleviation.

The following three examples illustrate how even the most humble form of aid can help a community develop and advance:

1. MALAWI – William Kamkwamba: Poverty Alleviation in the Form of a Book

When Kamkwamba was 14 he decided to build an electricity-generating windmill to power his family home in the village of Masitala. After the success of the first windmill in powering four lights and two radios in his house, Kamkwamba began to build bigger windmills in order to power more houses and pump water for irrigation.

Currently, Kamkwamba runs an NGO called Moving Windmills Project. The organization is involved in multiple projects from building labs for developing farm tools to providing secondary school scholarships.

All that was needed to create the first windmill were spare parts, scrap and a rented library book. The book that began it all was “Using Energy” from the NGO-run community lending library. Something as simple as building a library and providing access to books therefore led to great improvements in Kamkwamba’s community.

It was because of a single book and an individual willing to do something that a village that had formerly run on kerosene for power was able to obtain electricity. Imagine what would be possible if someone like Kamkwamba was given access to good building materials instead of scrap from the beginning.

2. INDIA – Joe Madiath: Poverty Alleviation in the Form of Instruction

Madiath is the founder of Gram Vikas, which means “village development organization.” The organization focuses on providing water and sanitation, community health, education and renewable energy to marginalized areas in India. TED Ideas Worth Spreading describes Madiath’s programs as “helping villagers help themselves.”

One of Gram Vikas’ most important programs targets water and sanitation. Madiath says the lack of toilets and infrastructure for waste disposal are “the cause for 80 percent of the diseases in rural areas.” As such, it is the lack of clean water and sanitation that prevents poor people from gaining the level of health that will allow them to break out of poverty.

The basic idea is very simple: Better toilets will lead to better lives. The methods for turning this idea into reality are also simple. Gram Vikas organizes and helps a village to build toilets, showers, an elevated water reservoir and the piping that will take water to taps in every household.

Materials for construction include rubble, sand, cement, steel and the actual toilet seat. Most materials can be found locally and the government helps with whatever the village does not have. This means that in the end, the community covers around 60 percent of construction costs for sanitation. In other words, it is the villagers who improve their community. All they receive is training and instruction from Gram Vikas.

In the 1,200 villages that have participated in the program, 400,000 people have benefited and waterborne diseases have gone down 82 percent. This shows that something as simple as providing training and know-how to people in poverty is enough to greatly raise standards of living.

3. MEXICO – Pablo de Antuñano: Poverty Alleviation in the Form of Opportunity

Antuñano works for Suma, an NGO that searches for talent in marginalized areas of Mexico City. The organization seeks to integrate youth into theater, cinema, sports, music and art.

By enabling youth who grew up in the street to participate in movies as paid actors, Suma prevents boys and girls from joining gangs or delving into the drug world. One Suma success story is Jonathan Monroy.

Monroy told Reforma newspaper he would never have known he was a good actor if it was not for Suma’s program. He gets inspiration from his experience growing up in the streets of one of the most dangerous areas of Mexico City.

Acting gives Monroy something to be proud of as he looks forward to the future.

The three examples above show that aid does not necessarily have to take the form of large sums of money or massive construction projects. Acts as simple and humble as providing books, a running toilet or an opportunity to act in a movie can transform a person’s life for the better.

– Christina Egerstrom

Photo: Flickr

,

The Principles of Economics and Poverty

Economics_PovertyContrary to popular belief, economists are not just concerned about money. In fact, much of the study of economics is concerned with how people behave and make choices. Since the days of Adam Smith, who is widely regarded as the father of this discipline, economists have adopted various views of poverty.  Exploring the link between economics and poverty is crucial if the world is to make positive progress.

What Causes Poverty?

Economics and poverty have a long history with thought camps that diverge in many directions. Nevertheless, many economists agree that some reasons for poverty are beyond the control of individuals.

According to the more classical view of economics, an individual’s social and private characteristics could lead to lower income and a lower probability of financial growth.

For example, a single parent without adequate support would find it harder to secure a full time job than someone who has no children. Meanwhile, someone born into an environment without easy access to education would find it harder to compete in the job market later on.

Poor health, discrimination and market failures are other examples of unavoidable inequalities that may contribute to poverty.

Other theories claim that since poor people are often excluded from the social circles of the rich, they are also excluded from certain opportunities.

Networking, or forming strategic relationships to gain entry to certain markets, is critical to financial success in a majority of career fields. Since the poor are unable to network with the rich, they are effectively barred from certain lucrative jobs, thus perpetuating poverty.

More modern strands of economics believe that poverty can be linked to failings of the government. If a country’s government fails to react to a significant decline in economic growth through financial or monetary policies, or if it does not adequately fund areas such as education, then the country’s population will suffer unemployment and a lack of financial mobility.

What Should We Do?

The natures of economics and poverty makes it difficult to address inefficiencies directly and successfully. For example, evidence has shown that raising minimum wages and enforcing caps on prices may actually hurt the poor. However, there are some things that governments can do to reduce poverty rates in their countries by using the relationship between economics and poverty.

