Progress since Copenhagen
Strategies for Reducing Poverty

     Relying on information complied from the forthcoming World Bank WDR report, the 1998 UNDP Human Development Report, and the Social Watch Development Report, Mr. Sinckler began his presentation by arguing that, while the Caribbean region had made some recovery in economic terms, it had lost some ground in years following the Copenhagen exercise.
He said that it was clear that the structural adjustment programmes implemented in such countries as Barbados, Trinidad, Jamaica, Guyana and Grenada, in the mid-nineties had telling effects on the social development systems of these countries. To this extent he stated that there was an obvious increase in the levels of poverty in these and other countries in the region. Of special note he argued the emergence during 1998 of a series of ad hoc poverty alleviation programmes which were in direct response to demands being placed on the state by various communities and organizations to address what is being seen as a growing regional problem.
Mr. Sinckler further stated that beyond the obvious increase in poverty, there was also a noticeable decline in the provision of basic social services, and by extension key social development indicators. Using the chart below, he illustrated that the region as a whole recorded worst performances in such key areas as literacy and basic education, child health/infant mortality, food security and child nutrition, reproductive health and health/
life expectancy.

     This he said was quite interesting with positive performances in many macro economic indicators including: Growth of GDP, levels of domestic capital formation, reduction in the general rates of unemployment, increases in the levels of foreign reserves and reduction in amortization of foreign debt.

     Mr. Sinckler argued that there was much to be learnt from these returns since they seemed to be telling Caribbean policy makers that the much-trumpeted co-relation between economic growth and the reduction in poverty was not as obvious as some would have believed. In fact he said that part of the problem rests with issues of distribution of economic wealth in the Caribbean and not so much with how much was created. He also pointed out that while economic growth had returned to several Caribbean economies, foreign direct investment had declined, particularly foreign grant aid to both government and non-government sources.

    He continued by saying that by 1997 most governments had recognized that rather than being able to put in place policies for social development, they had to take fresh guard and hastily put together poverty alleviation programmes. He said that as the case with most programmes that are hastily conceived, many of these programmes have not really had the desired impact. He argued that there was little public consultation with key stakeholders, matched with equally slim involvement of the said stakeholders in the implementation or ongoing evaluation of the programmes.

     Much of the problem he felt was based on misconceptualization of the causes of poverty and consequentially the misdirection of interventionist policies. Mr. Sinckler argued that the problems that faced the region in relation to poverty were systematic in nature and had to be addressed in this manner if progress was to be made.

     In this regard, he returned to his earlier point that the issue was one of distribution of economic wealth in the region rather than just only the creation of such wealth. To support his position Mr. Sinckler pointed to evidence in the World Bank’s, World Development Report 2000 which highlighted that while there was some improvement in the rates of economic growth in Latin America and the Caribbean, the rate of poverty, and more importantly, equity has worsened.

     This Mr. Sinckler argued, was where the problem lies with the issue of poverty alleviation. He said that policies designed by governments since Copenhagen tried to redress the symptoms of poverty rather than the root causes that related to the distribution of wealth created. He said that nowhere in the region was it evident that there was an access by Caribbean people to economic resources, including land. In fact, he argued that the situation had worsened since Copenhagen. This he said was even more so among women, who continued to face greater discrimination in terms of their ability to access and control economic resources.

     He agreed with Ms. Wedderburn, that there was a definite feminization of poverty in the region as there was for other parts of the world, and called for a greater level of participation by women in dealing with these issues. This he said must also be linked to the slow movement of Caribbean governments to fully engage civil society organizations in the development and implementation of poverty reduction programmes. He said that while some progress was made, the appropriate enabling environment for constant consultation has not been put in place and this was hampering the ability of countries to successfully tackle these issues. He said as well that the lack of capacity among civil society organisations in the region was having a devastating effect on communities to intervene in their own poverty alleviation programmes. He said this issue must be looked at if progress is to be made.

     Another problem which he identified was one of targeting of resources to those most critical areas. He said that while many accepted that resources were scarce not enough was being done to ensure that effective segregation of the various aspects of poverty for targeting. He said that part of this lay on how poverty was being defined, and a lack of clarity in determining what/who constituted, the relative as against the absolute poor. In this respect, he argued that lack of proper research was hindering many countries in addressing critical problems. He however conceded that institutions such as ECLAC, UNDP and CDB were trying to fill this void though more work still had to be done.

     He also indicated that many countries in the region had moved to put social development ministries in place, but these were often under-utilized and under-financed. As a result their effectiveness have been severely hampered.

     In concluding Mr. Sinckler reiterated that since Copenhagen, in terms of the redress of poverty, Caribbean countries have had some setbacks. These he said related to emphasis and targeting of resources for poverty reduction. Overall however he maintained that serious structural reform of the socio-economic systems in the region will be needed if any real successful poverty reduction programmes are going to be implemented in the region.