WUNRN
http://www.wunrn.com

Gender Poverty 

Poverty has a woman’s face. Of the more than 2 billion people in the world living in poverty, 70 per cent are women; two thirds of the 800 million poor in Asia are women.7 

Of the 57 million deaths worldwide in 2002, one in five was a child less than five years old - roughly one child died every three seconds. An estimated 4 million of these deaths happened in the first month of life, the neonatal period. Almost all child deaths happen in poorer parts of the world, while most of the spending to prevent child deaths happens in rich ones. This is but just one indication. 

Gender inequalities also continue to limit girls’ education. For example, even with the narrowing of gender gaps, on average girls can expect to receive one year less of education than boys in African and Arab States and two years less in South Asia. In 14 African countries girls represent less than 45 per cent of the primary school population. In Pakistan they represent just 41 per cent - gender parity would put another 2 million girls in the country in school. In the developing world as a whole primary school completion rates are 75 per cent for girls but rise to 85 per cent for boys. Gender disparities are even wider at the secondary and tertiary levels. These deep gender disparities represent not just a violation of the universal right to education but also a threat to future human development prospects: girls’ education is one of the most powerful catalysts for social progress across a wide range of indicators. 

Perhaps the most critical of the issues related to women’s poverty is the many forms of violence against women. One aspect of this deserves urgent attention – the trafficking of women and girls. During the past decade, this form of trafficking has become an issue of growing concern, especially in South-East Asia. It has been conservatively estimated that at least 200,000 to 225,000 women and children from South-East Asia are trafficked annually, a figure representing nearly one third of the global trafficking trade.8 Women and girls who are victims of this international trade are at an increased risk of further violence, as well as unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, including infection with HIV.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
 

International Council on Social Welfare

Statement to

United Nations Commission for Social Development

44th Session

New York

8-17 February 2006

Review of the first UN Decade for the Eradication of Poverty 1997-2006: One Decade Has Passed, Another To Go 
 

The International Council on Social Welfare (ICSW) is a global, non-governmental organisation which represents tens of thousands of organisations around the world that are actively involved in programmes to promote social welfare, social development and social justice. The organisation was founded in 1928.

ICSW membership consists of global, regional, national and local organisations in more than eighty countries, most of which are developing countries.

ICSW’s basic mission is to promote forms of social and economic development which aim to reduce poverty, hardship, and vulnerability throughout the world, especially amongst disadvantaged people. It strives for recognition and protection of fundamental rights to food, shelter, education, health care and security. It believes that these rights are an essential foundation for freedom, justice and peace. It seeks also to advance equality of opportunity, freedom of self-expression and access to human services. 
 

International Council on Social Welfare

C/O NIZW International Centre

P.O. Box 19152

3501 DD Utrecht

The Netherlands

Phone 31 30 2306 336

Fax 31 30 2306 540

icsw@icsw.org

www.icsw.org  
 

Executive Summary of Findings and Recommendations

ICSW’s Review of the first UN Decade for the Eradication of Poverty 1997-2006:

One Decade Has Passed, Another To Go 

The analysis made in this ICSW review of the first UN Decade for the Eradication of Poverty 1997-2006 leads to some fundamental findings and recommendations. They are not new but worth repeating. 

The findings show that, despite a decade of poverty eradication, there remains a large gap between the commitments, goals and targets of the Decade and the outcomes of current trends on income and human poverty.  

In summary, this report recommends that governments – both developing and developed - bear the primary responsibility to create the enabling environment to eliminate poverty in all its forms.

Developing country governments must ensure:

 

Developed country governments must ensure:

 

Developed country governments must:

 

And multilateral institutions, such as the United Nations’ bodies and regional commissions; the World Bank and regional development banks must:

 

After this ten-year review, we have another decade to go to change the poverty trends, alter the course and achieve the human-poverty eradication goals.


 

I. Introduction

 

The proposal to assign a special Decade for the Eradication of Poverty grew from the process of the UN World Summit on Social Development. The main objective of the Decade was to achieve the goal of eradicating absolute poverty and reducing overall human poverty in the world, through decisive national actions and international cooperation. This objective includes the full and effective implementation of all agreements, commitments and recommendations of major United Nations conferences and summits organized since 1990 as they relate to the eradication of poverty in all its forms. 

