The Relationship between Poverty, Governance and Development - Essay Example

? POLITICS POLICY The Relationship between Poverty, Governance and Development and an Analysis of the Strategies used by Key Actors in Dealing with these Three Variables Essay Number: Word Count: 3,451 1.0 Introduction Globalisation has taken the centre-stage in national affairs around the world in the past twenty years. This has been characterised by the fast growth in cross-border communication and travels, harmonisation of standards, stronger international treaties and the growth in the number of multinational organisations and entities. Globalisation has been supported by global partnerships and improved systems of cooperation amongst nations. It is obvious that governance in nations have changed and there are communities affected by global governance and standardisation now than ever. In spite of this, there are huge disparities between nations in different parts of the world. The aim of the research is to identify the relationship between poverty, governance and development and an analysis of the efficiency of methods used to deal with these three variables by governments and other key actors. In attaining this end, the following objectives would be explored by the researcher in order to draw a conclusion on the dominant trends in the relationship under review: 1. A critical examination of the key concepts: poverty, governance and development. 2. An evaluation of the key stakeholders and approaches used to deal with poverty and the metrics in examining them. 3. An assessment of the results of the strategies and approaches used to deal with poverty and its effectiveness. 2.0 Critical Examination of Key Concepts: Poverty, Governance and Development This section of the research would examine the key concepts under discussion in the paper. It would involve the definition of the three main concepts of poverty, governance and development. This review of literature will assess important trends that describe these three ideas in the international and global context. The popular definition of global poverty was set by the United Nations in 1995 (Segal-Horn and Faulkner, 2009). The definition include the people who live on “less than one dollar a day” (Segal-Horn and Faulkner, 2009). This classification provides a standardised view of who are poor and cannot afford the basic necessities of life. Generally, the world is divided into nations where there are few people who live below the poverty line and those who have most of their citizens living above it (Held and McGrew, 2007). The classification on the basis of the majority of nations provides a categorisation of richer nations and poorer nations. The classification provides an idea of the quality of life of nations and how much is available to people and how wealth is distributed in each of the nations. Another approach of viewing poverty on the global scale is to view the infrastructural development of the nation (McNeill and StClair, 2009). To this end, McNeill and StClair identify that some nations have better developed infrastructure whilst others have less developed systems and structures (2009). The classification on the basis of infrastructure puts nations into classes of developed, emerging and underdeveloped nations (Thomas, 2000). Developed nations are those that have the best and most advanced structures and amenities which provides a good life for their citizens. Underdeveloped nations are those that have limited infrastructure whilst emerging nations are those in the transition between developing and developed nations. Most developed nations are in the northern continents like Europe and North America whilst the underdeveloped states are in the southern hemisphere. The criticism of the model of classifying nations according to their infrastructural base is that, they do not give a clear picture of how well wealth is distributed in these nations. A typical example is the case of large federal nations in the developing world like India, Mexico and Brazil who have huge national funds which can afford to fund the largest projects. Yet, these nations have the poorest people on earth. Generally, governance involves the citizens, states, governments and non-state actors who wield control and influence (Lieberthal, 1995). Lieberthal identifies that these actors in nation states come together to operate within a given framework which constitutes the governmental structure of the nation (1995). The actors form a kind of formal and informal institutional matrix of governance which lead to compatibility of individual and group effort to provide the rightful living conditions for the people. Kennett identifies that nations are organised into sovereign nation-states from the Westphalian system where territorial exclusivity is defined and recognized by a group of nations (2009). The Westphalian model can be traced to treaties by powerful governments and monarchies in Europe in the early 1600s which set the stage for international relations and the recognition of territorial sovereignty (Kennett, 2009). Through this system, nations' territorial extents are identified and all the recognized authorities in the family of nations accept them and respect them. This trend provides a kind of global democracy which