In 2000, the UN came out with its Millennial Development Goals (MDGs) for world improvement. Prominent among these was the goal to halve world poverty by 2015. This may seem like a noble goal, and on face value it is, but the implementation and manipulation of the MDGs has decreased the true impact of “halving world poverty.” The MDG on world poverty has changed its goals throughout the years diminishing what it deems the “morally acceptable” number of poor from 828 million, to 1,329 million, a 331 million person increase (Pogge). Along with its overstated impact, the way in which global aid has been provided to those most in need has not maximized its utility and has often caused as much harm as good. The way in which governments and non-governmental
…show more content…
Instead of centering on top-down poverty reduction, aid should focus on a bottom up formation concentrating on local needs and circumstances. It should steer away from injecting billions into corrupt and dysfunctional systems and instead center on creating infrastructures that strengthen local economies and support local entrepreneurship. The next MDG focused on world poverty should change its language from merely a goal, to a goal with means of achieving it. What is more, it is vital that it sticks to the original goals created. The 2015 MDGs should first find a feasible, yet significant goal for poverty reduction (halving the number of poor worldwide by 2030). Second, it should state in writing the ways in which this goal will be achieved. Instead of throwing outnumbers without any notion of how they will be reached, the global community must come together and find the most efficient and functional ways to decrease global poverty. This policy prescription encourages the UN to create a new organization, known as the United Nations Poverty Reduction Organization (UN PRO), proposed to tackle the problem of how and to whom support for development should be …show more content…
Especially in the UN—an organization intended to keep world peace—poverty has become a central dilemma because it is so often linked with unrest and instability. Countries with high poverty are the countries with the greatest likelihood of internal and external instability and violence (Sachs). Quite a part from the more pragmatic issue of unrest, extreme poverty pulls at the moral (or reputational) heartstrings of the world’s leaders. The 2000 MDG were meant to provide milestones to addressing the pressing global issues of the day. MDG-1, or the goal addressing world poverty, was meant to address the problem of extreme poverty (living on less than $1.25 a day) around the world (worldbank.org). Unfortunately the way in which this goal has been “achieved” has not lived up to its full potential, and looking into the future, there is a lot the international community can do to improve any future likeminded
Instead of centering on top-down poverty reduction, aid should focus on a bottom up formation concentrating on local needs and circumstances. It should steer away from injecting billions into corrupt and dysfunctional systems and instead center on creating infrastructures that strengthen local economies and support local entrepreneurship. The next MDG focused on world poverty should change its language from merely a goal, to a goal with means of achieving it. What is more, it is vital that it sticks to the original goals created. The 2015 MDGs should first find a feasible, yet significant goal for poverty reduction (halving the number of poor worldwide by 2030). Second, it should state in writing the ways in which this goal will be achieved. Instead of throwing outnumbers without any notion of how they will be reached, the global community must come together and find the most efficient and functional ways to decrease global poverty. This policy prescription encourages the UN to create a new organization, known as the United Nations Poverty Reduction Organization (UN PRO), proposed to tackle the problem of how and to whom support for development should be …show more content…
Especially in the UN—an organization intended to keep world peace—poverty has become a central dilemma because it is so often linked with unrest and instability. Countries with high poverty are the countries with the greatest likelihood of internal and external instability and violence (Sachs). Quite a part from the more pragmatic issue of unrest, extreme poverty pulls at the moral (or reputational) heartstrings of the world’s leaders. The 2000 MDG were meant to provide milestones to addressing the pressing global issues of the day. MDG-1, or the goal addressing world poverty, was meant to address the problem of extreme poverty (living on less than $1.25 a day) around the world (worldbank.org). Unfortunately the way in which this goal has been “achieved” has not lived up to its full potential, and looking into the future, there is a lot the international community can do to improve any future likeminded