The complexities of the ‘lifting people out of poverty’ narrative

If you do Twitter right (full disclosure: I also follow Only in Russia and The Dodo) it can be an awesome space for global development debates.
There are a lot of smart people in my regular feed that share interesting, important empirical insights into development research e.g. Dina Pomeranz, Alice Evans, Maya Forstater, David Evans, or Justin Sandefur.



Right now, there is also a great debate going on where Jason Hickel and Brank Milanovic argue of (de-)growth (see below).

Let’s leave questions of ‘decolonization’ aside for a moment, because I do realize that said Twitter feed is dominated by citizens of the global North, educated at some of the best universities there and working at great organizations and universities.

It was probably Dina Pomeranz’ long thread on what she is thankful for that encouraged me to write down what I have been mulling over for a longer time: The very powerful and usually very unidirectional discussion around ‘our world is not getting worse, but better’ usually supplemented by at least one reference to how ‘millions of people have been lifted out of poverty’.
Both the late Hans Rosling and Max Roser’s Our World in Data did and do an excellent job about the big picture stuff in which development (i.e. money spend from aid budgets) plays a small, but significant role.

But these very large-n curves only tell one side of the story-or, to be a bit more precise, they contribute to a depolitization that usually ignores the other side of the coin:
‘More people have access to electricity than ever before’ is fantastic news for many people whose lives are made easier, potentially more fulfilling, but that story is linked to other stories e.g. about China’s increasing use of coal-to produce cheap energy for electricity.
Economic growth comes with huge cost-and maybe even more importantly with lifestyle changes. It is great news that kids can read late at night at the well-illuminated kitchen table, but that same electricity is also required to run the fridge, microwave or TV and charge mobiles and laptops-and tons an tons of plastic and other resources will be used and sold ‘to lift families out of poverty’.

As George Monbiot writes in his current commentary for the upcoming Black Friday shopping extravaganza that has now become a global phenomenon:
Everyone wants everything – how is that going to work? The promise of economic growth is that the poor can live like the rich and the rich can live like the oligarchs. But already we are bursting through the physical limits of the planet that sustains us. Climate breakdown, soil loss, the collapse of habitats and species, the sea of plastic, insectageddon: all are driven by rising consumption. The promise of private luxury for everyone cannot be met: neither the physical nor the ecological space exists.
But of course as Duncan Green points out in his discussion about the climate change trilemma, the techno-optimists may win and we will all be fine:
The world listens to the science and the scientists and somehow finds a way to stay within the planetary boundaries (decarbonization, broader shift to sustainability, including shift in norms around consumption etc)
In addition ‘lifting people out of poverty’ comes with new challenges as people live longer and up to a point healthier lives:

Preparing societies and their institution, currently very busy in ‘lifting people out of poverty’ and making sure everybody has a job, for an ageing society with new social and medical challenges that cannot be fully captured by yet another curve that goes up, e.g. life expectancy.

Communicating research with neat data visualizations is an important way to engage social media audiences with reminders that things, including ‘in Africa’, are not simply getting worse. But improvements come at a cost and the cost of growth raises important questions on how to deal with it.
Jason Hickel's recent discussion with Branko Milanovic (see below) is an important reminder:
Yes, one might argue that we can improve the share of growth that goes to the poorest. That would be an important first step, to be sure. But as long as the rest of the world continues to grow, increasing aggregate material throughput and emissions, we’re going to be in trouble. In fact, we’re already in trouble even at existing levels of throughput and emissions, and we can see it all around us: rapid deforestation, collapsing fish stocks, mass species extinction, soil depletion and of course climate change, with the poorest getting hit hardest by far. Milanovic believes we can reign these problems in with more “environmentally friendly” growth. But that’s a pipe dream.
As much as the ‘post-Rosling’ world likes a good data visualization, advocates in the #globaldev arena should point out the complexities more often and remind audiences that New Delhi’s toxic air, the market for skin bleaching products and Bollywood movies advocating for indoor bathrooms are all part of the same consumerist logic and politicians, corporations and other institutions do not always have the best interests in mind when those ‘lifted out of poverty’ join new markets.
Here's Branko Milanovic from the debate with Jason Hickel on (de-)growth:
Capitalist societies, after several centuries of exposure to market ideology and way of life, are structured in such a way that populations have fully accepted, and reaffirm in their daily lives, the objectives that make capitalism thrive. We want more and newer “stuff” every year. The ideology of commodification and commercialization has never been stronger: it is as present in the UK and the United States as in China, Nigeria, Congo, Russia or Brazil. We are not only working for a wage, we are cheerfully renting our homes and cars for money, networking at our children’s birthdays, and having kids who beat each other to grab a new model of smart phone or shoes. In other words, we have global capitalism with a population that has internalized the objectives needed for capitalism to reproduce itself and to expand, by requiring an ever greater amount of saving, investment and output.
In a perfect world we would have safe and hygienic indoor toilets for everyone, but behavior change is far more complicated and open to manipulation.
The ‘lifting people out of poverty narrative’ often overlooks that our digital now is already very complicated (Zeynep Tufekci's TED talk is a powerful reminder that so-called social networks are essentially advertising platforms).
Adding new consumers will unlikely bring sustainability and happiness any time soon...