sets the framework for nations to interact with each other. Governance systems involve problem solving and not the imposition of rules by some central authority (Koenig-Archibugi, 2003). Effectively, the people charged with government have to find the best way of providing an system for the attainment of the best possible life for the citizens of the nation (Koenig-Archibugi, 2003). As such, the citizens and entities within it would have to play a part in national discourse and influence matters and affairs in whatever level they can. Global governance is an important system which is built around the recognized international entities and treaties that regulate nations within a given region. In effect, the external global governance provides so me kind of framework for the organisation of nations and such an arrangement influences national governance. From the analysis in 2.1 and 2.2 above, it appears that the essence of governance is to improve the lot of citizens. And in doing this, the government and other relevant actors would have to provide an atmosphere of development for the citizens. Weinstein argues that most governments seek to promote the livelihood of their citizens by maintaining law and order, building essential institutions and promoting social, cultural and economic improvements (2009). Development is mainly done at the national and other decentralized levels. However, there is also the case of global governance with the view of promoting development to some extremely underdeveloped parts of the world like conflict regions and other deprived parts of the world. Jones identifies that there were a series of meetings between the Allied leaders towards the end of the Second World War to create a global system for the development of nations around the world (2006). These meetings led to the formulation of treaties that acted as the impetus for the creation of some elements of global governance which came into operation after 1945. The main elements included agreements on the creation of some global entities like the World Bank, IMF and the Bretton Woods System as to promote development in all nations around the globe (Jones, 2006). These parties laid the blue print for running affairs in the post-world war world The many treaties in the wake of the Post-World War era culminated in the formation of the United Nations which had the objective of promoting human rights, democracy and international cooperation (Jones, 2006). The United Nations laid the foundation for global development and governance across the nations (Pierre, 2000). The operations of the United Nations and other international organisations created the system whereby there were paradigm shifts from government to governance, public to private and state to market to promote development and democracy. 3.0 Analysis of Core Trends in Global Affairs & Key Stakeholders “Globalisation transforms the bases of state authority from within and produces a multinational post-Westphalian world order in which the state remains important but only as one of several levels of authority” (Rosenau and Czimpiel, 1992: 81). In other words, globalisation creates some kind of world order in which the power of the state or the sovereignty of the government of a nation is compromised. The end of World War ushered in so many changes in the global order. Kennett (2008) identifies that the agreement by the victorious powers in the war led to so many treaties which led to the the creation of entities which supported global development. This included the creation of the structures for “privatisation, deregulation, decentralisation and the downscaling of governments” (Kennett, 2008: 7). This meant the creation of a world where the forces of demand and supply would complement a lean government and public sector to promote efficient use of resources. However, this was rejected by the Soviet Union and other Socialist states. The United Nations and other related organisations global politics assisted in the decolonisation of nations that were ruled by imperial powers like Britain, France and Portugal. The drive towards decolonisation led to the creation of over fifty independent and internationally recognized nations in the southern continents between 1945 and 1970. The main vision of the United Nations which led to the liberation of most of these nations from imperialism was to “...promote freedom from want and human rights for individuals” (Thomas, 2000: 190). The implication of this is that the nations are to join the family of nations with the view of improving the lives of their citizens and where necessary, members of the family of nations can support individuals who are not getting the right levels of freedom and human rights in some nations. After the Second World War, the northern hemisphere was divided into two camps: the Soviet-led Communist world (East) and the Anglo-American-led Capitalist world (West). As the imperial empires of Britain, France and Portugal disintegrated, the Communist-Capitalist struggle continued to these newly decolonized nations. Due to this, there were numerous wars that were fought in these different parts of the world which mirrored the conflict between the East and the West of the northern hemisphere. These struggles led to major setbacks in the developing