Millennium Development Goals : Source 1 : Millennium Development Goals

Over the years living conditions around the world have improved, even in the poorest of countries. Despite this there is still a clear difference between high-income countries and low-income countries. High-income countries are defined as countries with very productive economic systems where the majority of people have fairly high incomes, while low-income countries are defineed as having low economic systems where most people are poor and many do not meet living standards (Macionis et al., 2005, pg 439). Even though poverty can be found all over the world citizens in low-income countries are living in absolute poverty rather than relative poverty

It is clear that citizens in impoverished nations are stuck in a poverty trap, where they are unable to escape even with the assistance of aid from well developed nations. Many citizens are contributing money to charities because there is a moral obligation to donate if it does not put us into a state of economic instability. On the other hand, no matter how much aid is being given to nations stuck in poverty, this money is not helping any of the citizens. The money is going directly into the hands of corrupt governments and corporations, who constantly use it improperly. This aspect of money misuse is clearly illustrated in Katherine Boo’s Behind the Beautiful Forevers. Boo focuses the book on the impoverished slum of Annawadi, located in Mumbai, India. Throughout the book, Boo shows examples of how the citizens of Annawadi are stuck in a poverty trap because of the country’s inconsistent and inefficient systems, leading to the failure of sustainable growth and poverty reduction to the nation. India is not the only place falling victim to this problem; many other third world countries grapple with the same issues. Other than helping the nations, aid has made impoverished nations circumstances even worse, pushing it into a further state of poverty. The main components of the failure of aid are due to developing countries not having proper infrastructure and institutions, no efficient government, and a dependence on aid.

The variations in the living standards among the people from place to place, and from time to time have always been existent. Greed, injustice and inequality are the three sides of the triangle of poverty and wherever we see them, poverty is always there. Humans cannot overcome a serious problem such as poverty without addressing those three main causes. Even this problem is worldwide; it varies from one area to another. It is higher in areas which were colonized for a long time before such as Africa, Asia and Latin America than other areas which were not colonized for a long time such as Europe and America. We cannot imagine the swift change that happens in the last century in poverty. Surprisingly, it is only one percent of the population that controls most of the international financial assets, creating a massive change in the international landscape of poverty. It was mentioned in the introduction to the text that was taken from Jacob Riis’ book “How the Other Half Lives” this quotation: “Curiously, today, that economic divide has changed and we now speak of a much wider division: the one percent versus nighty nine percent”. It is interesting, but not surprising to see today with all modern thinking and technological progress, poverty is still growing to threaten our existence and it doesn’t seem to go away anytime soon. Most definitely, without addressing the three sides of the triangle of poverty which are greed, injustice and inequality, nothing really will work

Between 1990 and 2005, the rate of poverty in the developing world dropped from 46% to 26%, with the majority of developing nations continuing in this trend today (United Nations Summit, 2010). However, statistics show that approximately 920 million individuals currently live on a daily sum of less than USD $1.25 per day (ibid.). It is evident, therefore, that income inequality continues to exist, prompting the demand to further build the economy and better serve those in poverty through a greater focus on sustainable development.

Unfortunately, it was estimated that roughly 1.2 billion people in 1993 lived in extreme or absolute poverty, that which Robert McNamara regards “‘a condition of life so characterized by malnutrition, illiteracy, disease, squalid surroundings, high infant mortality and low life expectancy as to be beneath any reasonable standard of human dignity’” (Singer 219, 220). These estimates can be projected at nearly 2 billion today. A large majority of the people living in absolute poverty resides in underdeveloped countries. Among the nearly 4.4 billion people in these countries, “3/5 lives in societies lacking basic sanitation; 1/3 go without safe drinking water; 1/4 lack adequate housing; 1/5 are undernourished, and 1.3 billion live on less than $1 a day” (Speth 1).

Fast-growing economies in the developing world have done most of the work. For instance, an article by the weekly publication The Economist states that between 1981 and 2001, China lifted 680m people out of poverty. Since 2000, the number of the poor living outside China has been “cut” by 280 million due to the growth of developing countries (“How Did..”). Surely a great feat for these developing countries and humanity in general. Finally, the most colossal problem that has plagued humanity for decades is undergoing a consequential decline and it is reaching its final lap. Does this signify that poverty will no longer be a threat to the world universally? Are we no longer going to discern ads showing children with no access to fundamental amenities suffering from malnutrition and other epidemic diseases? These questions do have answers. A postulation that poverty is reducing and will subsequently be eradicated is infeasible to conclude despite recent statistics exhibiting a remarkable decline in the rate of poverty in the world. We must consider the methods utilized by these international financial institutions in arriving at these figures. Withal, even if these statistics are true, a few countries still face major challenges in eradicating destitution.

