Habitat III: urban development and the future of the city

septembre 18, 2016 | End Poverty Now

Written by: Spiro Metaxas

quitoimagehabitat3

On September 10th, 2016 in New York City, a final draft of the New Urban Agenda (NUA) was accepted by members of UN-affiliated national governments. The NUA consists of 175 paragraphs, outlining the global standards to be followed for the future of urban sustainable development for human settlements. This agenda will be presented at the Habitat III global conference to take place October 17-20th in Quito, Ecuador. Members of UN-affiliated governments will partake in this four-day affair, with other invited and registered civil society organizations present as formal observers. Some believe that the exclusion of civil society groups and local governments from having any formal voting powers to be a tenuous deal. Moreover, because of this, their power to modify the agenda is severely limited. In light of this, social forums themed around resistance to this « mega-event » are set to take place alongside the UN conference.

Despite the benefits and drawbacks of the Habitat III event, the NUA is filled with desirable and feasible standards for governments to achieve. Importantly, non-governmental organizations occupied with the concern over the city (as an abstract concept) have fought for the inclusion of a formal « right to the city ». For months, the hashtags « #Right2City » and « #SupportTheCity » have pervaded social media. Umbrella organizations such as the UCLG (United Cities and Local Governments) have helped to spearhead the inclusion of this profound right.

On September 10th, the momentous campaign proved successful, as the Right to the City was formally recognized in the NUA, under paragraph 11, which reads:

« We share a vision of cities for all, referring to the equal use and enjoyment of cities and human settlements, seeking to promote inclusivity and ensure that all inhabitants, of present and future generations, without discrimination of any kind, are able to inhabit and produce just, safe, healthy, accessible, affordable, resilient, and sustainable cities and human settlements, to foster prosperity and quality of life for all. We note the efforts of some national and local governments to enshrine this vision, referred to as [the] right to the city, in their legislation’s political declarations and charters. » (alteration mine)

This right translates to a significant advancement for the flourishing of (urban) human settlements. More, it lays the foundation for a feasible goal to be sought after and achieved. In a correlative sense, the content of such a ‘right’ implies a duty governments and citizens have in seeing its practical implementation. So much is clear in the words « are able to inhabit and produce… » human settlements worthy of dignified, affordable living. As such, the general content of the NUA touches on so many vital issues that city-living encompasses: housing affordability, homelessness, economic development, urban security, infrastructure, local governance, civil society, policing, etc. Given the breadth and ambition of the NUA, our public attention is essential in overseeing the implementation and aftermath of any of its resolutions.

As we move closer to the Habitat III event in October, so too should we be reflecting on the place the city has in our everyday lives and how its development impacts our future.

Poverty Eradication Through Education in Undeveloped States

septembre 10, 2016 | End Poverty Now

capfqmhu8aemoqd

Written by: Shannon Maroutian

Unsurprisingly, education plays a key role in the eradication of poverty. However, those living in poverty may quit to work in order to support themselves and their family, leaving them without basic skills for the future. The vicious cycle is continued when their children find themselves in a similar situation: quit school, find an income. Therefore, it is vital that governments in developing countries help families escape the cycle of poverty through social programs that aim to develop an educated society.

Improving access to education is one of the most undeniable ways of ending the cycle of poverty. Both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child declare education as an essential human right. The right to education promises that every child has access to quality learning. In turn, increased rates of education will produce better employment opportunities, improve overall health, and increase economic growth. The benefits of an educated society extend across class-boundaries since more people acquire the skills needed to generate productivity gains for the state.

According to the United Nation’s Education for All Global Monitoring Report, providing all children with quality primary education would boost economic growth by 2% in low-income countries. About 170 million people could be lifted out of poverty if all students in poor countries had basic reading skills. While these statistics show that an increase in education rates in developing countries would improve overall economic growth, at least 250 million children are still unable to read, write, or count.

The effects of increasing quality education in developing countries cannot be understated. Education improves food security and reduces malnutrition by teaching youth about agriculture and proper nutrition. Education improves the overall standard of health by educating men and women on healthy pregnancy, children’s health, clean water and sanitation. Education reduces the threat of disease and viruses by spreading information on prevention and rehabilitation. Finally, education also reduces gender inequality by teaching children on the effects of young marriages and pregnancies.