world and diverted focus from constructive affairs and matters. The collapse of the Soviet Union led to what Sam Huntington describes as the Third Wave of Democracy (2012). The Third Wave of democracy meant that the structures of Bretton-Wood, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and other entities created after the Second World War which were rejected by the Communists could be implemented in the developing world (Huntington, 2012). These implementations led the the acceleration of development in the Third World nations and the improvement of lifestyle in these parts of the world. The Third Wave of Democracy led to the collapse of authoritarian regimes in nations in Africa, Asia and Latin America (Rosenau and Czimpiel, 1992). Such changes led to economic and political liberalisation which led to the increase in the betterment of the lives of individual citizens. The Third Wave of Democracy also promoted neo-classical economic approaches, privatisation, international economic order and the promotion of multiparty democracy in these poor nations (Rosenau and Czimpiel, 1992). In effect, the Third Wave of Democracy opened the doors for the governments of closed poorer nations to enable them to streamline their systems. The changes allowed such nations to create a system that supported economic reforms, liberalisation and the improvement of their national and social structures for better development and the alleviation of poverty. Also, with this degree of openness, the nations could invite important players in the international community and other development agencies to gain access to their nations and help improve the lives of their citizens. Stakeholders affect and are affected by the activities of a given entity (Singh et al, 2009) The main stakeholders in the discourse of poverty alleviation and development across national boundaries include: 1. National Governments. 2. Political Groups. 3. Non-Governmental Organisations. 4. Business Entities and 5. Multinational Corporations (Singh et al, 2009) Charu and Bradford (2009) simplify the grouping of international stakeholders in development and poverty alleviation as the governments, civil society, business community, international community, academia and the media. National governments set the legal framework for the creation of activities that are appropriate in a given nation. The corporation of the national government can help in the attainment of results in development and poverty reduction. Political groups provide alternative ideas and discussions of how to go about things in order to improve the lot of the citizenry. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are development oriented entities that ensure that the welfare of members of the society are taken seriously and honoured. These entities are often linked to international agencies and groups that promote the welfare and rights of people. The business community includes the local and international business entities. Academia focuses on research whilst the media promotes transparency and accountability in a given nation. All these stakeholders are essential in defining the rights of people and the promotion of the welfare of individuals in a given nation. Organisations like the World Bank and IMF which have already been discussed provide the rightful framework for the creation of frameworks which forces nations to comply with certain rules and regulations. These rules and regulations promote economic liberalisation and development (Roderik, 2001). The most popular international treaty for development and economic advancement is the Washington Consensus which stipulated that: 1. Fiscal discipline of nations around the world. 2. Reduction in public expenditure. 3. Tax reforms. 4. Financial liberalisation. 5. Dergulation 6. Privatisation (Roderik, 2001). The Washington Consensus and other agreements led to economic reforms in many nations, particularly the Third World who have been required to change their systems to conform with these rules for further development. The effect has been that there is legal and political reforms, strengthening of local regulatory institutions, anti-corruption, labour market flexibility and anti-corruption (Roderik, 2001). These pointers create a framework for improved governance and control. Another significant change that has come with the changes in the global governance structure and system is the inclusion of the rights of women. Jackson and Pearson identify that the rights of women have been identified has crucial in the quest to reduce poverty and promote development and this has culminated in the enhancement of women's rights after the Beijing Conference (1998). The Beijing Conference created a global framework for the promotion and protection of the rights of women. 