One of the best things a government can do is focus on economic growth. A country’s GDP is linked to unemployment in a relationship defined by Okun’s Law, which states that an increase in a country’s output will inevitably cause unemployment to decrease. By pursuing policy that strives for growth, a government can create jobs for its citizens.

Shocks to GDP tend to have a disproportionately negative effect on the poor. For example, children from poor families in Latin America and Africa often drop out of school to help at home during economic crises. To counter this, governments can enact policies to curb inflation and promote stability.

Governments can also focus on creating opportunities for poor citizens to build their human capital through education, work training, loans and grants. These chances at building mastery in employable skills and traits allows poorer people to compete in the job market and ultimately equalize income across the population.

The availability of information, which economists largely consider a public good, is also incredibly important. Many people are unable to access programs of job opportunities simply because they are unaware.

If citizens are poorly informed, then policies targeting poverty become ineffective. Remedies to this problem include job agencies, well advertised websites and community centers in low income areas.

Unfortunately, not all governments have the means to accomplish these things and may require aid from foreign powers.

Will There Always Be Poverty?

There are two types of poverty in the world: relative and absolute.

People who are relatively poor make a certain percentage of the average per capita income and in many countries have adequate funds.

Those who are in absolute or extreme poverty live on less than $1.90 a day. These people do not have enough income to live comfortably and therefore suffer from poor health and living conditions.

In the year 2000, the members of the United Nations set a goal to halve the absolute poverty rate by 2015. By 2010, the ratio of people living in extreme poverty was reduced from 43 percent to 21 percent.

This astounding success has caused many economists to believe that it is indeed possible to erase extreme poverty completely through continued growth and creative social and economic programs.

– Emiliano Perez

Photo: Flickr

Studio Samuel: Fighting Poverty in Ethiopia

Education_women
Education is what’s in fashion for the girls studying at Studio Samuel, a non-profit founded by New York designer, Tamara Horton. Located in Ethiopia, this organization aims to alleviate poverty and empower girls and women through training in a broad range of life skills.

According to the non-profit’s website, women in impoverished Ethiopia are living in severe health, education and career opportunity deficits. The organization notes the following:

  • Only four percent of women in these communities have received health screenings.
  • Only 16 percent of girls will advance into secondary school.
  • 64 percent of the community’s unemployed are female-identifying.
  • Trafficking and child marriage often halt young Ethiopian women’s journeys to self-reliance.

In order to combat these obstacles to gender parity and poverty alleviation, Tamara Holton founded Studio Samuel in 2012. The goal was to teach young women life skills and instill self-esteem that can help create pathways out of poverty.

The centerpiece of Studio Samuel’s work is the Training for Tomorrow program, which offers a two-year curriculum for girls, ages nine to 18, that runs in parallel to their regular schooling. The instructors pull from materials vetted by United Nations-based agencies in order to best serve the students.

According to the World Health Organization, the “Ten Core Life Skills” for success include “the abilities for adaptive and positive behavior that enable individuals to deal effectively with the demands and challenges of everyday life.” The Training for Tomorrow program teaches these abilities as a way to help girls realize their potential and avoid falling back into cycles of poverty.

The classes include everything from computer programming, a valuable job skill in the 21st century, to self-defense, a skill which Studio Samuel sees as a confidence-builder in young girls.

When founder Tamara Horton isn’t working in Ethiopia, she is thriving as a fashion designer living in New York City. She owns a shop, designs costumes for Off-Broadway shows, and is a mother to her son, Niko Samuel, for whom her non-profit was named.

She came up with the idea for Studio Samuel when she first adopted Niko from Ethiopia. In an interview with the Huffington Post, Horton said that “[t]he seed was planted the first time [she] met [Niko]. I wanted to give back in some way and after seeing the struggles that poverty places on a family, particularly the girls, it was the place to start for me.”

The organization has seen enormous success since its founding. Approximately 94 percent of students in the Training for Tomorrow program saw improvement in their academics and/or behavior within six months of enrollment. In addition, there has been a 97 percent success rate in avoiding human trafficking and child marriage amongst students.

The philosophy behind theses achievement can be described by the adage “teach a man (or woman for that matter) to fish,”. Studio Samuel believes in an “empowerment without pity” model, one that imparts skills training to women and girls, instead of offering traditional forms of charity.

As Hilawi Alemayehu, the organization’s Country Director, said in an interview with The Huffington Post, “By creating together and not giving handouts, a foundation unfolds [that] may not have existed. It builds pride and accountability and once welcomed, it is extremely impactful.”

– Jen Diamond

Photo:  Flickr

,

Ways Global Innovation Fund Tackling Poverty

Global Innovation Fund
A new investment firm called the Global Innovation Fund recently announced its first round of grants and equity investments, reports Devex, a media platform for the global development community.

In the evaluation of potential investments, says Devex, the London-based Fund focuses primarily on the projected impact on the world’s poorest. It professes a strong adherence to evidence-based programming, valuing concrete plans and results over the implausible.

