|
| |
At first glance, the task of ending extreme poverty might seem impossible. We are regularly overwhelmed by the enormity of the task at hand. But is any progress actually being made?
My friend, Terry Vo, was selected the first Trek Ambassador to the Taiwanese National Youth Commission earlier this year. When I, in turn, asked what she most wanted to gain from this trip, she replied, “I want people to take their own treks to this amazing place, because most people I know can’t even locate Taiwan on a map.” I knew I was guilty as charged—and became determined to change that. A mere three months after Terry’s trek to Taiwan, I was in Taipei myself, serving as a Trek Ambassador to the National Youth Commission, Executive Yuan. The NYC’s Youth Trekkers and Working Holiday Campaign invites international youth ages 18- 30 to submit travel itineraries and videos designed around themes of their choosing that they wish to explore in Taiwan. The NYC then chooses a select number of Taiwan Trek Ambassadors to come to Taiwan, fulfill their itineraries on an allotted allowance, and promote the island overseas.
 Taiwan has much to be proud of. The island has gone from aid recipient throughout the 1950s and ‘60s to aid donor and foreign investor today; alongside Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea, Taiwan is one of the four “Asian Tigers.” It seems no accident that the NYC was developed in 1966, alongside this global attainment, as a government initiative to foster domestic enterprise and professional skills amongst youth. Hyperinflation following World War Two gave way to growth so extensive in the latter half of the twentieth century that it is referred to as the “Taiwan Miracle.” Investments in IT, infrastructure, and productivity boosts through land reform are commonly cited as reasons for this miracle, and while growth has been modest since the late ‘90s, Taiwan— especially Taipei—is as cosmopolitan a city you’ll find. With the world’s second tallest building (Taipei 101), Michelin restaurants such as Din Tai Fung, one of the world’s oldest collections of Chinese artifacts in the National Palace Museum, and endless upscale shopping, the rewards of local enterprise are clear.
So what can we learn from Taiwan? I think the answer is twofold. First, the island’s an example of how “good aid” - investments in local business, education, and infrastructure - now allow it to thrive without global assistance. In GPP’s “1.4 Billion Reasons” presentation, countries such as India, South Korea, and China are cited as examples of countries that have achieved this goal. They share a common reason for success—the ability to make and sell products external economies want and need. With HTC having emerged from Taiwan and Samsung from South Korea—as well as an ever-expanding telecomm market across the continent of Africa—financial support for enterprise is one of the ideal examples of “good aid.”
The second concerns importance of education. While touring the National Palace Museum, I came across an exhibit on maps that discussed how they were once conceived of as art, with accuracy second to how their makers believed space should exist. Unable to read or understand geography, minority tribes were abused by those in power, who used manipulated maps to move various groups around to their own liking. Educating a population is essential, so citizens can recognize and then challenge corruption. And it is this which will lead to pulling them out of extreme poverty.
So, at first glance, ending extreme poverty might seem impossible. But countries like Taiwan- which has not only overcome domestic poverty- but gone on to contribute to the global market- show that with the right tools, the opposite is true. We can end it. And together, we will end it.
This is a guest blog by Global Poverty Ambassador Lauren Maffeo. |
Posted by Guest Blog: Lauren Maffeo in Aid for column Action Stories on Dec 22nd 2012, 00:20 |
|
|
|
| |
This week saw an interesting and lively debate in the House of Lords on recent developments in the European Union. While Members’ contributions were varied and focused on a range EU issues, I chose to highlight the impact of the Union as a driving force for poverty reduction and peace in some of the world’s most vulnerable countries.
All too often, debates on the EU have centred on the actual material or parochial political benefits of being at the tables of the European Council. Yet such a narrow understanding of the spirit of the Union risks missing the crux of the debate completely. Simply put, the EU question boils down to whether we want to live in isolation as the United Kingdom, or whether we want to live as part of a group of nations that work together - not only in their internal interests but externally too.
 Of course, the EU is far from perfect. From an excessive bureaucracy, through the imperfect Lisbon Treaty, to the current Euro crisis, it is clear that there exists a dire need for reform within the EU. But the Union also has its benefits. The single market has propelled trade and has been balanced by many social benefits; the EU has had a global impact on the environment, trade and development; and the EU has played a pivotal role in advancing peace across the continent in the aftermath of World War II and through enlargement to the East. The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the EU earlier this year was a much-needed reminder of just how far we have come. In the areas of Justice and Home Affairs, and the Economy, as well as in the area of External Relations, there is a strong case for pooled sovereignty in today’s world. And that sometimes has to be backed up by laws passed at the European level. The UK Government and others should show more leadership in making that case to the people of Britain, not shy away from it.