4.0 Approaches in Dealing with Poverty & Development There are several approaches that have been used to provide developmental and poverty reduction in nations around the world. One of the most pervasive systems used is the UN Millennium Declaration which provides a broad framework for guiding governments, NGOs and other developmental agencies in their operations. The declaration states that at the turn of the 21st Century, the United Nations sought to create a “... more peaceful, prosperous and just world” that gives collective responsibility for upholding the principles of human dignity, equality and equity at the global level (McNeill and StClair, 2009). In doing this the parties to the signatory agreed to treat poverty as a human rights violation and enhance ethics and global justice. This was to be backed by neutrality of actions, accountability and social justice. Other global commentators and lobbyists like Singer (2002) state that it is immoral to live in abundance whilst others starve. They therefore seek to promote charitable entities and work to reduce poverty through such entities. The Millennium Summit of 2000 was attended by representatives of 189 countries and it led to the declaration of eight goals meant to promote development, reduce poverty and strengthen local economic statuses of nations (UN Millennium Project, 2008). This led to the formulation of the famous Millennium Development Goals which include: 1. Eradication of extreme poverty and hunger. 2. Achievement of universal primary education. 3. Promotion of gender equality and empowerment. 4. Reduction of child mortality. 5. Improvement of maternal health. 6. Combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases. 7. Ensure environmental stability. 8. Develop a global partnership for development. The Millennium Development Goals and structures were mainly humanitarian in nature. Other systems like the World Bank and International Monetary Fund set out to provide create a system of promoting reforms amongst nations. The World Bank or International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) was set up in the era of the Bretton-Woods Conference at the end of the Second World War (World Bank, 2000). It had the goal of reducing poverty around the world. In doing this, the World Bank is to identify a nation's priorities and seek to get some strategic reforms and partnerships (Stiglitz, 2007). The World Bank plays a role of pledging for help from richer nations to poorer nations (Woods, 2007). The organisation works with local credible partners and promotes the welfare of citizens of these poorer nations (Alexander, 2009). This is because they supervise some important changes and improvements through reforms and loans in order to promote assistance and guidance for change and improvement. The International Monetary Fund was formed during the Bretton-Woods Accords and its main aim is to stabilise exchange rates (Stiglitz, 2002). The IMF helps in reconstruction and provides temporal borrowing opportunities for nations to balance their spending deficits in order to stabilise their currency (Moskella, 2010: Boughton, 2001). This place the IMF in the category of entities that assist developing nations to streamline their activities with other modern capitalist nations with the view of promoting growth, development and efficiency. Basically, the Millennium Development Agenda has provided direct support to very poor and impoverished nations. Also, the IMF has provided economic stability for nations around the world and encouraged responsible spending, particularly in the Third World where corrupt leaders could have their own way without any form of control. The World Bank provides some degree of subsidy and other loans that help poor nations to finance development and improvements in their economy. Also, nations that prove to disregard human rights and deny some basic amenities to their citizens are sanctioned through these organisations (Yu, 2008). A nation like North Korea which has blatantly disregarded international treaties and refused to carry out structural reforms has been left out of the IMF and the World Bank's activities around the world. These international organisations have enhanced internal management, improved services and promoted deregulation and privatisation which has put nations around the world on track for development and reduction in poverty (Kim, 2005). Also, governments have been encouraged to undertake reforms by international organisations (Grandolini, 1996). These reforms allow nations to set global and world-class targets and also use their local power to implement these changes. It appears that these international organisations would help welfare states to promote some elements of capitalism which can improve their economies (Scheuerman, 2008). Also, there has been some relative targets that have been set for some special regions that have serious challenges (Nwonwu, 2008). It appears that this special arrangement will continue into the future. As we reach the 2015 targets for most of the Millennium Development Goals, it appears that some nations that were found wanting would be given special attention whilst nations that have attained their objectives would be given new targets (Bussolo and Medvedev, 2009). This implies that international organisations would continue to lead the quest for a better world by assisting the nation deep into the future. Conclusion Poverty relates to quality of life and access to basic social amenities. The world is divided along the lines of developed and under-developed nations. The essence of governments is to ensure that their citizens get a good and pleasant life. To attain this, governments have the primary obligation of eliminating poverty and improving infrastructure. Global