Happy Thanksgiving!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should I consider a PhD in International Development Studies?

After the Economist’s piece on the (non-)value of doing a PhD and some comments later (e.g. Prometheus doesn't read the Economist (I like the slightly cynical dichotomy between ‘civilians’ and the ‘academic insiders) or the ' 100 Reasons NOT to Go to Graduate School ' (they are only halfway through so check it out regularly in the future...) I had an interesting conversation with a prospective PhD student a few days ago. This was not the first time that I had been approached about doing a PhD and I always try to be as frank as possible, even playing the ‘devil’s advocate’ when it comes to the complicated ‘should I or shouldn’t I?’ decision-making process. At the end of our conversation I sat down and tried to summarize a few important and generic points from the point of view of doing a PhD in Development Studies and in the UK . I understand that every case is different and involves a range of motives, options and rationales, but there a few important questions and t
Read more

John Marsh: Why Education Is Not an Economic Panacea-insights for development?

John Marsh just published an interesting article in the Chronicle of Higher Education on ' Why Education is not an Economic Panacea '. The article is long and a bit confusing to read. It is based on the author's experience in an education project for poor members of the community: The idea was simple. Faculty from the University of Illinois would offer night classes in their areas of expertise [...] for anyone in the community who was between the ages of 18 and 45 and lived at 150 percent of the poverty level of income or lower. [...] Students who completed the nine-month course would receive six hours of college credit, which they could then transfer to other institutions of higher learning. Everything would be free: tuition, books, even child care at a nearby community center. We named it after a similar program in Chicago, the Odyssey Project. In short, the programme was based on the well-known dicussion that  education pays, and pays more than ever. If so, it
Read more

Dear white middle class British women: Please don't send used bras (or anything, really) to Africa

Image
I am supposed to be on my summer blogging break , but the world of bad development does not seem to take a vacation... The first time I came across the #SWEDOW (Stuff We Don't Want) debate about what to do with unwanted stuff and whether to send it to 'Africa' was in 2010; in fact, I wrote about a shoe donation project on the blog in 2012. Fast forward to July 2019 and a local British Women's Institute Facebook page with about 500 page likes is posting a picture of two innocent-looking parcels that has been shared very widely. The vast majority of the 500+ comments under the post are positive and I am sure that both charities will receive quite a few parcels in the next few days. It seems almost futile and pointing out bad examples of charity and development is not always the best way to communicate, but I anonymize the post as much as possible to avoid simply shaming a particular Women's Institute chapter. 'Rapey men here are the same as rapey men t
Read more

What if MrBeast really is one of the futures of philanthropy-and what does that mean for communicating development?

Image
“ I feel good seeing myself dancing after receiving the money. It makes me appreciate the moment my life changed and reminds me of when I was able to send my son to school .” (Resident of Nakapiripirit, Uganda) “ It might seem strange to carp over a few good deeds filmed for YouTube clicks. After all, even if this Gen Z mode of philanthropy is brash and narcissistic, some lives are being changed for the better. Yet at the same time, Donaldson is exploiting less fortunate people’s problems to shape his image of decency, while reinforcing the aid illusion that has blown so much money and achieved so little over the past half century .” (Ian Birrell, UnHerd ) “ As people have noted, if you watch the video in total isolation, it's maybe not that bad? Mr Beast is good at this. And he's not obviously mocking or manipulating these people. Then again, the TV commentators in the Hunger Games fawned over Katniss. That wasn't the issue .” (Justin Sandefur, Center for Global Developmen
Read more

Handbook on Humanitarianism and Inequality - Chapter 04 - Humanitarianism and the new wars: humanitarianism, security, and securitisation

Image
Every two weeks I am going to feature one of the chapters of our Handbook on Humanitarianism and Inequality which was published in spring 2024. This week we are taking a closer look at Chapter 04 - Humanitarianism and the new wars: humanitarianism, security, and securitisation - contributed by Michael Magcamit and Anastassiya Mahon. From the introduction This chapter demonstrates and probes the idea of ‘humanitarian securitisation’ propelled by humanitarianism amidst the emergence of new wars linked to inequality. Humanitarian securitisation is defined here as the process of securitising the humanitarian crises brought about by the new wars – specifically, internal conflicts and terrorism – to justify the use and implementation of humanitarian intervention in the target states. As the foremost authority on ‘new wars’, Mary Kaldor ( 2016: 147 ), describes these phenomena as the ‘combination of political violence, organised crime and massive violations of human rights’ happening in di
Read more