The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time

The Christian Gospel quotes Jesus as saying that the poor will always be amongst us, which seems to make any eradication of poverty in the world hopeless. But the book "The End of Poverty" gives one hope that world poverty can, in fact, be eliminated, at least at the "extreme poverty" level. And the book gives us a wealth of factual information to make the problem more understandable...and not so hopeless. I highly recommend the book to those who seek to be better versed in knowledge of poverty in the world. Jeffrey Sachs is the Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. 2002 to 2006, he was the Director of the United Nations Millennium Project Millennium Development Goals. He is a frequent contributor to The Huffington Post. In the book's preface, Sachs tells us that his purpose for writing the book is primarily to promote the idea that world poverty (later defined as "extreme poverty) can be eradicated in "our time." He tells us:* More than 20,000 people die each day of extreme poverty* The $450 billion per year (actually more) that the U.S. spends on its military is about 30 times more than the U.S. spends per year to help the poorest of the poor* Ending poverty is a better way to seek peace than the military solution* The $15 billion the U.S. spends per year to help the poorest of the poor is but a tiny percentage of the U.S. income And, in an early chapter, he gives us some basic statistics on poverty in the world:* About 1 billion people live in extreme poverty, living on pennies per day* About 1.5 billion live in poverty, or above mere subsistence* Another 2.5 billion or so live in the middle-income world* The remaining 1 billion people live in the high-income world* Those in extreme poverty tend to be caught in a "poverty trap" Some good news is that the number of those in extreme poverty has dropped from about 1.5 billion in 1981 to about 1.1 billion today, despite an increase in the total number of people in the world. He also tells us that most people who live in extreme poverty live in East Asia, South Asia or Sub-Saharan Africa. (Surprising to me is that the percentage of those living in Latin America in extreme poverty is only about 10 percent.) But between 1981 and 2001, the numbers of those living in extreme poverty in East Asia have dropped significantly, while those in South Asia have remained about the same, with the numbers doubling in Sub-Saharan Africa. Clearly, extreme poverty in the world is being concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa. Some valuable insight is in the history of world poverty. Per Sachs, until the early 1800's just about everyone in the world was dirt poor. Life expectancy was low, relative to today's ages, and most were living as farmers. As the world entered the modern economic growth, the population of the world rose accordingly, not really taking off much until 1800. Then, there were about 900 people in the world. Thus, says Sachs, "The gulf between the world's rich and poor countries is therefore a new phenomenon." It is here, that Sachs hopes to add insight. He would claim that economic development is not a zero-sum game. Everyone can win. The rich have NOT gotten rich because the poor have gotten poor - or because the poor have been exploited by the rich. No, technology is what is behind the long-term increases in income in the new world: the steam engine, chemical fertilizers, electricity, etc. And it was Britain that advanced the first, due to factors including its low cost of sea transportation, its relative social and political stability and its abundance of coal. As food production rises, fewer and fewer need to be farmers, and the division of labor increases. A second wave of industrialization emerges by the end of the 1900's, with Europe dominating in this first age of globalization. Says Sachs, "There is no single explanation for why certain areas of the world remain poor, there is also no single remedy." But for those caught in the "poverty trap," there is no way out without help. These people lack roads, trucks, irrigation channels and power. They have no capital, and no way to save. Over time, those caught in this poverty trap get poorer and poorer. And in Sub-Saharan Africa, they have the entrenched problem of malaria, plus a geography that makes it more difficult to escape the poverty trap. The poor also have an innovation gap for a variety of reasons, and the countries with extreme poverty get stuck with the highest fertility rates. Two countries with dramatically reduced fertility rates over the past 30 years or so are Bangladesh and Iran. In general, there is an inverse relationship between the fertility rate and the GDP per capita. Per Sachs, the most important determinant of poverty is the ability/inability to raise food. Over the past several decades, Asian countries have been able to increase food production and to participate in the "green revolution." This can be followed by higher literacy and lower fertility rates. In contrast, those trapped in rural farming communities are "caught in a spiral of rising populations and stagnant or falling food production, per person." Per Sachs, the first goal is to put an end to extreme poverty; the second is to give those still poor a "chance to climb the ladder of development." Sachs is fully supportive of the Millennium Development Goals of the United Nations. He gives us a full chapter about the mechanics of this, before launching into five chapters on economic/poverty details involved with five countries: Bolivia, Poland, Russia, China and India. Then, there are two chapters on Sub-Saharan Africa, followed by a chapter about how the George W. Bush administration shifted its attention from world poverty to the War in Iraq. The final seven chapters of the book detail Sachs' arguments for implementing an end to extreme poverty in the world. The titles of the chapters speak for themselves:* On-the-ground solutions for ending poverty* Making the investments needed to end poverty* A global compact to end poverty* Can the rich afford to help the poor?