The World Health Organization (WHO) has determined that poor people suffer greater loss of life and health from pollution and other environment-related causes, with lack of safe water, sanitation, and poor air quality being the main factors in determining life expectancy. The statistic that 20% of the total loss of life expectancy in developing countries is attributable to environmental causes, versus only 4% in rich countries is also indicative of the fact that the poor are hit the hardest by environmental degradation. (Ibid. p. 6) Despite such overwhelming evidence about environmental degradation as a major cause of poverty, there is a widespread perception in developing countries that maintaining the environmental quality was a luxury that the poor countries can ill-afford while allocating their scarce resources in supposedly more important areas such as education, health and infrastructure. This is an arguable point. According to the "Sustaining the Environment to Fight Poverty..." report, pursuit of development that accepts environmental degradation as the price of progress often leads to situations in which the benefits of greater economic gains are either off set or even outweighed by economic losses from damages to ecosystems (p. 8). The study, quoting WHO figures, allocates very high cost-benefit ratios of up to 14 to investments in water treatment and sanitation, which indicates that investment in environmental conservation, is worthwhile even for the poorer countries as it is an effective way to reduce poverty.

So what are the possible solutions to the problem of environmental degradation, which often leads to poverty? Perhaps the most important way out is the need for the stake-holders, especially the policy makers, to be convinced about the gravity of the problem and to be aware that a degraded...

Second, a coordinated effort is required at the international and domestic levels to tackle the problem with the involvement of the people who matter most -- the poorest sections of the population. Third: it has also been observed that the poorest people often lack the rights to the natural resources, including title to the land on which they depend and work; hence they do not have the incentive to maintain or prevent its degradation. If they are given the rights to these resources, especially ownership of land, they would not only prevent their degradation but also make investments for their improvement, lifting themselves and their families out of the debilitating poverty ("Assessing Environment's..." 2005, p.10).
References

Assessing Environment's Contribution to Poverty Reduction" (2005). United Nations Development Program for Poverty-Environment Partnership. Retrieved on June 13, 2007 at http://www.undp.org/pei/pdfs/AssessingEnvironmentsRoleinPovertyReduction.pdf

Sustaining the Environment to Fight Poverty and Achieve the MDGs." (2005). United Nations Development Program for Poverty-Environment Partnership. Retrieved on June 13, 2007 at http://www.undp.org/pei/pdfs/SustainingEnvironmentFightPoverty.pdf

UNDP is United Nations Development Program; UNEP is United Nations Environment Program; IIED is International Institute for Environment and Development; IUCN is World Conservation Union; and WRI is World Resource Institute

The perception is based on the controversial 'environmental Kuznets curve' (EKC) hypothesis, which suggests that environmental assets are degraded in the early stages of economic development, but they improve after some income threshold has been passed

Poverty