By Kollengode S Venkataraman (written in 1998)
Economists, sociologists, and politicians of all stripes have recognized that in the US, the gap between the rich and the poor has widened considerably in the last 2 decades, both in income and wealth. See Economic Trends in Business Week, page 32, August 27,1997. In this background came last year the Human Development Report 1996 issued by the UN Development Program. The report finds that this widening gap is a global phenomenon having sinister consequences. The essence of this report is that despite improvements in the conditions of people in many parts of the world in the last 50 years, the wealthiest and the poorest people — both between and within countries — are living in an increasingly separate world.
The administrator of the UN program says. “An emerging interconnected global elite, mostly urban, is amassing great wealth and power while more than half of humanity, that is more than three billion people, are left out. This 2-class world is a breeding ground for hopelessness.
The end of the Millennium witnessed explosions in global communications. This has brought people living geographically far apart, but having access to resources, a lot closer. However, while we know what happens in far-off lands — if you are curious also why — we often remain uninformed about the happenings in our own backyard. Modern technology has thus aided people to choose to remain oblivious to reality outside that is no to their liking. This leads to conflict because we geographically live in one place, but mentally live in another place, which often exists only in our imagination. If this happens in individuals, we refer we refer them to a psychiatrist. Then this happens to a large number, we form support groups.
The UN report questions the basis of GNP and per capita income. The Human Development Report takes approach that grows national products or per capita income, particularly when expressed in terms of U.S. dollars, after converting from local currencies, we may add, are inadequate indicators of how people live.
Taking into consideration the life expectancy, education and adjusted real income, the report ranks countries by health, sanitation, treatment of women, nutrition of children and other factors. These are more realistic measures of how people live. On a list of 174 countries, Norway ranks first. Our northern neighbour Canada is second, US 4th, Japan 12th, China 79th and India the 6th nuclear-weapon-state is 135.
Another finding of the report. In South Asia, dominated by India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. 29% of the people live in severe poverty when income alone is considered. But over 60% of people, live in conditions, that can severely affect their future in a fast-changing world.
According to one expert in the field, social indicators can no longer be overlooked by any country focused on national economic growth. In developing countries, the prime responsibility for improvements falls on the government and societies themselves. Nothing much is going to change until countries take steps to invest in people, educate women, and provide basic health care while also adopting policies leading to economic growth. South Asian nations, despite assessment by their own experts, have led these problems fester. It is not that these nations do not understand the need for commitment and sustained hard work for accomplishing anything of value. Look at the recent nuclear blasts by India and Pakistan. These countries have been working on this for decades, covertly and overtly, sometimes using even allegedly stolen technology, as in the case of Pakistan.
Heavy allocation of tax money for fancy weapon systems, either imported or indigenously developed, drains the already scarce national resources and precious time into nonproductive items and diverts public attention from real issues. In South Asia, interest on debt, cost of running government, and defence spending leave little for improving public health, basic education, and infrastructure. That Pakistan is teetering on the brink of economic collapse is very little comfort to India because. Sooner or later your neighbours’ problems become your problems too. Mexico’s problems affect us in the US, and the Russian collapse affects the whole of Europe and Asia.
In the final analysis, measures such as infant mortality, school education, mortality of women during pregnancy and childbirth, and strength of the underlying economy are the yardsticks for assessing national strength. Therefore, encouraging consumer goods may not be the best way to modernize societies in Asia and Africa. This requires that societies make careful and unpopular, nonglamorous, nonjingoistic choices in resource allocation.
Countries such as Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia, for example, more than a generation ago started investing in education and basic health care for their population and in improving the condition of women. These societies changed for the better significantly when compared with other nations in the region. Though these Asian tigers have been bitten by the Asian economic flu, because of the strength of the basic societal indicators in these countries, they might recover sooner than later than what may predict.
Other observations in the report:
1. Worldwide, 360 billionaires control assets greater than the combined incomes of countries having 45% of the world population.
2. Eighty countries are worse off today than they were a decade ago.
3. In seventy developing countries, income after considering the purchasing power is lower than they were in 1960s and 1970s.
The Human Development Report 1996, published by Oxford University Press, is also available in paperback and can be obtained through major bookstores. Price $18.95. ∎