Importantly, the commitment to eradicate poverty made at the Social Summit and reflected in the objectives of the Decade was strongly reaffirmed in the Millennium Declaration, which resolved to halve, by 2015, the proportion of people living in extreme poverty and hunger. 

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have clearly strengthened efforts towards poverty eradication. But the MDG poverty target in terms of the poverty threshold of a dollar a day overshadows the human dimensions of poverty set out at the Social Summit. 

This position paper, therefore, looks at various trends of human poverty, espoused in the 1990s conferences and summits and how they have played out over the past decade. What are the achievements and what are the remaining gaps and challenges vis-à-vis the goals of the Decade? 

The usual caveats apply. Accurate data on many indicators are not available for many countries and several specific goals of the decade. There are also difficulties in reviewing trends of every aspect of the Decade’s scope.  

Even so, the indications point, without a doubt, to a large gap between the commitments, goals and targets of the Decade and the outcomes of current trends. A decade of poverty eradication has gone by but still one in five persons worldwide is forced to live on less than a dollar day. That amounts to more than one billion people. Another 1.5 billion live on less than two dollars a day. That’s about 40 per cent of human beings worldwide. And the full human dimensions of this poverty are even more overwhelming. 

After this ten-year review, we have another decade to go to change the poverty trends, alter the course and achieve the human-poverty eradication goals…what will we say then?

II. Income, Consumption and Human Poverty – Trends to Date
 

Poverty cannot be adequately measured, explained or addressed in terms of income or consumption. Poverty is a deprivation of essential productive assets and opportunities to which every human should be entitled. Everyone has a right and, therefore, must have access to basic education and primary health services. The poor should have the ability to sustain themselves by their labour and be adequately remunerated, as well as be entitled to adequate protection from natural and social risks and vulnerabilities. 

Notwithstanding income and basic services, people are also poor and tend to remain so if they are not empowered to participate in making the decisions that shape their lives and livelihoods. The poor may not have acquired essential assets because they live in a remote or resource-poor area, or because they are vulnerable on account of age, health, living environment or occupation. They may be denied access to assets because they belong to an ethnic minority or a community considered socially inferior, or simply because they are females or have a disability. At a broader level, poverty stems from situations where gross inequality persists because of vested interests, and entrenched power structures. This situation translates into a lack of political will, inadequate governance and inappropriate public policies and programmes to eradicate poverty in all its forms.

Income/consumption poverty1

 

Worldwide, and over the last decade, the extreme income poverty trend, measured by the $1 a day poverty line shows a positive indication. Extreme poverty fell from 28 per cent in 1990 to 21 per cent currently. 2 This represents a reduction in absolute numbers of about 130 million people. To the extent that economic growth has contributed to income poverty reduction, the indicators are also positive. Average per capita income growth in developing countries in the 1990s was 1.5 per cent, almost three times the rate in the 1980s.3 Additionally, since 2000, average per capita income growth in developing countries has increased to 3.4 per cent – double the average for high-income countries. Even Sub-Saharan Africa, after a two-decade record of declining average income, showed an increase of 1.2 per cent a year since 2000. 

But trends in income poverty must take into account large variations across regions and between countries, in order to make sense and show real numbers. Global poverty reduction has been driven largely by the well-known success of East Asia, particularly China.4 But at the other end of the spectrum, Sub-Saharan Africa had almost 100 million more people living on less than $1 a day in 2001 than in 1990. South Asia reduced the incidence of poverty, though not the absolute number of poor people. Latin America and the Middle East registered no progress, while Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) experienced a dramatic increase in poverty. The number of people living on less than $2 a day in Central and Eastern Europe and the CIS rose from 23 million in 1990 to 93 million in 2001, or from 5 per cent to 20 per cent. 

In other words, income-poverty reduction has advanced in East Asia, reversed in Sub-Saharan Africa and stagnated almost everywhere else. The worrying world-wide trend for the future is that overall progress is slowing. Much of the success in pushing back poverty over the past two decades was achieved in the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s – before the UN Decade in question. Since the mid-1990s $1 a day poverty has been falling at one-fifth the 1980–96 rate. This is despite the fact that average growth for developing countries picked up in the 1990s, increasing at more than double the per capita rate of the previous decade. 

