Global Poverty: Ethics, Stakeholders, and Singer's Utilitarianism

Introduction: The Scale of Global Poverty

The World Bank (2012) points out that "nearly 1.3 billion people remain below the extreme poverty line with an income of U.S. $1.25 or less a day." The global financial institution further notes that "another 2.6 billion live on less than U.S. $2 a day, another common measurement of deep deprivation" (World Bank, 2012). It is important to note that although inequalities in terms of wealth exist regardless of which country one comes from, developing countries have been hit hardest by them.

In general terms, unemployment levels in Australia are relatively low and levels of education remain relatively high. Given the high average incomes of a vast majority of Australians, most citizens do not encounter many of the problems faced by millions of people in other nations. Some of the most common problems the world's poorest people face are occasioned by limited access to education, health, and other services regarded as essential for human survival.

In many ways, poverty is an issue of both justice and the common good. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as cited by Joseph (2011), defines poverty as:

A human condition characterized by sustained or chronic deprivation of the resources, capabilities, choices, security, and power necessary for the enjoyment of an adequate standard of living and other civil, cultural, economic, political, and social rights.

In a just society, individuals are expected not only to recognize the dignity of the human being but also to understand and respect human rights values. Any society that promotes inequality and has little concern for the suffering of fellow human beings cannot be regarded as just from a social perspective. Poverty, as defined above, deprives human beings of the factors necessary for the enjoyment of an adequate standard of living. Towards that end, poverty threatens and undermines liberty and justice for the world and its inhabitants.

Groups and People Having a Stake in the Issue

Several groups and people have a stake in the poverty issue. These include, but are not limited to, governments from across the world, religious organizations, volunteer groups, business entities, and the private sector.

To begin with, governments from across the world are interested in enhancing the social well-being of their citizens. In that regard, governments have over time developed policies aimed at empowering the poor through public expenditure reorientation, reduction of inflation, and related measures. In so doing, governments seek to uplift and cushion their most vulnerable citizens from economic and natural shocks.

Civil society organizations also have a stake in the global poverty issue. The poor often lack a voice to rally support for their various needs. Non-governmental organizations seek, among other things, to articulate the needs of those living below the poverty line. Driven by altruistic reasons, most NGOs have a genuine interest in ending human suffering by acting as the voice of the voiceless. It is important to note, however, that some NGOs — particularly in developing countries — operate to serve the selfish interests of their founders. In such cases, it is unlikely that the individuals behind these organizations would want the issue of poverty addressed conclusively.

Over time, Christians have also added their voice to the global poverty debate. According to the World Council of Churches (2006), "poverty threatens life and human dignity." The inequalities existing in society are not accidental. To some extent, this assertion holds truth: accountability and transparency failures have been blamed for the loss of billions of dollars in some of the countries with the highest numbers of people living on less than $1 a day. The World Council of Churches (2006) views poverty as an issue that "undermines the very basis of life of billions of children, women and men who are denied not only the benefits of growing wealth, but even access to basic necessities of life."

The private sector is yet another group with an interest in the poverty issue. In basic terms, the wealthier people become, the more income they have at their disposal. Higher income levels lead to enhanced purchasing power and hence increased profitability for businesses. The private sector also plays an important role in wealth creation by investing in new and existing opportunities in an attempt to stimulate economic growth.

Developed countries have also stepped up their efforts to help less developed nations address poverty. This is accomplished by offering development aid, which is essentially meant to support long-term development initiatives. It is important to distinguish development aid from humanitarian aid: humanitarian aid is meant to alleviate human suffering in the short term, while development aid aims to address the structural causes of poverty over the long run.

Although most stakeholders are genuine in their resolve to end poverty, some may support the status quo for a variety of reasons. There are those who have questioned the real intentions behind international donor aid. According to Deen (2004), "donor money that comes with strings attached cuts the value of aid to recipient countries 25–40%." Recipient countries are often required to import goods that are uncompetitively priced in order to access the said aid — a finding drawn from a UN study conducted on African economies. As noted, the authenticity of some NGOs in developing economies has also been called into question. Although the vast majority of NGOs that receive funding from developed nations are genuine in their support of poverty eradication programs, some may be established as a vehicle to enrich their founders, with money meant for development projects never reaching its intended use. In that regard, some stakeholders would be disadvantaged if conditions were to improve for the poor.

An Analysis of the Issue

To reach their full potential, human beings must uphold and respect a number of principles that promote human flourishing. Although there are a wide range of such principles, a few are particularly relevant to an analysis of poverty as a serious global issue.

The principle of equality, according to Mizzoni (2009), requires that the interests of all individuals be given the same consideration. What is considered just for persons X and Y should remain just even when the positions of those persons are interchanged. According to this principle, human beings are equal and should be treated as such. Poverty fosters inequality, producing a world in which some individuals live in abject poverty while others live in absolute — and even wasteful — abundance. One root cause of poverty is the lack of equal opportunities, particularly in access to education. There exists a clear need to ensure that each individual has access to equal opportunities. A world divided into haves and have-nots has little or no regard for equality.

The principle of least harm suggests that, where harm is unavoidable, only those options presenting the least harm should be selected. In scenarios where every available choice carries some probability of harm, decision-making can be complex. The most appropriate alternative is the one that occasions the least harm overall. Applied to governance, this means that economic decisions made by governments should result in the least harm to citizens; they must not embrace policies that impact negatively on the well-being of the people.

Utilitarianism, in basic terms, "advocates actions and policies that produce the maximum aggregate utility or happiness" (Galston & Hoffenberg, 2010). According to the authors, Peter Singer remains one of the best-known proponents of the utilitarian approach to global poverty. Singer is convinced that by sacrificing just a little of what we have for the sake of others, we would essentially be satisfying the interests of a greater number of people. Singer suggests that we should donate to charities all the money we have left after satisfying our basic needs. In that regard, anyone who spends on luxury items could indirectly be contributing to the suffering or death of a person whose hardship results from poverty-related issues such as lack of food or medical attention.

References

Deen, T. (2004). Development: Tied aid strangling nations, says U.N. Inter-Press Service. Retrieved October 6, 2012, from http://www.ipsnews.net/2004/07/development-tied-aid-strangling-nations-says-un/

Galston, W. A., & Hoffenberg, P. H. (Eds.). (2010). Poverty and morality: Religious and secular perspectives. Cambridge University Press.

Joseph, S. (2011). Blame it on the WTO? A human rights critique. Oxford University Press.

Mizzoni, J. (2009). Ethics: The basics. John Wiley & Sons.

Singer, P. (1999, September 5). The Singer solution to world poverty. The New York Times Magazine. Retrieved October 5, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/19990905mag-poverty-singer.html

World Bank. (2012). Poverty overview. Retrieved October 5, 2012, from http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview

World Council of Churches. (2006, February 16). Ecumenical conversation: Changing social and economic context. Retrieved October 6, 2012, from