SDGs and Global Poverty

The Sustainable Development Goals: Geography, Climate Change, Human Rights, and the United Nations’ Renewed Call to End Poverty Everywhere

On September 25, 2015, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as its new framework for international development. Goal 1 of the SDGs is overarching: “To end poverty in all its forms everywhere.” Although “everywhere” includes the Diocese of Oregon, this article explores high-level concepts underlying our attitudes and responses to extreme poverty in the world’s poorest countries. It identifies and explores the ground Episcopalians share with the United Nations, concluding that poverty alleviation is a common moral priority.

Poverty has been described as a distribution problem, but it is ultimately a product of belief systems and psychology. Because aspects of our Christian tradition have contributed to some common misconceptions about poverty, labeling these errors may help us move past them.

One roadblock is a very human tendency to assign personal fault to those suffering from poverty. This is not our belief as contemporary Episcopalians, but other Christian theologies do apportion fault to the poor. These beliefs range from the Protestant/Puritan work ethic and Calvinism to contemporary preachers of the Prosperity Gospel. Underlying these beliefs, many of which permeate Western culture, are the notions that poverty is a sign of God’s disfavor, a lack of right belief or right action, or both.

Another, perhaps more familiar obstacle is our tacit acceptance of poverty as inevitable. In the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and John, when a woman (Mary in John’s Gospel) anointed Jesus with costly ointment and the disciples grumbled about it, wondering out loud why the ointment wasn’t sold and the proceeds given to the Poor, Jesus defended the woman, telling the disciples, “For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me.”

Jesus was quoting Deuteronomy. The context for Jesus’s quote is God’s gift of the Promised Land to the Israelites, under the premise that there would always be enough for the Israelites to thrive. Perhaps in a nod to human frailty and the distribution problem, the passage includes two important directives: (1) to forgive debts every seven years; and, (2) to “Open your hand to the poor and needy neighbor in your land.” Although Episcopalian theology rejects the inevitability of poverty, it is an aspect of other Christian theologies that, again, are woven into the fabric of Western culture.

While poverty is not inevitable, extreme poverty can become entrenched and difficult to eradicate. The causes of poverty, though, are very much a function of geography and history.

To illustrate this, the ten poorest countries, measured by per capita GDP at purchasing power parity, are all in Africa or are African coastal islands: Madagascar, Guinea, Eritrea, Mozambique, Niger, Burundi, Liberia, Malawi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Central African Republic. Of the 20 poorest countries, only Kiribati and Haiti are not in Africa. In contrast, the ten richest countries, starting with the wealthiest, are petro-states, global financial powerhouses, small kingdoms, resource rich, or a combination of these factors: Qatar, Luxembourg, Singapore, Brunei Darussalam, Kuwait, Norway, United Arab Emirates, Hong Kong, the United States, and Switzerland.

The most striking example of geography and history determining economic outcomes is the contrast between Haiti and the Dominican Republic, which share the Island of Hispaniola. Haiti is the 20th poorest country in the world while the Dominican Republic is number 100. How did this happen? Haiti was historically deforested and is naturally drier than the Dominican side of the island. Deforestation exposed what little fertile soil existed on Haiti to erosion and loss. Although conflicts among disparate ethnic groups, political corruption, and other factors have contributed to disparities in wealth between the two countries, Haiti’s environment is simply incapable of generating enough food and other wealth to meet its people’s needs. Political reforms, afforestation, improved agricultural practices, and so on, will help, but Haiti is impoverished because it lacks natural resources.

Another commonality among poor countries is vulnerability to climate change, which is, in turn, a function of geography and greenhouse gases emitted primarily by rich countries. Droughts are more frequent and more severe in many parts of the world already. Due to unavoidable warming and geography, extreme drought is expected to become worse in the next few decades in much of Africa. This will make poverty alleviation especially challenging in the 18 poorest countries now that are African.

Recognizing the connections between material wealth, natural resources, and healthy ecosystems, the SDGs include several goals that are intended to mitigate climate risks by preserving, protecting, and restoring natural environments. These include: Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts; Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources; and, Goal 15. Sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, halt and reverse land degradation, halt biodiversity loss. These goals reflect simple biological truths: material wealth comes from natural capital and natural capital must be protected and used sustainably in order to maintain material wealth over time.

Turning specifically to the political concepts underlying the SDGs, these ideas reflect fundamental cultural values. A significant example of contrasting values concerning our attitudes about poverty is this: in the United States, most people reject the idea that individual human beings have the right to a minimum standard of living above the poverty line. However, Article 25, Section 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (the “Declaration”) states: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment sickness, disability, widowhood, old age, or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

The SDGs extend and reflect the values contained in the Declaration, which include a value about poverty—that it should not exist. Period. While Article 25 stands on its own, its place in the Declaration reflects the belief that poverty prevents human beings from realizing their full potential and that poverty undermines other fundamental rights.

Our baptismal covenants to seek and serve Christ in all people, to strive for justice and peace among all people, and to respect the dignity of every human being embody very similar values. We value love, dignity, justice, and peace. We actively seek these virtues in everyone we meet. In applying our values to poverty, we understand that poverty is not just or dignified and that it disrupts peace. Finally, out of love, our first value, we, as Episcopalians, are fully and especially well equipped to work for the end of poverty in all its forms everywhere.