| |
Dear Colleagues
One can argue that global abundance was achieved some years ago, but has been sequestered for access by a limited few … and now there are signs of spiralling destruction of the environment in the ongoing quest for monetized assets.
The Sachs approach to poverty alleviation … that in essence calls for a lot more resources doing more or less the same thing with little or no systemic change is likely to impoverish and not enrich. It is value destruction that has to stop in order for value creation to leave a benefit in the communities that need progress. The millennium village (MV) approach has very high costs for very good goals … but can it ever be replicated at an affordable cost. If it can … great … but my attempts to find data to support this have not been welcomed by the MV organization … which is a sure sign to an accountant that all is not well.
My view of the Sachs approach may be wrong … but such data as I have suggests that it is very much a flawed approach. My preference is for approaches that start with the idea that a community has human resources and these people have priorities … and then move on from there. I call this Community Centric Sustainable Development (CCSD).
Peter Burgess
|