Different solutions to poverty in urban areas
Poverty can be defined in two ways, which are absolute poverty and relative poverty. In terms of absolute poverty, Murray (2004:2) suggests that the lack of an adequate income and cannot gain access to basic necessities to provide for basic human needs-food, clothing, warmth and shelter- are a clear indication of poverty. In a relative way, there was an assumption that a certain standard of living was normal, and that those living below this, while they might not be starving or homeless, were certainly poor, which are called relative poverty (Murray, 2004).
Nowadays people are in the more industrialised and technologically advanced societies. However the global poverty is slowing changing recently then taking on a more urban face. (Watkins, 1995).In many countries, the reason why the urban poverty happened is that the rapid population growth, agricultural modernisation, and inequalities in land ownership. As urban population increases, urban poverty is becoming increasingly serious. For example, children playing in open sewers or of women picking their way through huge rubbish dumps is no longer shocking (Practical Action Consulting, 2009). Additionally, form 1970 to 1990, the number of urban poor in the United States rose from 44 million to 115 million, compared to 75 million to 80 million in rural areas (World Resources 1996-97: 12). All of these illustrates that urban poverty is rapidly becoming one of the most complicated challenges.
There are several problems associated with urban poverty. With the problems of housing, urban services, community development, employment generation, micro-enterprise, nutrition, family planning, and education, it becomes increasingly clear that have a great influences on the whole society. “Of the problems to be ameliorated, poverty is perhaps the most basic.”(Allen and Thomas, 2000:10). Consequently, the urban poverty problem is urgent needed to solve. The purpose of this report is to discuss and evaluate the different solutions of urban poverty. The first way is accessing to sanitation. Next, investment in education would be introduced. The final way is to improve the standard of housing.
2.1 improve sanitation standards:
To start with, the government should focus on sanitation problems exist in urban poverty. (Practical Action Consulting, 2009) Masika (1997) suggested that physical infrastructure problem of housing, sanitation, water, which is a tradition policy approaches to urban poverty. Furthermore, lack of sanitation should be concerned for solving the urban poverty. Because the World Health Organisation (WHO, 2006) indicates that in excess of 13 million deaths per annum are due to preventable environmental causes. Also environmental causes approximately one third of death and disease in the least developed regions. Better environmental health management can prevent two of the world’s biggest childhood killer. It is serious that over 40% of deaths from malaria and a projected 94% of deaths from diarrhoeal diseases (Practical Action Consulting, 2009).
Urban poverty do not have access to basic services like sanitation or water .For example, in India about 54.71% of urban slums have no toilet facility. As well as because of the lack of maintenance most free community toilets built by state government or local bodies are unusable (The Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government of India, 2009). Which also means it is necessary to solve basic service especially like sanitation. As a result, in India urban poverty report discuses that to improve sanitation standards, “it is suggested to construct community toilets, to extend sewerage networks to slum areas and connect toilet outlets with that, and community management of toilets in common places” (The Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government of India, 2009).
It is believed that the best least cost and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document