* Myths and magic bullets* Why we should do it* Our generation's challenge Despite the depth and breadth of information contained, I found the book to be a pleasant read. Ideas and information are repeated, but in a reinforcement way. And I found the book, ultimately, to be up-lifting. I'll end this review with some quotes that may prove that point: "The poor countries must take ending poverty seriously, and will have to devote a greater share of their national resources to cutting poverty rather than to war, corruption, and political infighting....Many poor countries today pretend to reform while rich countries pretend to help them." "Boring as it may seem, we need to fix the `plumbing' of international development assistance....these pipes are clogged or simply too narrow...." "Ghana (my note: where President Obama recently visited) is one of the best governed and managed countries in Africa....Ghana took seriously the Millennium Development Goals." "...success in ending the poverty trap will be much easier than it appears." "...the Millennium Development Goals can be financed within the bounds of the official development assistance that the donor countries have already promised." "Eliminating poverty at the global scale is a global responsibility that will have global benefits....I reject the plaintive cries of the doomsayers who say that ending poverty is impossible." "The movements against slavery, colonialism, and racism share some basic features....Ultimately, with a sudden shift in public attitudes, they transformed the impossible into the inevitable. In the same way, the end of poverty will come quickly, marked by a rapid transition."

There aren't any "I's" in the word "development," but there are plenty in this 2005 bestselling book on development by "Economist to the Stars" Jeffrey Sachs. The professor presents his personal vision of a grand plan to quickly eradicate extreme poverty, as though indigence was an easily treatable form of small pox. If someone would just give him a check for $1 trillion to spend over the next decade the ill of extreme poverty around the world would be sent to the dustbin of history. He writes: "The wealth of the rich world, the power of today's vast storehouses of knowledge, and the declining fraction of the world that needs help to escape poverty all make the end of poverty a realistic possibility by the year 2025."In the first third of "The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time," the author introduces his readers to a truly fascinating character, an intrepid man of integrity and unusual brilliance, with the ability to grasp simple and achievable roadmaps for alleviating poverty where others of immense education and experience see nothing but a tangled and unsolvable puzzle. Small wonder that many heads of state and ministers of finance from countries as diverse as Bolivia, Poland and Malawi have come knocking at his door, veritably hat-in-hand and on bended knee, begging him to lend his inimitable genius to the cause of their benighted land. The character's name is Professor Jeffrey Sachs. And he has a plan to save the world from abject poverty. Consider this exert (and note the use of the first person): "I reject the plaintive cries of the doomsayers who say that ending poverty is impossible. I have identified specific investments that are needed; found ways to plan and implement them; shown that they can be affordable; and addressed the counsels of despair who claim that the poor are condemned by their cultures, values, and personal behaviors."In fairness, Sachs isn't the only hero in his own story. In fact, he's a big fan of any important person who is a big fan of his. For instance, Sachs writes that collaborators in Poland, Bronislaw Geremek, Jacek Kuron, and Adam Michnik, "are giants in the worldwide struggle for human rights"; his ally Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland , Director General of the World Health Organization, is "one of the world's most skilled political leaders"; UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is "the world's finest statesman"; while Harvard colleague Paul Farmer is "a saint of global health." Evidently, the only thing remotely as impressive as being Jeffrey Sachs himself is somehow helping Jeffrey Sachs promote his vision and work.Snarky comments aside, "The End of Poverty" is absolutely a book of value and importance, even though I don't necessarily subscribe to the author's central hypothesis that solving global hunger is a simple, yet expensive trick. And I certainly reject his egocentric approach to the topic, that is often grating -- embarrassing actually. In the foreward, written by U2 front man and celebrated humanitarian Bono, the rock star tells a story of being approached by a flight stewardess while traveling