Nigeria Content Online

One of the grim paradoxes of our global digital civilisation is the increasing asymmetry between the rich and the poor.

The last
quarter-century has seen a doubling of global output. But this wealth
has accrued preponderantly to a few nations and a few classes within
those nations. In the United States, an estimated 5 percent of the
population control 70 percent of the country’s wealth. Poverty still
persists even in the most advanced industrial democracies. But it is
mostly in Africa and South Asia that we have dramatic incidences of
poverty bordering on destitution.

My respected
teacher Paul Collier recently wrote a book, The Bottom Billion (Oxford
University Press 2007). A former World Bank Director of Research and
Director of Oxford University’s Centre for the Study of African
Economies, Collier is one of the world’s most respected economists.

But much of his
technical work is covered up in abstruse algorithms that are known to
only a few. His recent popular work has made him into something of an
international celebrity. Collier underlines four factors accounting for
the phenomenon of world poverty.

First, we have what
is referred to as ‘the conflict trap’. Nations trapped in conflict such
as the DRC, Côte d’Ivoire, Sudan and Sri Lanka are willy-nilly bound to
remain poor. War saps the energy of nations and peoples, wiping off
physical infrastructures and destroying the fragile networks of social
capital that hold communities together. Post-conflict nations such as
Sierra Leone and Liberia also have to grapple with the challenge of
rebuilding hope and restoring confidence in societies where conflict
and violence have eroded trust among the people.

Second is ‘the
natural resource trap’. It is a well-known law of economics that
nations that rely solely on one commodity for their export earnings
will sooner than later run into trouble.

All raw-material
exports are subject to wild gyrations in world prices. With the
exception of oil and gold, most are also subject to path-dependent
decline.

The wisest leaders
have always pursued the path of structural diversification as the
ultimate solution to the trend towards increasing economic
vulnerability.

Thirdly, we have
the curse of geography. Many of Africa’s nations are small and
landlocked. There is only so much you can do if you are a landlocked
Central African Republic surrounded by poverty-stricken warring
neighbours. Much of Africa is far from the world’s growth poles. This
means that commerce and transportation are bound to be much more
expensive and a country cannot take advantage of the benefits of
contiguity to a prosperous neighbour as nations like South Korea,
Singapore and Malaysia have done.

Fourthly, we have
the problem of poor governance. The accumulated wisdom of five decades
of economic development makes it clear that leadership makes all the
difference. It would be difficult to contemplate Singaporean prosperity
without the figure of Lee Kuan Yew. It is equally doubtful that Tunisia
would have achieved so much in economic and social development without
the leadership of the visionary Habib Bourguiba and his successor Zine
Abidine Ben-Ali. Africa’s poverty cannot be dissociated from the
failure of leadership and governance.

The recently
concluded summit by world leaders at the United Nations (20-22
September) has brought into sharp focus the abiding challenge of world
poverty. The summit was convened by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon to
assess the achievements of the last decade in terms of the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) and to forge a new consensus towards meeting
the internationally agreed targets by 2015.

Many observers had feared that it would be just another talking shop. Diplomats are, of course, paid to talk.

And talk they did.
But the summit was also significant in highlighting areas of progress
and the constraints that must be overcome. It was acknowledged that an
additional amount of US$35 billion would be required annually to meet
the MDG targets. Donors have also pledged contributions of some US$40
billion over the next five years for the Global Strategy for Women and
Children’s Health. This new initiative has the potential of saving the
lives of 16 million women, preventing 33 million unwanted pregnancies
while protecting 120 million children from preventable diseases.

I am pleased to
note that our country was ably represented by President Jonathan
Goodluck and the Senior Special Assistant on MDGs, Amina Az-Zubair.
While some progress has been made in such areas as school enrolment and
child health, we are well below targets in the area of maternal
mortality. I dare to say that Nigeria’s problems transcend mere issues
of MDGs. With our population of 150 million people, tackling poverty
requires a concerted development strategy anchored on agriculture-led
industrialisation. Providing electricity across the country would
reduce poverty by 20 percent in Nigeria.

I know Ms.
Az-Zubair and I know that she can achieve even more if she has the
necessary backing. It was rather unfair that some sections of the press
recently made some outrageous allegations about her Office, insinuating
corruption involving figures that were wildly above the total quantum
that the Federal Government has committed to poverty alleviation over
the last decade. Some of the problems the MDG Office has encountered
have to do with legislators cornering some of the funds in the name of
‘constituency projects’. We would do well to keep politics out of
poverty.