Poverty Alleviation and A Sustainable Environment: Two Strands of the Same Thread
Over the past several decades rapid population growth and production (industrial and agricultural) has led to extreme inequality and destruction. The United Nations 1998 Human Development Report reveals that human-induced climate change and activities have resulted in mass species extinction, deforestation, rampant spread of disease and catastrophic natural disasters (UNHDR, 1998). Simultaneously, as this injustice is imposed on the earth by a relatively small proportion of the population, drastic inequalities are forced upon the majority of our fellow citizens. In fact, 20 percent of the world’s richest people account for 86 percent of private consumption compared to the 1.3 percent consumed by the poorest 20 percent (UNHDR, 1998). To articulate this point further, note that there are 1 billion people who suffer from chronic hunger while 1.2 billion are obese (Shah, 2005). The gap between the affluent and the destitute exists largely because the appropriation of our planet’s natural wealth is vastly uneven. The wealthiest people utilize most of the world’s resources, while the poorest receive no compensation for their exclusion from them (Pogge, 208). So the question remains; how is it that this elite group is able to claim the world’s wealth, do with it as they chose, and leave the rest struggling to survive? The Millennium Development Goals were drafted as a roadmap to “eradicate extreme poverty and hunger” as well as “ensure environmental sustainability” by 2015 (2002). In order to meet such targets and reduce the gap between excess and deprivation regarding the environment and social justice, there must be immediate relief for heavily indebted poor countries (HIPCs), changes in environmental infrastructure (mainly sanitation and water access) in developing nations and a redistribution of natural resources among the world’s population.
The debt crisis facing the developing world is unjust and, according to economist Jeffery Sachs, should have been relieved years ago. In The End of Poverty Sachs states, “for at least twenty years we have known that HIPCs are unable to repay their debts, or at least do so and achieve the MDGs at the same time” and he goes on to say that the debts should have simply been canceled long ago (Sachs, 280). Excessive debt burden has made it problematic for some nations to survive let alone focus on sustainable development or environmental infrastructure. Quite often developing countries are responsible for paying debt services in amounts that exceed national spending on education and health care (Sachs, 280). In order to pay these excessive arrears, usually accumulated by previous dictators and oppressors, many developing nations are forced to deplete their natural resources (Shah, 2005). Because the government is unable to provide support, poor rural families often have no choice but to overuse the natural resources they have at their disposal. This results in environmental degradation, further increasing the limitations on their means of survival (IFAD). The governments and inhabitants of HIPCs are forced to choose between immediate relief efforts and long-term environmental sustainability. Sachs argues that rich countries should have given poor countries grants not loans and it is time for the debt burdens of the heavily indebted poor countries to be “canceled outright as part of the Millennium Goals-based poverty reduction strategies” (Sachs, 281) in order for them to focus their efforts on poverty eradication and sustainable development.
The 2006 United Nations Human Development Report states that 1.1 billion people in developing nations do not have adequate access to water and 2.6 billion lack basic sanitation (UNDHR, 2006). As a result, 1.4 million children will die each year and nearly half of all people living in a developing country will suffer from a health problem caused by either sanitation or water deficit (UNICEF). In order to have safe water for consumption, women and children often spend many hours of their day retrieving it. Clean, safe water near or in the home would allow many children to attend school and women to spend more time generating an income (UNHDR, 2006). Currently one third of the world’s population lives in either “water-scarce or water-short” areas. Population growth and climate change is threatening to raise that number to nearly one half in the next couple decades, yet it is not over population that is responsible for the global water shortage (Shah, September 2007). Eighty-five percent of water is consumed by 12 percent of the world’s population, and those 12 percent do not live in developing nations (Barlow). Environmental infrastructure in the form of water and sanitation (when comparing developing and developed nations) shows a significant inequality. The disparities must be addressed when attempting to alleviate poverty and secure a sustainable environment (The World Bank, 2).
Billions of people are born into a world where all resources are “owned” by someone else therefore no matter how hard they work, they will never be able to acquire a share of the world’s wealth (Pogge, 208). While natural resources can be a means of generating revenue for development in a nation, they are often only used to generate income for wealthy, oppressive leaders rather than the nation’s poor citizens. According to Harvard Professor Stephen Marks, quite often “the exports of the natural resources and commodities are distributed to countries when the commodity is needed in the country that is producing it” (Marks). Developing countries are much more dependent on natural resources as assets than are rich countries, making them more vulnerable to environmental changes and destruction. A recent study found that poor rural households derived 9-26 percent of their income from natural resources, while rich household derived only 1-4 percent (The World Bank, 2). Over the past two decades, environmental degradation has furthered the level of poverty and food insecurity for many developing nations (Shah, February 2007). In his book World Poverty and Human Rights, Thomas Pogge declares:
The global poor get to share the burdens resulting from the degradation of our natural environment while having to watch helplessly as the affluent distribute the planet’s abundant natural wealth amongst themselves (Pogge, 209).
Unable to meet their most basic needs, the poorest people endure extreme deprivation while the luxuries of the affluent are fulfilled with ease. Affluent states are violating a “negative duty of justice” when they deny the poor their right to a “proportional resource share” (Pogge, 209).
Environmental degradation and extreme poverty are two of the most urgent global issues mankind has created and therefore must attempt to solve. These constructs are often discussed as separate conditions, yet they are inextricably linked and an attempt to solve one must involve the other. In order for both environmental and social justice to be achieved and for the Millennium Development Goals to be met, we must all realize the interconnectedness of humanity and the earth.
References
Barlow, Maude (2001.) “Water as Commodity—The Wrong Prescription,” The Institute for Food and Development Policy, Backgrounder, Summer 2001, Vol. 7, No. 3)
“Combating Environmental Degradation”. IFAD. www.ifad.org.
Human Development Report 1998. “Consumption for Human Development”. UNHDR. www.hdr.undp.org
Human Development Report 2006. “Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis”. UNHDR. www.hdr.undp.org
Marks, Stephen. “Bilateral and Multilateral Approaches to Human Rights in Development and Development Aid,” Harvard University, April 13, 2009.
Millennium Development Goals (2002). UNDP. www.undp.org/mdg
Pogge, Thomas (2008.) World Poverty and Human Rights. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Sachs, Jeffery (2006.) The End of Poverty. New York: Penguin Books.
Shah, Anup. “Climate Justice and Equity”. Global Issues. December 30, 2009 www.globalissues.org.
Shah, Anup. “Water and Development”. Global Issues. September 1, 2007 www.globalissues.org.
Shah, Anup. “Poverty and the Environment”. Global Issues. February 12, 2005 www.globalissues.org.
Shah, Anup. “Global Warming and Pollution”. Global Issues. February 1, 2007 www.globalissues.org.
“State of the World’s Children”. UNICEF. 2005 www.unicef.org.
The World Bank (2006.) Poverty and the Environment: Understanding Linkages at the Household Level, Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
© 2010, Kahlah Macedo. All rights reserved.
Poverty alleviation and a sustainable environment two strands of the same thread.. Nifty