img1 img2
logo
img3 img4
 

Analysis

Let’s begin with some simple semantics: poor [bad] performance; poor [bad] quality; poor [shoddy] work; poor [weak] effort; etc. So, what do we mean when we talk about “poor people” or “the poor”? I’m struck by how – in discussions on social policy in many high-income countries – progressive writers often avoid using the term “the poor,” preferring to talk about “families living on low incomes” or “families living in poverty.” Yet, in international development, many of us – and, yes, there is significant mea culpa here – have fallen into the trap of referring to such families and individuals as “the poor.”

In September 2013 the International Monetary Fund (IMF) released a Discussion Note called Women, Work, and the Economy: Macroeconomic Gains From Gender Equity. The report examines “whether women have the same opportunities as men to participate in labour markets in the first place, [or] in other words, are women empowered to contribute fully to global economic growth and prosperity?”

In this two part series we share responses to the report from leading feminist economists. In part one Dr. Mariama Williams gives a critical analysis of the Discussion Note, highlighting the positives and shortfalls of the various sections of the Note. In part two Prof. Stephanie Seguino with Assistant Prof. Elissa Braunstein and Dr. Anit N. Mukherjee take a look at some of the shortfalls in the report related to gender wage gap, how macroeconomic policies perpetuate gender inequality, female labour force participation rate (FLFPR) and unpaid care work.

The World Bank’s Office of the Compliance Adviser/Ombudsman (CAO) determined on January 10 that the Bank’s private-sector lending arm, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), violated “its own ethical standards” when it “lent millions of dollars to a Honduran palm oil company [Dinant Corporation] accused of links to assassinations and forced evictions,” Nina Lakhani reported in the Guardian.  Were this true—had the Bank really acted against its principles, displayed over decades of consistent action—then the appropriate response would be global celebration.  But the IFC-Dinant incident is just the latest chapter in a miserable story.

Popular resistance to the IMF’s role and influence appears to be growing in significance. A December study published by the Initiative for Policy Dialogue at Columbia University and German political foundation Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, World Protests 2006-2013, found that of the 843 protests examined in 87 countries, the IMF was a target of 168 protests overall, 20 per cent of the total. The report reveals that hostility to the Fund is not restricted to richer or poorer countries; 25 per cent of IMF protests occurred in high-income countries and 24 per cent took place in low-income countries. The study found that where the IMF is targeted, it is “for promoting a ‘new Washington Consensus’ that favours the interests of corporations, wealthy investors and the financial sector”.

This week the World Economic Forum holds its annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland. As the great and good gather to chart the direction of the global economy, there will be much talk of development, of transparency, and of the importance of trade. In light of our new research showing that Switzerland’s recent emergence as a global commodity trading hub might hide large illicit capital flows, participants may want to raise some questions with their hosts.

Bill Gates is worried – too many people are talking about raising the minimum wage. Appropriately, the world’s richest man spoke on the eve of the World Economic Summit in Davos. Gates is a great symbol of the Davos summit, an annual away day for global capitalism, at which the world’s 1% mouth concerns about poverty and climate change, while working on policies which fuel inequality.

Can the sharing economy movement address the root causes of the world’s converging crises? Unless the sharing of resources is promoted in relation to human rights and concerns for equity, democracy, social justice and sustainability, then such claims are without substantiation – although there are many hopeful signs that the conversation is slowly moving in the right direction.

With its two-trillion-dollar economy, recent discoveries of billions of dollars worth of minerals and oil, and the number of investment opportunities it has to offer global players, Africa is slowly shedding its image as a development burden.

“While global direct investment has shown some decline, dropping by 18 percent in 2012, in Africa foreign direct investment rose by five percent,” Ken Ogwang, an economic expert affiliated with the Kenya Private Sector Alliance (KEPSA), which has a membership of over 60 businesses, told IPS.

Since 2012, Kenya has made a series of mineral discoveries, including unearthing 62.4 billion dollars worth of Niobium – a rare earth deposit. The discovery in Kenya’s Kwale County has made the area among the world’s top five rare earth deposits sites, and allows Kenya to enter a market that has long been dominated by China.

The Transnational Institute is proud to launch its third annual ‘State of Power’ report as the World Economic Forum meets in Davos. This anthology exposes and analyses the principal power-brokers, members of the “Davos class”, who have caused financial, economic, social and ecological crises worldwide.

Unless we know which elites control our wealth and resources, understand how they influence political and social processes, and can identify the systems, structures and policies by which they maintain their power, TNI believes our hopes for advancing social and environmental justice are slim. Justice demands a recalibration of power and that requires us to better understand it.

Read the report

 

 

China's top leaders have held secretive offshore companies in tax havens that helped shroud the communist elite's wealth.

Read the whole story

Focus on
Search
Interesting links
Follow me
facebook twitter rss