Poverty

In studying economic development, I have always been aware of the gap that exists between theory and practice. Way back in my grad student days, Big Theory was the rule (see Reflections on Globaliza).
I have recently revisited the development literature, both for personal reasons and out of professional necessity in my current consulting work at the Asian Development Banktion for an example of the syndrome). Indeed, I suppose I was somewhat unusual in that I made the transition from the theoretical disciplines of political science and economics to the practical level of hands-on development work. (I also never managed to finish my dissertation and never quite made it to the big Ivory Tower in the sky, but that's another story best filed away in the lost dreams folder (ADB). And I must say that I am impressed by the breadth and logic of current development philosophies.
Let's take a quick look at some widely accepted principles in the mainstream development community, at the three descending levels of the world as a whole, Asia as a region, and the Philippines specifically. All three share in common placing poverty reduction at the core of development work.
Global Level: In September, 2000 the UN General Assembly ended the Millennium Summit by adopting a set ofMillennium Development Goals (MDGs). In addition to the first MDG of eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, the others include achieving universal primary education, promoting gender equality, reducing child mortality, improving women's reproductive health, combating HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases, ensuring environment sustainability, and "developing a global partnership for development."
With specific reference to poverty, the MDGs specify three targets:
• Target 1: Halve the proportion of people living in extreme poverty between 1990-2115
• Target 2: Halve the proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption and halve the proportion of underweight children (under five... [continues]

Read full essay