with Professor Sachs. Bono humbly commented that the autograph seeker should instead be asking for Sachs' signature as it will certainly be worth more in time. I can't help but imagine Professor Sachs shaking his head in agreement with this preposterously flattering statement.Nevertheless, Sachs makes many valid points and helpful insights in this book. One of the very best is his argument in favor of "clinical economics." He compares contemporary development economics to physicians in the 18th century, prescribing leeches to bleed the sick, committing much harm and very little good. The professor's wife is a pediatrician and he's learned a lot from observing her work. He argues that five principles from medical triage should be applied to development economics: 1) an economy, like the human body, is a complex system where the failure of one system can quickly and easily cascade to others; 2) there is a fundamental importance in differential diagnosis that allows the practitioner to tap into the root cause of a common symptom (e.g. fever/poverty); 3) development, like our health, is a "family affair," and the economist needs to ask what the industrial world family can do to help the brother sick economy; 4) the economist, like any good doctor, must monitor and evaluate for outcomes, not just inputs (i.e. what's been done); and 5) the need to develop professional standards and responsibilities for the economist akin to the physician's Hippocratic oath (i.e. the economist needs to truly understand their "patients" - study their history and culture - and feel ownership for their health and well-being).Second, Sachs places particular emphasis on the criticality of physical geography. He first gained appreciation for this fact when advising the Bolivian government in the 1980s. I know from my firsthand experience in southern Afghanistan that grand dreams for economic rehabilitation easily founder on the rocky shoals of geographic isolation.Much like other book on economic development that ostensibly are not about sub-Saharan Africa, but really are all about sub-Saharan Africa (e.g. Paul Collier's "The Bottom Billion"), Sachs pays special attention to this benighted region, even though his goal is to eradicate extreme poverty globally. So why is Africa so desperate? Sachs quickly rejects two favored explanations from both the political Right and Left: 1) African governments are too corrupt (Sachs: no, many Asian countries, such as India, Indonesia and Bangladesh have been more corrupt and yet have achieved economic growth); and 2) colonial exploitation has devastated Africa (Sachs: no, many countries in Asia suffered just as much, if not worse). So then what plagues Africa? Sachs says it's the 3 D's: disease (AIDS and malaria, specifically), drought (unreliable irrigation) and distance (most Africans live in isolated, inland villages without access to navigable rivers).So is there any hope for poor sub-Saharan Africa? Sachs says, "YES!" But it will require an integrated approach - or "package investments" - backed by major and consistent financial support from the rich countries. He uses the rural, impoverished Kenyan village of Sauri to demonstrate his point. The farmers in Sauri (and just about all the families are farmers) are caught in a classic poverty trap. Their income is so low that they can't afford to buy critical fertilizers or medical attention. Thus, crops are reduced or fail, while family members are struck down by malaria or worse, forcing families to pull children out of school to help gather water or fuel wood. Economic growth for these families is worse than stagnant; it's negative. Sachs argues that a "big push" in 5 interconnected development interventions is all that is needed to get these poor communities on the first rung of the development ladder. "If a country trapped beneath the ladder," he writes, "with the first rung too far off the ground, the climb does not even get started. The main objective of economic development for the poorest countries is to help these countries to gain a foothold on the ladder." For a mere $70/person per year a village like Sauri can be boosted to the first rung of the ladder with strategic investments in: 1) agriculture (mostly fertilizers and nitrogen rich tree plantings); 2) basic health (village technician); 3) education (primary and functional); 4) power/transport/communication (grid power, roads, cell phones); and 5) sanitation (clean drinking water). Sachs claims that a village like Sauri can be saved for a mere $350K per year. "Foreign assistance is not a welfare handout," he stressed, "but is actually an investment that breaks the poverty trap once and for all."And here lies the rub with this book for me. The professor lays out a clear, albeit ambitious program of packaged, interconnected investments. He also quantifies what it might cost for a very specific village, thus remaining true to his call for "clinical economics" that treats each patient's case as unique. Yet, this experiment, which is both remarkably cheap (you couldn't get $5M from the Gates Foundation to prove out the model in Sauri?!) and absolutely critical to his core hypothesis, was evidently not followed up upon. He makes much of his visit to Sauri, the passion and earnestness of its people, the clarity of what needed to be done, the affordability of the needs...but that's the last we hear of this central test case.He goes on to chastise the Western World, the United States