From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec
From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec From poverty to power - Oxfam-Québec
3 POVERTY AND WEALTH GOING FOR GROWTHSecond, Viet Nam has been far more successful in redistributingresources to poorer regions and maintaining high levels of publicspending in education, health, water, and sanitation. In contrast,China opted for ‘fiscal decentralisation’, limiting central governmenttransfers to poorer provinces, leading to a widening gulfbetween dynamic coastal regions with their booming exportindustries and a largely neglected interior. (This is something theChinese government has sought to correct through its ‘Go West’programme of encouraging investment in infrastructure awayfrom the coast).Third, Viet Nam’s recent history of war and national threatreinforces a strong collective sense of ‘national mission’,imbuing the country’s Communist Party with a sense of nationallegitimacy.Enormous challenges await both countries as they seek to buildon their achievements. Viet Nam’s accession to the WTO in 2006will constrain the government’s ability to use subsidies and otherelements of industrial policy to guide the economy and redistributewealth. The country must also deal with increasing inequalitybetween its ethnic minorities and the Kinh majority, rampantcorruption, and the increasing need for political participation.If anything, China faces even more extreme versions of thesechallenges, and on a grander scale.Source: P. Chaudhry (2007) ‘Why Has Viet Nam Achieved Growth With Relative Equity, andChina Hasn’t?’, internal paper for Oxfam International; Le Quang Binh (2006) ‘What HasMade Viet Nam a Poverty-Reduction Success Story?’ background paper for OxfamInternational.A developing country’s success or failure at achieving growth isincreasingly linked to its ability to participate in international trade.Global trade is booming, growing much faster than the world economyas a whole. Global exports of manufactured and agricultural productsincreased by 15 per cent in 2006, to a value of $11.8 trillion. Trade inservices such as banking and tourism rose by 11 per cent, reaching$2.7 trillion. 180Not surprisingly, trade is heavily skewed towards the rich andmiddle-income countries (including better-off developing countries).Today, for every $100 generated by world exports, $97.28 goes to the185
FROM POVERTY TO POWERhigh- and middle-income countries, and only $2.72 goes to lowincomecountries, even though they contain nearly 40 per cent of theworld’s people. 181Under the aegis of structural adjustment programme agreementswith aid donors or bilateral and regional trade agreements, manydeveloping countries have sought to improve their trade balance andattract investment by reducing border tariffs and import and exportquotas and, more widely, by reducing state regulation of trade. Tradeliberalisation also includes cutting subsidies or restricting the abilityof governments to impose rules on investment, and can cause surgesof cheap imports against which small farmers or local labour-intensivemanufacturers are unable to compete. 182 As firms have sought tomodernise production and recruit more skilled workers, the differencebetween skilled and unskilled wages has risen.In its 2006 World Development Report on equity, the World Bankconcluded that opening up to trade has been associated with risinginequality in earnings in many countries over the past two decades.Trade liberalisation has also cut into one of the few easy ways for poorcountrygovernments to raise revenues.In agriculture, the success of exporters such as Chile and Botswanagives some credence to the liberalising agenda. However, in countriessuch as Korea, Malaysia, and Indonesia, smallholder developmentstrategies were underpinned by government use of tariffs to stabilisedomestic prices (protecting floor prices for farmers as well as ceilingprices for consumers) and thereby encourage investment. Retainingtariff flexibility is particularly important because other instruments,such as quotas, were largely prohibited in the WTO’s 1994 UruguayRound agreements. 183In manufacturing, countries with successful growth records –such as South Korea, Taiwan, Viet Nam, China, and Mauritius – havedeveloped core industries behind protective barriers. Trade barrierswere gradually lowered once these sectors started to becomeinternationally competitive. Rich countries are now demanding thatdeveloping countries cut tariffs significantly, even though theythemselves once used high tariffs to protect their own fledgling industries.When they were at the same level of development as sub-SaharanAfrica is today, the USA had an average tariff of 40 per cent, Japan186
- Page 152 and 153: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 154 and 155: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 156 and 157: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 158 and 159: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 160 and 161: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 162 and 163: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 164 and 165: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH LIVING OFF THE