The inception of the Fund, launched in December 2014, marks an increasingly popular trend of private sector firms experimenting with new business models geared toward development and poverty alleviation in underprivileged places around the world.

USAID describes the Fund’s business strategy as “a venture capital-like approach to investing in a wide range of social innovations, drawing on the success of the industry to discover and support innovative ventures that have the potential to scale across the developing world.”

This strategy bears similarities to a number of new experimental business models, such as social entrepreneurship and impact investment, which are reshaping the way the private sector and development communities think about the developing world.

According to USAID, the Fund is currently seeking innovative ideas that will both spur development and turn a profit “from a wide range of potential partners, including social enterprises for-profit firms, researchers, government agencies, non-profit organizations and others.”

Collaboration, in other words, is the new name of the game.

The Fund’s website lists numerous examples of the work they have done and the kinds of ideas they are interested in.

PoaPower, for instance, is a social enterprise designed to supply low-income consumers in off-grid Kenya with clean and affordable electricity using a pay-as-you-go system. PoaPower’s £150,000 loan from the Global Innovation Fund will support the development of this unique model, with which it aims to serve 100 to 200 households in the Mount Kenya area.

The Fund seems to show a preference for ideas that have not only positive effects for economics or finance, but also health and safety. Large-scale health problems and poverty often correlate.

On its website, the Fund announced it provided a £160,000 grant to SafeBoda, a Ugandan company that aims to curb an epidemic of road accidents by instituting an Uber-like system of safe motorbike taxis and encouraging the use of helmets.

If successful, such a venture would not only save lives, but save money for the country. According to the Global Innovation Fund’s website, over “60 percent of the surgical budget at the main Kampala hospital is spent on treating motorbike crash injuries.”

Among the Fund’s investments in medical and food security programs is Valid Nutrition, which aims to distribute a paste based on locally grown ingredients that could reduce widespread acute malnutrition. The Newborn Foundation is another organization which aims to supply poor areas with low-cost pulse oximeters that can improve the detection of neonatal infection and reduce infant mortality by an estimated 25 to 30 percent.

All of these ideas are said to be cost-effective and scalable. Most importantly, the Global Innovation Fund affirms they will “improve the lives and opportunities of millions of people around the world.”

– Joe D’Amore

Sources: Devex, Global Innovation Fund, USAID
Photo: Flickr

BRAC Graduation Model: Success in Fight Against Poverty

BRAC
Complex issues call for comprehensive solutions. The significance of this logic cannot be overstated when tackling the most multifaceted issues worldwide, such as extreme poverty. BRAC, a large Bangladeshi nonprofit organization working to support the rural poor, has recently actualized the benefits of such all-inclusive problem-solving.

In recent years, BRAC has implemented a new “graduation” program worldwide, in an effort to fight extreme poverty. BRAC’s carefully crafted approach targets the poorest households within smaller communities. Over a fixed period of time, the program provides these households with the wide-ranging set of services they need.

Beneficiaries of the program first choose from a list of productive assets, such as livestock or goods needed to start a small business. Then, the program provides appropriate training and support, life skills coaching, weekly consumption support, access to savings accounts, as well as health and information services.

The thinking behind this approach is that the most extreme cases warrant the most all-encompassing forms of aid. Providing the ultra-poor with a set of such complementary services lays the groundwork for self-employment activities. In this way, the program can additionally achieve its primary goal: increased consumption.

An MIT study analyzing the implementation of the graduation model in six different countries has evidenced the wide-ranging success of BRAC’s strategy. Randomized control trials conducted on more than 21,000 participants in Ethiopia, Ghana, Honduras, India, Pakistan, and Peru reveal the program’s long-term impact.

Results of the study showed that, across the board, increased consumption was not only achieved but also typically maintained one year after the program’s end. In some cases, gains in areas like food security and household assets remained for as long as three years after “graduation”.

Although BRAC’s graduation approach is criticized for being relatively expensive; however, positive returns were seen in five out of the six countries. In short, the program benefits outweigh the costs. In all six countries, experimenters witnessed the program bringing dramatic improvements to the lives of the ultra-poor.

BRAC prides itself in creating a program that is not only comprehensive, but also “codified, scalable, and replicable”. The study’s results certainly serve as a testament to the model’s versatile workability. In fact, groups like Heifer International, Trickle Up, and Fonkoze are currently implementing the graduation model.

By following BRAC’s lead, such organizations have taken a major step in the worldwide fight against poverty. They have followed suit in combating a deeply complex issue with an astutely comprehensive perspective.

The world’s poorest people commonly lack more than just income. Typically, the ultra-poor face challenges that have to do with health, education, and, perhaps most importantly, morale. The most effective way of breaking the poverty cycle is to acknowledge each of these moving parts by attacking from all sides.

The study’s success story helps to show policy-makers what works. The wide-ranging needs of the world’s poorest people necessitate an extensive set of tools. With time, extreme poverty could very well become a thing of the past. With this goal in mind, however, we must remember to always look at the bigger picture.

– Sarah Bernard

Sources: Humanosphere, World Bank, MIT
Photo: Erol Foundation