especially, for a general failure to live up to their financial and political commitments made in support of the Millennial Development Goals. Specifically, the West pledged to devote 0.7% of GNP to official development assistance (ODA), the most flexible and useful form of economic development contribution according to Sachs. For the United States, that would be growing foreign aid from the 2005 range of $15B (0.14% of GNP) to $75B, or roughly 50% more than the annual budget for the entire U.S. State Department.Sachs argues that helping the extreme poor is absolutely achievable. First, the global population of extreme poor (those caught in negative economic growth) is "only" 1 billion, which he claims is a manageable figure. Second, he is focused only on "extreme" poverty, those unable to provide the basic necessities of a healthy life, not the "relative" poor who can't afford cable and an iPhone. Third, the situation can be effectively addressed by targeted and achievable projects, mainly roads, power, soil, water and sanitation. Fourth, the new super rich in the western world can afford to pay the bill for these investments almost completely on their own. And, fifth, our available tools, especially technology, are stronger than ever. Despite these qualifications, Sachs' plan is wildly ambitious. Indeed, rival New York-based economist William Easterly hints in his 2006 counter-thesis "The White Man's Burden: Why the West's Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good" that Sachs has "delusions of grandeur." He argues that Sachs' "plan to end world poverty shows all the pretensions of utopian social engineering," and goes on to negatively cite comparisons of "The End of Poverty" to the writings of discredited nineteenth century utopian Robert Owen.Sachs estimates that the total investment per person required is roughly $110. He further estimates that even individuals suffering extreme poverty could contribute $10 per year to their own salvation and that their cash strapped governments could reasonably scrounge up another $35 per citizen in the form of taxes to support the program. That leaves $65 per person ($100 - $10 - $35 = $65) to be provided by ODA. Sachs suggests that the total ODA investment would be split roughly 1/3 to health, 1/3 to energy, 1/5 to education, and the rest distributed to sanitation and other needs.In 2002, gross foreign aid amounted to $76B, but Sachs says that even this number, which he argues is miserly, is misleading, as much of that money was in the form of debt relief ($6B) or import credits or for expensive Western development consultants or for middle income countries he says don't really deserve the money. Sachs estimates that only $12B of that $76B was true ODA targeting the neediest countries. Rather, according to Sachs, the world needs a whopping $195B in true ODA to the bottom billion by 2015 - or an increase of some 16 fold. Over half of this additional money would have to come from the United States, he writes. And for those who argue that ODA does not take into consideration private and NGO investment, Sachs says that those donations, while important and welcome, only total some $3B per year, or roughly 0.03% of GNP. In other words, a relative drop in the bucket. The author suggests at first that the most wealthy Americans - the top 400 income earners in 2000 who made $69B, or roughly the GDP of four African nations with a population of 161 million - pay the lion share of the required investment. Yet, like in many other examples, he doesn't present any kind of plan, but rather offers up a 5% additional income tax on those income earners of more than $200,000. The top 400 earn, on average, $172M a year. How he got from that number to $200,000 a year, I have no idea.He goes on to chastise the United States for spending 30 times more on defense than ODA. That is a reasonable argument to make, I think. Furthermore, he cites a CIA report that shows that there have been 113 cases of state failure from 1957 to 1994, nearly all of which contained the common denominators of high infant mortality, a closed economy, and an authoritarian regime. The vast majority of these events drew U.S. intervention in one form or another, thus arguing for the national security importance of preventing such failures. Or, as Sachs claims, "Eliminating poverty at the global scale is a global responsibility that will have global benefit." And he cites the Marshall Plan (>1% of GNP from 1948 to 1951), Jubilee 2000 Campaign to end indebtedness and PEPFAR as examples of American generosity. But these examples begged the question for me: Were Jubilee 2000 and PEPFAR successful? If so, how? If not, why not? Again, Sachs is silent on these questions.In closing, "The End of Poverty" is an important book and if you have half an interest in the subject you owe it to yourself to read it closely. That said, at the very least, supplement your reading of this book with Easterly's "The White Man's Burden" and Paul Collier's "The Bottom Billion." Sachs deserves to be read with thought and care. But think (or read) twice before you swallow his utopian visions of a world without poverty so close and so easily achievable.

From a well-known academic, this book is a must-read for student and practitioners alike. It's a classic in socio-economic discussions.

Inspiring read, great story teller

The book is very fantastic. It is useful to understand the phenomenon of poverty comprehensively.