Expanding access to education is essential for development in many of the poorer African states. According to the Africa Learning Barometer, only half of sub-Saharan Africa’s 128 million youth in school are likely to learn basic skills to live healthy and productive lives. Gender, income, and region contribute to the learning gaps in countries like Zimbabwe, South Africa, Uganda, Lesotho, Malawi, and Botswana. For different reasons, rural areas in Africa are the most disadvantaged in terms of schooling. Rural schools suffer from a lack of willing teachers because urban schools generally offer better opportunities with higher incomes. Urban schools have access to better infrastructure, health services, and general goods. Meanwhile, rural teachers are often less qualified and overwhelmed by the pupil to teacher ratio. Many African governments face an education crisis that needs to be addressed by implementing policies that improve infrastructure, health and sanitation needs. Rural development through social programs is necessary if African governments wish to see an improvement in the overall quality of education in their state.

In 2012, the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon launched the Global Education First Initiative, which seeks to ensure every child receives a quality education. Ban Ki-Moon stated: “Our shared goals are simple. We want children to attend primary school and to progress toward higher education that will help them to succeed in life. We cannot stop until every child goes to school. This is our task, this is our homework.” The initiative aims to achieve the enrolment of all children of member states in primary education. The initiative’s Top Ten supporters and advocates include: Australia, Bangladesh, Benin, Brazil, China, Croatia, Denmark, Guyana, South Africa, and Tunisia.

While the role of education is largely promoted on the international scale by non-governmental organizations (NGO) like United Nations and Child Fund, it is important that state governments, especially in underdeveloped countries, do so as well. With the financial, moral and educational help of developed nations and NGO’s, the eradication of poverty through education can be achieved in many underdeveloped states.

Experiments in Giving: Basic Income Projects at Home and Abroad

juillet 18, 2016 | End Poverty Now

By: Spiro Metaxas

income

The last few years have seen a renewed interest and discussion surrounding the idea of basic income. More than mere talk, many international governments have sought to implement ‘pilot projects’ to study the viability of this renewed policy idea, while other governments have put the question of implementation to its citizens. For example, on June 5th, 2016, the Swiss government held a national referendum on the question of implementing a monthly basic income allowance (approx. 2,500CFH) for its citizens. This was the first referendum of its kind, attesting to basic income’s increased exposure and desirability as a policy option. Although the referendum failed to garner a majority of support, advocates for basic income nonetheless rejoiced. They saw the call for a referendum over this proposal as a victory toward a future free from poverty.

The meaning and value of basic income guarantees

In one simple sense, basic income is an unconditional cash-transfer giving directly to individuals. The unconditional nature of basic income means there are no prerequisite conditions in order to be considered eligible. No work requirement, or test that aims to shows that certain individuals are ‘deserving’ poor. Thus, the fundamental idea behind implementing a basic income guarantee is to entirely eliminate existing government welfare programs that are means-tested. Doing so can subsequently simplify complex bureaucratic assistance programs already in place, easing the inefficiency and prying of bureaucracy for current welfare recipients. There are others, however, that suggest basic income guarantees can be supplemental welfare provision in addition to traditional means-tested welfare programs.

An additional benefit gained from a basic income guarantee is that it is non-stigmatizing. This is significant for the restoration of dignity. Conventional means-tested assistance programs reduce eligibility to questions of desert: does an individual applying for government assistance fit the criteria of ‘deserving’? Such questions can induce a sense of shame, thereby repelling the poverty-stricken from attaining the necessary means for everyday survival.

There is also growing evidence concerning the link between poverty and health issues, particularly mental health issues. Providing a basic income guarantee can (and has) had positive effects on quality of health. Those stuck inside the vicious cycle of poverty often develop increased anxiety and depression, in turn negatively impacting any prospect of escaping the poverty trap. Conversely, pre-existing mental health issues drastically increase the chances of falling into the poverty trap. A basic income guarantee helps mitigate the mental impact of poverty. It does so by providing an economic floor, thereby reducing the anxiety and stress that burdens the poor. In another sense, this economic minimum is liberating; it allows those who are poor or have precarious jobs to reignite their entrepreneurial spirit without the fear of acquiring an income for basic subsistence.

Who are its advocates?