governance and globalisation has led to cross-border support and assistance that help in attaining this end. In essence, development is the main reason why nations have governments. The period after the Second World War has led to a system whereby nations have come under a unified global governance system. This has created the need for joint efforts in dealing with problems and issues. Organisations like the United Nations, IMF and World Bank play a major role in ensuring that global governance issues are resolved. Globalisation therefore provides some kind of compelling context for human rights and development. The third wave of democracy which developed after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 caused the collapse of authoritarian regimes in the developing world viz Africa, Asia and Latin America. The global order has therefore used various ways and means to reduce poverty in these regions. The key actors in international affairs that are responsible for reducing poverty and increasing development include governments, the international community, civil society, media, academia, multinational companies and other relevant stakeholders. These people have sought to push economic reforms, particularly in the poorest nations and also enhance the rights of the underprivileged like women. Explicit programs by the international community like the UN Millennium Development Goals seek to promote fairness, accountability and social justice. Also, other global economic agencies like the IMF and World Bank provide direct reforms and changes that promote development and reduce poverty. References Alexander, T. (2009) Unravelling Global Apartheid: An Overview of World Politics, Cambridge: Polity Press. Boughton, M. (2001) Silent Revolution: The IMF 1979 – 1989, Washington DC: IMF Publications. Bussolo, M. and Medvedev, D. (2009) Challenges to Millennium Development Goal Achievement in Low Income Countries New York: World Bank Publications. Cheru, F. and Bradford, C. (2009) The Millennium Development Goals: Raising Resources to Tackle World Poverty, New York: Zed Books. Grandolini, G. M. (1996) El Salvador: Meeting the Challenge of Globalization New York: World Bank. Held, D. and McGrew, A. (2007) Globalisation/Anti-Globalisation: Beyond the Great Divide, London: Polity Press. Huntington, S. P. (2012) The Third Wave of Democratisation in the Late 20th Century, Norman: Oklahoma University Press. Jackson, C. and Pearson, R. (1998) Feminist Visions of Development: London: Routledge. Jones, A. (2006) Dictionary of Globalisation London: Polity Press. Kennett, P. (2008) Governance, Globalisation and Public Policy Surrey: Edward Elgar Publishing. Kennett, P. (2009) “Global Perspective on Governance” The New Public Governance Theoretical Perspectives and Future Directions, London: Routledge. Kim, J. (2005) Globalization and Industrial Development Indianapolis, IN: iUinverse. Koenig-Arehlibugi, M. (2003) “National and European Citizenship: The Italian Case in Investment Perspective,” Citizenship Studies 7 (1) pp85 – 109. Lieberthal, K. (1995) Governing China from Revolution Through Reforms, New York: Norton & Company. McNeill, D. and StClair, A. C. (2009) Global Politics, Ethics, and Human Rights: The Role of Multinational Organisations, London: Routledge Nwonwu, F. O. C. (2008) Millennium Development Goals: Achievements & Meeting the Targets of Africa Pretoria: University of Pretoria Press. Pierre, J. (2000) Debating Governance, Authority and Democracy Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rodrik, D. (2001) “The Global Grievance of Track as if Development Really Mattered” Working Paper Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government. Rosenau, J. N. and Czimpiel, E. O. (1992) Governance Without Government: Order and Change in World Politics Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Segal-Horn, S & Faulkner, D. (2009) Understanding Global Strategy Mason OH: Cengage Scheuerman, W. E. (2008) Frankfurt School Perspectives on Globalisation, Democracy and the Law London: Routledge. Singer, P. (2002) One World: The Ethics of Globalisation New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Singh, A., Gonzalez, E. T. and Thomson, S. B. (2009) Millennium Development Goals and Community Initiatives London: SAGE Stiglitz, J. (2002) Globalization and its Discontents New York: WW Norton and Co. Stiglitz, J. E. (2007) Making Globalization Work New York: WW Norton and Co. Thomas, C. (2000) Global Governance Development and Human Security in the Challenge of Poverty and Inequality London: Pluto Press. United Nations Millennium Project (2008) The United Nations Millennium Development Library New York: Earthscan. United Nations (2009) Millennium Development Goal Gap Task Force Report 2008 New York: UN Publications. Weinstein, G. (2009) International Relations in Context Washington DC: Hudson Institute. Woods, N. (2007) Globalizers: The International Monetary Fund, The World Bank and the Barriers Ithica, NY: Cornell University Press. World Bank (2000) Poverty Reduction and the World Bank: Progress in Fiscal 1999 New York: World Bank Publications. World Bank (2012) Global Monitoring Report, 2011 New York: World Bank Publications. Yu, K. (2008) Globalisation and Changes in China's Governance New York: BRILL Read More