In conclusion, progress in poverty reduction has been partial. One in five people in the world - more than 1 billion people - still survive on less than $1 a day, a level of poverty so abject that it threatens survival. Another 1.5 billion people live on $1–$2 a day. In effect, after a decade of poverty eradication measures, more than 40 per cent of the world’s population are faced daily with the direct reality or the impending threat of extreme poverty. 

Human poverty 

How has the world fared in terms of human poverty eradication? How has the world’s poor population benefited in terms of health, education, sanitation, social situation, etc.? Again, average figures in the long-run trend show progress. As the UNDP 2005 Human Development Reports: “On average, people born in a developing country today can anticipate being wealthier, healthier and better educated than their parents’ generation. They are also more likely to live in a multiparty democracy and less likely to be affected by conflict.” (UNDP 2005:19). Average life expectancy in developing countries has increased by two years in a little more than a decade. Currently, there are 2 million fewer child deaths than in 1990, and the chance of a child reaching age 5 has increased by about 15 per cent. Improvements in access to water and sanitation have contributed to the child survival rate by reducing the threat of infectious disease. Another 1.2 billion people have gained access to clean water over the past decade. The rapid scale-up in global immunization since 2001 through the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization has also brought down the death toll, saving an estimated half a million lives. 

Human poverty in terms of education has also shown impressive average reductions; despite the fact that there are still 800 million people in the world lacking basic literacy skills.5 And women accounting disproportionately for two-thirds of the total. Even so, literacy levels in developing countries have increased from 70 per cent to 76 per cent over the past decade, and the gender gap is narrowing. Compared with the position in 1990, there are 30 million fewer primary school–age children out of school, and the average number of years in school has climbed by half a year. The gender gaps in primary school enrolment, although a limited indicator for gender equity, have narrowed, though girls still account for more than half of children out of school. 

But the numbers also show large gaps in opportunities for education. Despite a decade of poverty eradication, there are about 115 million children still denied even the most basic primary education. Most of the children who are not enrolled in school are in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.  

Human poverty in terms of health is discouraging. In this regard we look at life expectancy - an indicator of how healthy one can expect to be and one way of measuring risk of avoidable mortality. Another measure is the greater risk of dying before a specified age in comparison with a population group in another country. Taking the high-income country average as a point of comparison, over half of mortality in developing countries is avoidable. Latin America, the Middle East and Asia have been converging with rich countries, in terms of life expectancy. In South Asia life expectancy has increased by a decade in the past 20 years. By contrast, the countries of the former Soviet Union and Sub-Saharan Africa have been falling further behind. 

In the countries of the former Soviet Union life expectancy has dropped dramatically, especially for males. In the Russian Federation life expectancy for males has dropped from 70 years in the mid-1980s to 59 years today—lower than in India. Non-communicable ailments - such as cardiovascular disease and injuries - account for the greatest share of the rise in deaths, though infectious diseases are also resurgent. If the death rate remains constant, about 40 per cent of 15-year-old Russian males today will be dead before they reach age 60. 

There is no more powerful - or disturbing - indicator of human poverty than child mortality. More than 10 million children die each year before their fifth birthday. Sub-Saharan Africa’s share of child mortality is growing. The region accounts for 20 per cent of births but 44 per cent of child deaths. Almost all childhood deaths are preventable. Every two minutes four people die from malaria alone, three of them children. Most of these deaths could be prevented by simple, low-cost interventions. Vaccine-preventable illnesses—like measles, diphtheria and tetanus—account for another 2–3 million childhood deaths. For every child who dies, millions more will fall sick or miss school, trapped in a vicious circle that links poor health in childhood to poverty in adulthood. Like the 500,000 women who die each year of pregnancy-related causes, more than 98 per cent of children who die each year live in poor countries. They die because of where they are born. 

But numbers are dying elsewhere. HIV/AIDS is at the heart of the problem. In 2004 an estimated 3 million people died from the virus, and another 5 million became infected6. Almost all of these deaths were in the poorer parts of the world, with 70 per cent of them in Africa. Some 38 million people are now infected with HIV - 25 million of them in Sub-Saharan Africa. 

Looking to the future, Africa faces the gravest HIV/AIDS-related risks to human development. But new threats are emerging. Serious epidemics have emerged in other regions. In Tamil Nadu state in India, for example, HIV prevalence rates higher than 50 per cent have been found among female sex workers, while both Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra have passed the 1 per cent prevalence mark. The incidence of HIV/AIDS is also growing in the countries of the former Soviet Union. Ukraine now has one of the fastest growing rates of HIV infection in the world, while the Russian Federation, with the second fastest growth rate (and 1 million infected), is home to the largest epidemic in that region. The vast majority of people living with HIV are the young.