The rise in support for basic income has not merely come from current welfare recipients burdened with the plight of poverty. Support for basic income is touted by politicians, health practitioners, entrepreneurs, academics, and ordinary citizens. The growth of precarious employment, and the introduction of automation in the workplace has much to do with a call for basic income programs. For many of those employed in menial employment, a sense of productive fulfillment may be lacking. A supplemental income provided through BI programs can engender a spirit of financial liberation, in turn allowing those with precarious waged labour to set their sights on other means of self-fulfillment.

In the tech-world, particularly in Silicon Valley, many employers are entertaining the idea of basic income. For those enveloped by the digital world and its work, precarity of employment has risen closely parallel to automation. For some time, robots have been replacing people in administrative, technical, and labour-intensive jobs. While this implies that the work-force should adapt itself to an evolving job market, it also means those currently or recently employed in such jobs need to develop new skills, or acquire further education to remain competitive and employable. Being unable to do so can hasten a painful slide into poverty. With the safety net of a basic income guarantee, this disconcerting reality slowly collapses to reveal something more promising.

Basic income in practice

To date, multiple countries (e.g. Finland, Kenya, Canada) are proceeding to administer pilot projects to test whether a basic income guarantee makes good on its promise of economic liberation, positive productivity, and the restoration of dignity.

A non-profit organization, GiveDirectly, has supported the basic income model through their direct cash-transfers to Kenyan citizens. Their operating model finds Kenyan’s who live in extreme poverty, conducts audits to ensure non-fraudulent transactions, and then directly transfers crowd-sourced funding to those in need. Due to the stratified selection of their funding model, it is not an unconditional grant for all Kenyans. Nevertheless, it targets those in extreme poverty with the purpose of providing basic monetary provisions to enable individual and household development. Their experiment in basic income has been so far successful, with evidence suggesting positive impact on well-being and consumption.

One of the first genuine cases of basic income provisions tookplace in the small Manitoba city of Dauphin between 1974-1979. During the experiment, an annual guaranteed income, called a mincome (minimum income) was granted to adults and teenagers alike. Looking back on the aftermath of Dauphin, Professor Evelyn Forget’s research shows that mincome did not establish a socio-economic utopia, though it positively impacted the health and economic prosperity of many, with minimal negative impact on the labour force and productivity. For those who received the income supplement, hospital visits were reduced. Moreover, those who opted out of the work force were, for the most part, single mothers and teenagers, choosing to stay home to provide care for their families. Forget’s finding reveals that a guaranteed basic income can lift the burden of having to find affordable childcare during working hours. For many, this can also mean finally finding meaning to the words “work-life balance”.

Potential Pilots in Quebec and the RoC

More recently, the Liberal government under Justin Trudeau has prioritized Resolution 100: (Creating a Basic Annual Income to be Designed and Implemented for a Fair Economy). This policy resolution seeks to further research for basic income with the goal of policy implementation. For many Canadians now living at or below the poverty line, this resolution serves as a beacon of hope. As stated, an unconditional basic income guarantee allows people to regain what they lose with conventional means-tested welfare services: their sense of autonomy and dignity. The details regarding cost, implementation, and macro-economic impact are yet to be revealed, calling for extensive research efforts investigating the presumed socio-economic impacts of basic income grants in different provinces.

In early 2016, Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard expressed his government’s intent on researching (and conceivably implementing) a basic income program in Quebec. Implementation can mean the elimination of its many social services into one simplified program, free from bureaucratic burdens and red tape. While this is arguably welcome, it also means that BI advocates will surely encounter resistance from the bureaucratic class. This setback notwithstanding, the BI program does not have to be a complete substitute for existing welfare services. It can actually act as a supplement to present programs. Although it does not eliminate the stigmatization of means-tested programs, it does provide additional relief for low-income earners.

Thus far it is clear that basic income has gained traction on government policy agendas and visibility as an alternative form of distributive justice for the general public. Although the policy impacts of basic income grants are few (but positive nonetheless), its steady introduction into the mainstream can further incite those sympathetic to the idea (and perhaps those who impulsively detract from it) to embrace a promising policy that can combat the advent of poverty and rising inequality.

Further references:

http://www.basicincomecanada.org/

http://www.basicincomepilot.ca/about

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/12/23/mincome-in-dauphin-manitoba_n_6335682.html

http://www.cirano.qc.ca/pdf/publication/2012s-36.pdf

http://www.princeton.edu/~joha/publications/Haushofer_Shapiro_UCT_2013.pdf