J'ai un ami voyageur qui a fait un tour du monde de 5 ans pour mieux découvrir le monde et les enjeux de développement. Lorsqu'il m'a dit que ce livre (qui parle des enjeux de développement économique) était un de meilleurs qu'il n'a jamais lu, j'ai acheté ce livre, bien m'en a fait.Parlons de l'auteur d'abord. Classé à deux reprises comme étant l'un des 100 hommes les plus influents du monde par le célèbre magazine Times, Jeffrey Sachs a entre autres conseillé la Bolivie durant les années 1980 sur la stratégie à mettre en place pour lutter contre l'hyper inflation. Au début des années 1990, il a également conseillé le gouvernement Polonais sur la stratégie à mettre en œuvre pour assurer la transition du système communiste vers un système de livre échange. Voila pour le personnage.Parlons du livre maintenant. Enormément de gens ont des idées reçues sur le développement dans le monde. Beaucoup de gens pensent que si certains pays sont pauvres, c'est que leurs habitants sont paresseux ou corrompus. Beaucoup d'autres pensent qu'il y a trop de pauvres pour être tous aidés.C'est pourtant une grosse erreur. Dans son livre, Jeffrey D Sachs fait tomber un énorme nombre de mythes. J'ai notamment découvert que:- Si 1 milliard d'humains vivent avec moins de 1$, c'est car ils sont victimes de qu'il appelle la trappe à pauvreté. Lorsque les gens sont tellement pauvres qu'ils parviennent à peine à se nourrir, ils ne peuvent pas épargner le moindre centime pour l'avenir. A la moindre pénurie sévère de nourriture, ces personnes tomberont rapidement malade - voire pire - ne pourront avoir accès aux soins et seront encore moins productifs au champ, accentuant encore un peu plus la trappe à pauvreté.Sortir de la trappe à pauvreté est impossible par soi même, mais il suffit de très peu d'aide extérieure pour aider ces personnes à en sortir. Dans un village de 1000 habitants très pauvre d'Afrique (Kenya de mémoire), Sachs estime à 70 dollars pendant 5 ans les sommes nécessaires à investir dans les équipements de base (construction d'un puits, pompe à eau, construction d'un dispensaire, recrutement d'un médecin et d'une infirmière et médicaments de base, 1 véhicule motorisé pour le village, accès aux télécommunications et au microcrédit) pour sortir le village de la trappe à pauvreté.Bref, il suffit de 350 000 dollars (environ 250 000 euros) seulement pour sortir durablement un village de la pauvreté et enclencher le cercle vertueux du développement. Si les gens sont plus riches, ils peuvent épargner un peu d'argent, acheter des engrais, produire plus de nourriture, épargner encore plus, payer les frais d'école de leurs enfants et ainsi de suite... Utopique? Fournir 70 dollars par an (durant 5 ans) pour aider la totalité des 1 milliards d'humains vivant en situation d'extreme pauvreté à sortir de ce cercle vicieux couterait aux pays riches 70 milliards de dollars seulement. C'est 10 fois moins que le seul budget militaire des Etats-Unis...Partant de ce constat (oui la fin de la pauvreté est possible pour un coût extrêmement modique), Jeffrey Sachs explique dans son livre quelles sont les nombreuses causes du sous-développement (causes géographiques, climatiques, politiques...) et donne une méthode et une stratégie concrète sur comment mettre fin à l'extrême pauvreté dans le mondePragmatique, concret, optimiste, ce livre est un excellent ouvrage (la preuve: Bono a accepté de le préfacer). Loin des clichés sur les pays en développement véhiculé par les médias de masse, ce livre vous aidera à mieux comprendre le monde contemporain et les grands enjeux de développement dans le monde. Bref, c'est un excellent ouvrage passionnant que je vous recommande

I bought this book on a recommendation and wasn't really sure whether I wanted to read a book written by an economist. Well, this book is a true 'eye opener.' Jeffrey Sach's account is well written, enjoyable and doesn't hold back any punches. His main conclusion is that poverty can be alleviated globally but 'Richer' economies' lack the will to make any serious inroads to tackle the problem.It also highlights the bad decisions and policies followed by the 'western leaders' and his hypothesis that even 'current backlash against the west' could have been dealt with far more effectively, if a concerted effort had been made to eradicate poverty.A compelling, powerful and moving account, together with a blueprint for the future.Future leaders, such as Imran Khan (Pakistan), would be well placed to read this book as Jeffrey Sachs needs to be on any team serious about changing the plight of it's people.