Poverty is a major menace to humanity existence in recent times majorly in the third world countries; it is one of the greatest threats to stability and peace more than other tussles like terrorism. The Sustainable Development Goal of the United Nations to eradicate poverty everywhere in all its form and ensure quality education by 2030 shows the global commitment to ensure a higher standard of living for mankind.

India's rate of population growth of some 2.2 per cent has been relatively slow as compared to other developing countries” (Johnston & Clark, n.d., p. 405). “High population growth rate is one of the major reasons for poverty in India and the lack of success to financial resources” (Kaur, 2013).

Eradicating extreme poverty and hunger is the number one goals of Millennium Development Goals. The target of reducing extreme poverty rates by more than half has been attained five years ahead of 2015 deadline. Since the inceptions of MDG, the extreme poverty and hunger rate has reduced significantly in most developing regions. The statistics conducted in 2015 indicates that more than one billion have been lifted out of abject poverty from the time MDG was coined. As compared to 1990 when the majority of the people use to live below $1.25 a day in developing countries, the rate of poverty has dropped by more than 14 percent in 2015. The global employment-to-population ratio has significantly reduced by more than 2 percent from 1991 to

According to the United Nations The Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target of halving extreme poverty by the end of 2015 has been met, as the proportion of people living on less than USD 1.25 (purchasing power parity) per day (the extreme poverty line for 2005) in developing regions fell by more than half from 1990 to 2010

The U.N. has been trying to eradicate world hunger and poverty since its inception in 1945. The answer to these issues have been Article 25 and the Millennium goals, but what are they? Article 25 is the set of human rights that govern the right to adequate living. It states everyone has the right to adequate health, shelter and general life, for them and their family. It also states “motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance.” The Millennium goals are goals that the UN have set to further improve human rights around the world in the 21st century. These goals include the eradication of world hunger, promote gender equality and provide free education for all.

To keep the economy running smoothly, to maintain price stability and to alleviate poverty are the main goals for formulating policies around the world. The experiences of every country are various as different patterns of economic development. Although it is widely accepted that the reduction of poverty accompanies the economic growth of a country, which encourages many countries, especially some developing countries, to concentrate on improving the standard of gross domestic product (GDP), it is still controversial whether the causal relationship exists or not, for recent evidence shows that if the measures are not taken appropriately by the government, citizens may remain impoverished. This essay focuses on China and India, two of the

According to the interactive map corresponding to the latest human development report, more developed areas in the world are Europe, North America, most countries in South America, North part of Asia, North part of Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea and Malaysia. Most countries in Africa and South part of Asia are considered as less developed areas. On the line graph we can see an upward trend in development for most of the countries. Moreover, some countries have been developing faster then others such as Korea, China (Hong Kong), Spain, France, Germany, Iran, Malaysia, Tunisia, Egypt, Singapore, India, Morocco and Norway – the most advanced country in the world; in contrast, the development of Greece, United Arab

World leaders came together in 2000 and made a commitment to assessable progress (The Millennium Development Goals report 2008, p.3). They committed to reduce poverty in under developed counties by 2015 (The Millennium Development Goals report 2008, p.3).The Millennium Declaration was a statement of commitment in humanity (United Nation 2010). These are eight goals, which are measurable and have a timetable. The goals address the reduction of poverty, education, gender equality, reduction of child mortality, maternal health, combat HIV-AIDS and other diseases, sustainability of the environment, and development of a global partnership (United Nation 2010). Along with the eight goals, 20 specific targets are set out for achieving the MDGs (The Millennium Development Goals report 2008, p.4). Monitoring is based on 60 indicators formulated to measure the 20 targets (The Millennium Development Goals report 2008, p.4). MDGs are essential to all nations of the world, for we live to improve the quality of life (The Millennium Development Goals report 2008, p.4).

The Sustainable Development Goals are a set of global agendas set by the United Nations to be achieved by the year 2030. They are a continuation of the Millennium Development Goals, which were framed through the Millennium Deceleration in 2000 to address the needs of the world poor (1). The Millennium Development goals included a set of eight easily stated goals with 21 targets and 48 indicators to measure progress (1). Amongst them- reducing child mortality (MDG 4), improving maternal health (MDG 5) and combating HIV-AIDS, malaria and other diseases (MDG 6)- were specifically aimed at improving health (2). This approach provided a clear and focused direction for many of the stakeholders, to work on realizing these goals. The SDGs, on the other hand, are longer with 17 Goals and 126 targets (3). Unlike the MDGs, the SDGs contain one cohesive health goal (SDG 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages), with 9 specific targets and 4 means of implementation within the targets (4) . There is criticism claiming that a switch from three to one goal would reduce the global focus on health. I argue that a simplified SDG goal is sufficient because it builds upon, and strengthens the template set-up in the MDGs. Furthermore, the four proposed ways of implementation to achieve these targets further reinforces the objective (1). Thus, if the work that has been laid out in the MDG era continues with a sustained focus, there is no reason why the priority