The current battle over the EU Budget risks consequences for the Official Development Assistance of EU states. But, whoever is responsible for the current financial crisis and EU overspends, it is not those who live in the poorest parts of Africa, Latin America or Asia, and who currently benefit from the EU aid budget. The UK has made a proposal to freeze the budget, and I sympathise with that view. But if cuts are made proportionately across all budgets, there will of course be an impact on the aid expenditure as well. The President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy recently made an outrageous proposal, suggesting that cuts to the EU aid budget should be disproportionately high in comparison with cuts to other departments, in order to avoid cuts to the subsidies and the waste that goes on in the departments for which he and President Barroso are responsible.
Not only is this morally wrong, it is also illogical. In the UK, every penny that we take out of the EU aid budget will simply have to be re-routed to our own DfID budget. We have committed to the 0.7% international target irrespective of what agencies, departments and organisations such funds are channelled through. Other countries will have to follow suit and do the same thing with their national budgets since the EU spend contributes to national aid and development assistance targets. The only countries to benefit will be those that want to avoid international obligations. And poor people will pay with their lives.
A review of UK aid signals that engaging with the EU on development matters works. DfID and the former Secretary of State, Mr Mitchell, undertook a Multilateral Aid Review in 2011 which, in an objective evaluation that saw funding withdrawn from a number of multilateral organisations, showed that the European Development Fund’s performance was strong in meeting the UK’s aid objectives. In having organisational strengths to use that money effectively, the Fund was considered to be strong, and it was more likely than most to change and reform. It would be a terrible signal if in a year when the G8 comes back to the UK we were leading on a budget initiative that slashes the EU aid budget, depriving the world’s poorest of essential humanitarian assistance and the development investment that helps create growth.
I urge our Government to take a strong stand. Political leadership is not only about tactics. It is not only about trying to get the better of the other parties in relation to a referendum. It must also be about vision: setting out a case for our role in the world and in Europe, working out how the two go together, and understanding how we can then make the best use of them. Now is the time for the Government and the Opposition to be bucking the popular trend of euroscepticism, and leading Britain to a new level of engagement fit for the 21st century.
This is a guest blog, originally published here. The author, Lord McConnell, was the youngest and longest serving First Minister of Scotland. He is now a Labour life peer.
*Image credit: European Council |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The Global Poverty Project is deeply saddened by the news today that five polio vaccinators have been killed in Karachi, Pakistan and condemn the multiple attacks responsible for this tragedy. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the vaccinators' families, as well as to the children who are right now being denied access to basic health services and interventions, to which they should be entitled to.
The vaccinators had been working to protect children in their community against polio as part of a three-day vaccination round. It follows a similar incident yesterday, in which a male polio vaccinator, also in Karachi, was killed.
It is important to note that no one has yet come forward to claim responsibility for the attack. Investigations continue and the vaccination round has been suspended in Karachi.
The loss of these polio heroes serves as a reminder of the bravery and dedication of the men and women who work under such insecurity, many as volunteers, to ensure that Pakistan’s children can be safe from this debilitating disease.
The best way we can honour their sacrifice is to ensure that all children in Pakistan receive basic health services and that polio is finally eradicated from Pakistan. To that end, the Global Poverty Project is committed to supporting global polio eradication efforts wherever it can.
Please direct enquiries through to Michael Sheldrick at michael.sheldrick (at) globalpovertyproject.com or on +61 411 513 931. |
Posted by Michael Sheldrick in Polio for column Issue Analysis on Dec 18th 2012, 15:36 |
|
|
|
| |
On Wednesday 5th December, against a backdrop of prolonged austerity, Chancellor George Osborne MP presented the UK government’s Autumn Statement. The bleak economic outlook across the Eurozone heightened apprehension, with lower-than-expected growth figures and the battle to reduce public debts plaguing critics’ minds.
The statement did, however, provide positive news for International Development. The government reaffirmed its much-needed contribution to spend 0.7% of national income on overseas development assistance, adding pressure on other donor countries to meet this 40-year old UN commitment.
 It should be noted that the 0.7% target is not an arbitrary figure, but has been in use since the 1970s, and found in 2002 by the United Nations Millennium Project to be the level required from all rich nations to meet the Millennium Development Goals (or MDGs) by 2015. As such, the Autumn Statement marks the first time in history the UK will have met this 40-year old promise.
Meeting the 0.7% target will secure the UK’s foreign aid budget and crucially means that the Department for International Development (DfID) will have the resources to continue its important work in social advancement across the globe. This is extremely good news both globally and nationally for a number of reasons:
Firstly, it fuels momentum towards the achievement of the MDGs by 2015- for example the charity Save the Children, in a recent report, indicated that UK development assistance has drastically helped to reduced child mortality, with the number of deaths of under-fives falling from 12 million in 1990 to 6.9 million in 2011. Our aid has also contributed to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria, helping to save at least 4,000 lives every day, and has saved an estimated 7.7 million lives in 150 countries.