Gender Poverty

 

Poverty has a woman’s face. Of the more than 2 billion people in the world living in poverty, 70 per cent are women; two thirds of the 800 million poor in Asia are women.7 

Of the 57 million deaths worldwide in 2002, one in five was a child less than five years old - roughly one child died every three seconds. An estimated 4 million of these deaths happened in the first month of life, the neonatal period. Almost all child deaths happen in poorer parts of the world, while most of the spending to prevent child deaths happens in rich ones. This is but just one indication. 

Gender inequalities also continue to limit girls’ education. For example, even with the narrowing of gender gaps, on average girls can expect to receive one year less of education than boys in African and Arab States and two years less in South Asia. In 14 African countries girls represent less than 45 per cent of the primary school population. In Pakistan they represent just 41 per cent - gender parity would put another 2 million girls in the country in school. In the developing world as a whole primary school completion rates are 75 per cent for girls but rise to 85 per cent for boys. Gender disparities are even wider at the secondary and tertiary levels. These deep gender disparities represent not just a violation of the universal right to education but also a threat to future human development prospects: girls’ education is one of the most powerful catalysts for social progress across a wide range of indicators. 

Perhaps the most critical of the issues related to women’s poverty is the many forms of violence against women. One aspect of this deserves urgent attention – the trafficking of women and girls. During the past decade, this form of trafficking has become an issue of growing concern, especially in South-East Asia. It has been conservatively estimated that at least 200,000 to 225,000 women and children from South-East Asia are trafficked annually, a figure representing nearly one third of the global trafficking trade.8 Women and girls who are victims of this international trade are at an increased risk of further violence, as well as unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, including infection with HIV.

Hunger

 

Income poverty is closely linked to hunger. In a world of plenty, millions of people go hungry every day. More than 850 million people, including one in three preschool children, are still trapped in a vicious cycle of malnutrition and its effects. Malnutrition weakens the immune system, increasing the risk of ill health, which in turn aggravates malnutrition. Around half of the deaths of preschool children are directly attributable to interactions between malnutrition and infectious disease. Children who are moderately under weight are more than four times more likely to die from infectious disease than are well-nourished children.

Lest we forget

 

There’s a Third World in the First World. Let’s look at one important indicator again – child poverty – this time in rich countries. 

No matter which of the commonly-used poverty measures is applied, the situation of children in rich countries has deteriorated over the last decade. Over the last decade, the proportion of children living in poverty in the developed world has risen in 17 out of the 24 OECD nations9 for which data are available.10 

Most progress in reducing child poverty has been made in the Nordic countries, which have rates below 5 per cent. Next is a broad band of middle-ranking nations with rates between 5 and 15 per cent, including all of the most populous European countries except Italy. Italy has the highest child poverty rate in Europe. There are four other OECD countries with exceptionally high rates of child poverty (15 per cent to 17 per cent) - United Kingdom, Portugal, Ireland and New Zealand. 

At the bottom of the OECD countries’ ranking in this regard are six non-European nations – Australia, Canada, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, and the United States. In terms of relative income poverty, the Czech Republic and Hungary have lower child poverty rates than Germany or the Netherlands; Poland has a lower rate than Canada, Japan, or the United States. 

In terms of numbers, it is estimated that about 40 to 50 million children living in some of the world’s wealthiest countries, are growing up in poverty. 11

Risks & vulnerabilities

 

The reversals suffered in the Decade against poverty are all the more significant because of the extreme vulnerability of populations in many countries in the face of shocks of different kinds, varying from natural calamities such as droughts, floods, earthquakes and tsunamis to man-made shocks such as the so-called 1997 Asian financial crisis. Most natural calamities, whether they are inter-continental tsunamis, typhoons in the Pacific, hurricanes in the US, floods in Bangladesh or earthquakes or droughts in India, adversely affect the poor the most. They are the ones who are located in the most calamity-prone areas, live in the most vulnerable shelters, are prone to low crop prices and unemployment in times of crisis and have no safety nets to fall back on when adversely affected. Furthermore, since they are already at the margins of subsistence, even a small external shock is sufficient to push them into a situation where their survival is threatened. For these reasons, poverty and vulnerability are inextricably intertwined. 

