Dear Heart,
Today in one of my classes we discussed international aid within the context of the Millennium Development Goals. Briefly, the Millennium Declaration was signed in 2000 by 189 countries and stated eight highly ambitious objectives addressing major global issues including but not limited to poverty, health, education, and gender. This unprecedented effort has established a universal framework for development, and requires complex networks of coordination and cooperation from all hundreds of world players (states, NGOs, pharmaceutical corporations etc.).
As part of this agreement developed countries have in one way or another reached a consensus and agreed upon how much aid (as a percentage of the Gross National Income) should be given to the various causes addressed in the MDGs. What percent do YOU think Canada gives to international aid? A similar question was asked to some people in the USA, and they responded something around 20% (although they thought it should be a lot less...along the lines of 8%). Though the international standard was set at a mere 0.7%, the reality is that the average financial effort is around 0.46% (the US coming in with 0.18% and Canada at 0.29%). Was that what you thought? Didn't think so.
So why is it that the percentage aid is so low? Why do we even commit to giving financial aid at all? Obviously there are many other factors at play. It is inherent that a country must be selfish -- it must first fix its own backyard before tending to other's gardens. So it is understandable that there are other priorities such as funding a war, improving education, building infrastructure etc. take priority in a government's eye. Yet, on the other hand do we not have a moral obligation to help those less fortunate than us? I think we do. The latter reason is not entirely altruistic though. With the present world order I strongly feel that the theory of the butterfly effect comes into play -- the gentle flap of one's wings in Sub-Saharan Africa could have devastating effects on a country in Central Europe. Therefore it is not only a moral obligation but also a global responsibility to fund and support efforts such as the MDGs, for something so great can only be achieved if everyone commits wholeheartedly.
Before the end of lecture the Professor asked a question, and now I turn that question to you: In the moment before you're born, before you know your race, your income, your future, how would you choose a global value system?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
i know i would want every country to put as much effort into minimizing human suffering as they can afford.. which, really, is a lot. we can afford a lot.
my question, though, is how to we make a change, enough of a change in society, so that it happens?
this is where, i think, we're all just stuck without answers =(
The only response I have to that one is to utilize the media. I think we both know that the media is a formidable avenue for getting anything noticed -- bold headlines, constant coverage, devastating pictures, doomsday-esque predictions...they all grab our attention whether it be for a few weeks (Tibet), an hour (Earth Hour), or a day (Live Earth). Pressure increases the chance of change. Change is good.
How do we create pressure? Well that really is a whole other issue BUT I think we can start by talking about it. To your friends, to your family...not necessarily preaching but maybe dinner-table topic approach. That or you can vote me presidito of el mundo and I'll make this happen!
Wanna know something crazy? Apparently, Jeffrey Sachs (development economist) said that if the war in Iraq was stopped for one day...ONE DAY, then there would be enough money to finance the achievement of every MDG. 24 Hours. Crazy.
Aww..our little lillan's all grown up.. soo cute!
Post a Comment