Secondly, improved funding for DfID is also of extreme importance in the fight to finally eradicate polio. In the last 20 years polio cases have been reduced by 99%, from 123 endemic countries to just 3. However, with an almost $1bn shortfall in funding for the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (the public-private partnership which leads eradication efforts) without securing development assistance from donor countries, there is a serious risk that polio may continue to disproportionately affect the most vulnerable.
In addition to these clear moral reasons to improve the livelihoods of the 1.3 billion people who live in extreme poverty, there are also strategic benefits from the increase in the UK’s overseas development commitment. By investing in developing structurally stronger, healthier and more productive economies abroad, we simultaneously improve the UK’s ability to engage with these nations in international trade.
 This is increasingly important given that the proportion of total exports fell to the EU, in the three months to May 2012 to 49.6%, whilst there was a growth of non-EU exports to 50.4%. Moreover, a recent Centre for Economic and Business Research (CEBR) report predicted UK export growth over the next five years of 30% to Asia, over 40% to Latin America and at least 60% to Africa.
Aside from these intrinsic benefits, perhaps what this year’s Autumn Statement has most lucidly shown is that collective political action can yield tangible change.
Despite the austerity we continue to face in the UK, it is a testament to the work of the Global Poverty Project and the commitment shown by our Ambassadors on the ‘Protecting 0.7’ campaign, as well as other organisations, that has resulted in the UK government committing to raise its overseas development contribution to 0.7%.
Of course there is still much to be done. Whilst today we have honoured a 40-year old promise to those most vulnerable, tomorrow our work resumes- advocating, campaigning and working towards a vision for a global society without extreme suffering.
Sameer Gulati is an intern at the Global Poverty Project. |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Diane is a supporter of the Global Poverty Project. After watching the live stream of the Global Citizen Festival, Diane decided to take action in her community to bring an end to extreme poverty.
What would $1.50 buy me today? A loaf of white bread, 1 and 1/2 pounds of apples, a soda from a convenience store or a cheeseburger. What if this is all you had to spend each day for not only food, but your entire livelihood including shelter, clothes and medicine? 1.4 billion people are faced with this reality each day.
At the age of 44, I am back in college and see where life has taken me. One day I was doing some research and I ran across an article that stated the Foo Fighters would be playing a concert benefitting the Global Poverty Project. Being an avid fan, I tuned in. I streamed the concert on my laptop and enjoyed the show. I heard the stories of current GPP partners and what they have accomplished with so little funding. Adam Braun, CEO of Pencils of Promise, said that he used to not be sure how he, as one of billions on this earth, could ever make a difference. One day, he started his journey with $25 and is now opening his 100th school. WOW! One person can make a significant difference! First, even if something we do is significant to one person, it was worth the effort. Second, if we all work together, we can accomplish much.
.jpg)
I looked further into GPP and found more information pertaining to living on less than $1.50 a day. I thought to myself,”I can’t even get a decent sandwich for less than $5.00 “. This started me thinking of how my existence on this earth could benefit someone else. Wristbands, everyone loves wristbands. Color? Several internet sites agree orange is the color of hunger and poverty, so orange it is. What should it say? Simply, $1.50 a day. This would not only remind the wearer of how fortunate they are, but provoke conversation. I also added the GPP web address to remind the wearer to continue to follow the GPP’s progress.
I found a company that would make the Silicone (latex free) bands in the US and use the scraps to make children’s playground bedding. Perfect! Great for allergies, great for the environment, and made in the US!
I have had these wristbands for a week and have had a great response! I get asked about mine several times a day. Will I save the world with these wristbands? No, but all of us together will make a difference in so many lives.
The Global Poverty Project is so wonderful at pulling resources together, that I decided I wanted to be a part of their mission. Orders can be emailed to 1.50adaywristbands@gmail.com. They are $5 each. $3 from each wrist band goes to Global Poverty Project, $1.50 goes to local non-profit charities in the US, such as food banks purchasing bulk food ( 25 cents buys one pound of bulk food! ) and non-profits dedicated to promoting volunteerism, $.50 will purchase another wristband to pay it forward!
Wristband, anyone?
After discussions with Diane, the Global Poverty Project has decided to devote the money that is donated through the purchase of wristbands to help fund our Spring Tour. In Spring 2013 GPP will send a team of skilled presenters on a tour across the United States. The team will give presentations to 100 community groups, universities, and schools. Are you interested in booking a presentation for your group of 150+? Email gpp_usa@globalpovertyproject.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