However, as the 1997 crisis demonstrates, it is not just the extremely poor who are vulnerable.  

In turn, vulnerability to infectious disease is exacerbated by inadequate access to clean water and sanitation. More than 1 billion people lack access to safe water and 2.6 billion lack access to improved sanitation. Diseases transmitted through water or human wastes are the second leading cause of death among children worldwide, after respiratory tract infection. The overall death toll: an estimated 3,900 children every day. 

And if the widely predicted outbreak of avian flu were to materialize, it would have devastating implications for vulnerable populations, as well as for public health across all countries. Similarly, the full consequences of global warming and other ecological pressures on food systems could dramatically affect the food security of millions. 

Conflicts are another window of vulnerabilities. The UN Decade on Poverty Eradication has witnessed genocide in Rwanda, violent civil wars in the heart of Europe, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and setbacks in the Middle East. The conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has claimed almost 4 million lives - the greatest death toll since the Second World War. In Sudan a peace settlement in one of Africa’s longest running civil wars served as a prelude to a new humanitarian crisis in Darfur, with more than 1 million people displaced. New threats to collective security have emerged. Yet despite the challenges posed for human development by violent conflict, there is some positive news. The number of conflicts has fallen since 1990. The last 15 years have seen many civil wars ended through negotiation under UN auspices. From Timor-Leste to Afghanistan, El Salvador and Sierra Leone peace has brought new opportunities for human development and democracy. Violent conflict poses one of the greatest barriers to accelerated human development. But the barrier can be lowered.

III. Policy Recommendations

 

The objectives and goals of the UN Decade for the Eradication of Poverty are reflected in the 2015-targeted MDGs. What this means is that we have another decade from now to improve on the human poverty trends of the previous decade.  

The UN Decade for poverty reduction called for eradicating absolute poverty and reducing overall human poverty in the world, THROUGH DECISIVE NATIONAL ACTIONS AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION. In this regard, the UN Decade has seen many countries worldwide developing national poverty reduction strategies and programmes in consultation with international agencies. Many Governments have established inter-ministerial coordinating committees aimed at formulating and implementing strategic national poverty-reduction plans and actions. 

But, translating poverty reduction strategies into effective policies and programmes to tackle the various dimensions of human poverty, simultaneously with limited resources, has become a challenging task for all the stakeholders. In other words, national governments, their regional inter-governmental bodies, donor governments, international agencies – especially the United Nations, the World Bank, the IMF and their regional arms – the private sector and civil society organizations everywhere must increase efforts to make their partnership work.

Developing country governments, however, bear the primary responsibility to create the enabling environment to eliminate poverty. This environment is characterised by:

 

What other steps would it take to close the gap between the trend projections of the last decade and what the MDG targets represent? 

The answer lies in policy lessons from practices that have worked. Briefly put: 

  1. Sustained poverty reduction cannot be achieved unless socio-political dimensions are incorporated in a comprehensive strategy. Policies that address the inequalities in access to basic social services can increase the capacity of the poor to improve the quality of their lives; the provision of basic social services should be incorporated in poverty strategies. This is particularly important in primary health care and basic education that reduce mortality and enhance the quality of life.
 
  1. Education is one of the most important investments that a country can make. Not only does it fulfil people’s right to knowledge, but the benefits are both economic and social. Education is one of the most powerful ways of accelerating economic growth and reducing poverty. And education, particularly for girls, has important spill over effects for the society as a whole, helping to empower women, improve their status and enable them to exert greater influence at both the household and community levels. This not only tends to improve children’s nutrition and health; it also results in a decline in fertility, as educated women tend to have smaller families. However, people need to be educated to a sufficient level: only if children have moved beyond a certain threshold of learning, in good-quality primary and lower secondary schools, can they fully capitalise on education through increases in productivity or in their social contributions.
 
  1. Higher standards of health are also important both for society and the economy. Good health is one of the most vital components of human development. There are also important linkages between improved health – of both mothers and children – and better performance at school. Good health also reduces population growth: when fewer children die in infancy, parents tend to have smaller families. And a healthy workforce is also essential if countries are to achieve the highest levels of productivity. The interventions that could prevent or effectively treat the conditions that kill children and women of reproductive age are well known. Most are low cost—and highly cost-effective. Two in every three child deaths could be averted through provision of the most basic health services. Yet a health catastrophe that inflicts a human toll more deadly than the HIV/AIDS pandemic is allowed to continue. Nothing more powerfully underlines the gap between what we are able to do to overcome avoidable suffering and what we choose to do with the wealth and technologies at our disposal.
 