- Page 166 and 167: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 168 and 169: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 170 and 171: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 172 and 173: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 174 and 175: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 176 and 177: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 178 and 179: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 180 and 181: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 182 and 183: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 184 and 185: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH THE CHANGING W
- Page 186 and 187: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH PRIVATE SECTOR
- Page 188 and 189: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH PRIVATE SECTOR
- Page 190 and 191: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH PRIVATE SECTOR
- Page 192 and 193: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH PRIVATE SECTOR
- Page 194 and 195: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH PRIVATE SECTOR
- Page 196 and 197: GOING FOR GROWTHFifty years ago, Ko
- Page 198 and 199: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH GOING FOR GROW
- Page 200 and 201: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH GOING FOR GROW
- Page 204 and 205: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH GOING FOR GROW
- Page 206 and 207: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH GOING FOR GROW
- Page 208 and 209: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH GOING FOR GROW
- Page 210 and 211: 3 POVERTY AND WEALTH GOING FOR GROW
- Page 212 and 213: SUSTAINABLE MARKETSIn using markets
- Page 214 and 215: PART FOURLiving with risk 198Social
- Page 216 and 217: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY LIVING WIT
- Page 218 and 219: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY LIVING WIT
- Page 220 and 221: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY LIVING WIT
- Page 222 and 223: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY LIVING WIT
- Page 224 and 225: SOCIAL PROTECTIONIt may seem surpri
- Page 226 and 227: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY SOCIAL PRO
- Page 228 and 229: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY SOCIAL PRO
- Page 230 and 231: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY SOCIAL PRO
- Page 232 and 233: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY SOCIAL PRO
- Page 234 and 235: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY SOCIAL PRO
- Page 236 and 237: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY SOCIAL PRO
- Page 238 and 239: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY FINANCEwil
- Page 240 and 241: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY FINANCEinc
- Page 242 and 243: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY HUNGER AND
- Page 244 and 245: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY HUNGER AND
- Page 246 and 247: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY HUNGER AND
- Page 248 and 249: HIV, AIDS, AND OTHER HEALTH RISKSPr
- Page 250 and 251: 4 RISK AND VULNERABILITY HEALTH RIS
FROM POVERTY TO POWERhigh- and middle-income countries, and only $2.72 goes <strong>to</strong> lowincomecountries, even though they contain nearly 40 per cent of theworld’s people. 181Under the aegis of structural adjustment programme agreementswith aid donors or bilateral and regional trade agreements, manydeveloping countries have sought <strong>to</strong> improve their trade balance andattract investment by reducing border tariffs and import and exportquotas and, more widely, by reducing state regulation of trade. Tradeliberalisation also includes cutting subsidies or restricting the abilityof governments <strong>to</strong> impose rules on investment, and can cause surgesof cheap imports against which small farmers or local labour-intensivemanufacturers are unable <strong>to</strong> compete. 182 As firms have sought <strong>to</strong>modernise production and recruit more skilled workers, the differencebetween skilled and unskilled wages has risen.In its 2006 World Development Report on equity, the World Bankconcluded that opening up <strong>to</strong> trade has been associated with risinginequality in earnings in many countries over the past two decades.Trade liberalisation has also cut in<strong>to</strong> one of the few easy ways for poorcountrygovernments <strong>to</strong> raise revenues.In agriculture, the success of exporters such as Chile and Botswanagives some credence <strong>to</strong> the liberalising agenda. However, in countriessuch as Korea, Malaysia, and Indonesia, smallholder developmentstrategies were underpinned by government use of tariffs <strong>to</strong> stabilisedomestic prices (protecting floor prices for farmers as well as ceilingprices for consumers) and thereby encourage investment. Retainingtariff flexibility is particularly important because other instruments,such as quotas, were largely prohibited in the WTO’s 1994 UruguayRound agreements. 183In manufacturing, countries with successful growth records –such as South Korea, Taiwan, Viet Nam, China, and Mauritius – havedeveloped core industries behind protective barriers. Trade barrierswere gradually lowered once these sec<strong>to</strong>rs started <strong>to</strong> becomeinternationally competitive. Rich countries are now demanding thatdeveloping countries cut tariffs significantly, even though theythemselves once used high tariffs <strong>to</strong> protect their own fledgling industries.When they were at the same level of development as sub-SaharanAfrica is <strong>to</strong>day, the USA had an average tariff of 40 per cent, Japan186