  1. One of the primary objectives of government policy should be to reduce inequality. The nature and extent of inequality will, of course, vary considerably from one country to another. But for poverty reduction, some types of inequality matter more than others. The most important are those concerned with the distribution of assets, especially land, human capital, financial capital and access to public assets such as rural infrastructure.
 
  1. Economic growth could be reduced for any number of reasons: for example, declining terms of trade, shocks in the global economy, natural disasters, financial instability or regional conflicts. Individual countries may also have to deal with social and political instability and the impact of HIV/AIDS. However, the outcomes will be better if Governments integrate social and economic policies. And a key policy must be to take specific steps to reduce inequality, particularly those forms that arise from corruption. Governments should try to distribute the ‘growth dividend’; using the gains from economic growth to offset some of the rises in inequality, by offering broad access to social development and by protecting the most vulnerable.
 
  1. Measures that help mitigate risk and vulnerabilities arising from armed conflict, violence and natural disasters are essential in addressing both transient and chronic poverty. These measures include the provision of social safety nets to cushion the impact of social and economic crises, a lesson learned in the wake of the Asian financial crisis and the extensive natural disasters of recent years. Poverty reduction strategies that do not incorporate risk mitigation and vulnerabilities of the poor are likely to fail given the realities of disasters and conflicts that are often beyond their control.
 
  1. Poverty is not just a matter of deprivation but also of vulnerability and macroeconomic crisis is only one kind of shock that can trigger downward mobility for the poor. People living in low-income countries, whether in Asia, Africa or Latin America, are regularly exposed to risks, uncertainties and shocks including social instability, loss of markets, crop failures, droughts, floods, hurricanes, tsunamis and other natural disasters. Individual households can also be hit by the sickness of a key family member. Any of these events can wipe out savings and assets and thus reverse poverty reduction or reduce its pace. This means that countries need to explore different forms of social protection. Clearly only a few developing countries will be able to offer extensive welfare provisions similar to those in developed countries. However, even poorer countries can experiment on a smaller scale with programmes that fit within their financial constraints and work alongside existing patterns of informal insurance. These include simplified social insurance schemes for the self-employed; support for informal insurance; formal title for informal assets; and health insurance for the poor.
 
  1. Empowerment of citizens and civil society organisations to take responsibility and initiative in programmes to relieve poverty is essential. Several cases abound of social protection schemes that are the result of non-governmental intervention rather than public policy. These include health care schemes, access to credit and the provision of legal services facilitated by civil society organisations. And in many more instances, the progress in poverty eradication is due in no small measure partnerships of governments with non-governmental organizations. An active civil society is key component in any poverty-reduction strategy, given the role of civil society in keeping the state accountable, promoting necessary reforms, and complementing state efforts to protect the most vulnerable.
 
  1. Finally, although the prime responsibility for poverty eradication ultimately rests with the individual countries, human development is a shared responsibility – because the roots of poverty are as much global as local. The United Nations Millennium Declaration recognised this fact and urged for ’strong partnerships’ to promote a more open and equitable system of international finance and trade, to increase development assistance and to enhance international commitment to good governance, development and poverty reduction. International partners can and must support and enhance individual countries’ commitments to the above-mentioned pursuits. In this regard, the private sector has responsibilities and a role in creating broadbased growth and furthering opportunities for the poor to move up. Developed country governments, on their part, must assist in the development of poorer nations by opening their markets to the exports of developing countries. International donors and institutions must continue to honour their development-aid commitments. And multilateral institutions, such as the United Nations’ bodies and regional commissions; the World Bank and regional development banks, have to heed the criticisms of their poverty-reduction operations, the resources they consume, and the impact of their programmes on poverty. These institutions should remain at the front line in international development efforts but their international, regional, and bilateral assistance must be better coordinated, less competitive and more committed to narrow the gap between words and institutional action.




================================================================
To leave the list, send your request by email to: wunrn_listserve-request@lists.wunrn.com. Thank you.