----- Original Message ----- From: M A Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: l-i <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 2:14 AM Subject: L-I: Rich live longer, poor die younger in a divided world > > > UN report highlights growing gap between developed countries and those > ravaged by war, poverty and Aids > > Victoria Brittain and Larry Elliott > Thursday June 29, 2000 > > The mapping of the human genome may hold out the prospect of life expectancy > in the west nudging 100 but it comes far too late for countries where > poverty, war and HIV/Aids have turned the clock back on development by > decades, the UN says in a report published today. > Its annual assessment of progress in 174 states finds that the super-rich > are not only getting richer, they are living longer as well. > > While the income gap between rich and poor countries continues to widen, the > lifespan in some sub-Saharan Africa countries is only half that in the > developed world. > > The human development report (HDR) says the top 200 billionaires had a > combined wealth of $1,135bn last, up by $100bn from the previous year. The > total income of the 582m people in all the developing countries barely > exceeds 10% of that: $146bn. > > In the 30 countries considered to have the highest level of human > development, life expectancy at birth is more than 75 years. In sub-Saharan > Africa it is 48.9 years, falling to 39.1 years in Malawi and 37.9 years in > Sierra Leone. > > For the first time since it was launched in 1990, the HDR argues that these > are inequalities which the UN classes as human rights violations. > > A yawning gap > > > The report breaks new ground this year with the assertion that human rights > must include economic, social and cultural rights, not just political and > civil rights. Richard Jolly, the report's main author, says this is the most > important of the 11 reports produced so far. "We've taken a major conceptual > step." > > The report says global inequalities have increased in the 20th century "by > orders of magnitude out of proportion to anything experienced before". The > gap between the incomes of the richest and poorest countries was about 3 to > 1 in 1820, 35 to 1 in 1950, 44 to 1 in 1973, and 72 to 1 in 1992. Dr Jolly > estimates that a calculation of a comparable figure today would show an even > wider discrepancy. > > Between 1990 and 1998, per capita income fell in 50 countries, only one of > them in the 29 developed states which make up the Organisation for Economic > Cooperation and Development. > > Some progress > > > The national disparity between rich and poor is similarly widening in many > countries, the report says. In Russia the gulf is dramatic, but even in > countries not undergoing great social changes, such as Britain, Sweden and > the United States, there gap has been steadily widening for 20 years. > > Progress has been made in some areas, it says. Between 1980 and 1999, the > proportion of underweight children in developing countries fell from 37% to > 27%, and access to safe water has increased from 13% to 71% since 1970. > > But while income poverty in countries such as China has fallen dramatically, > 1.2bn people - a fifth of the world's population - are living on less than > $1 (66p) a day. > > In addition, 100m children are estimated to be living or working on the > streets and 1.2m women and girls under 18 are trafficked for prostitution > each year. > > Problems exist in the world's richest countries as well as the poorest, the > UN says. In the OECD as a whole, 8m children are undernourished, and in the > US 40m people are not covered by health insurance and one in five adults is > functionally illiterate. > > Britain remains 10th in the UN's human development index, which measures > literacy and life expectancy in addition to living standards. > > The report calls for bold new approaches to achieving economic and other > human rights for all. "Advances in the 21st century will be won by human > struggle against divisive values - and against the opposition of entrenched > economic and political interests." > > The report is upbeat about the surge of change in the human rights climate > in many countries, involving many different civil groups, women's groups and > media. > > This in turn has brought about a new democratic climate far removed from > formal election processes with no real participation by ordinary people. > > In a special contribution to the report, the Nigerian president, Olesegun > Obasanjo, writes of the "evil governance" experienced by his country before > its return to civil government. > > "The dark years spawned human rights activism . . . the more tyrannical the > regime got, the more people became aware of what they were losing by way of > freedom of expression and the right to determine how they were to be > governed." > > These changes, Dr Jolly says, are underpinned by the large number of > countries ratifying the various UN conventions on human rights. > > The convention on the rights of the child, for instance, has been ratified > by every country except two: the US and Somalia. > > And countries such as Norway, Belgium, Sweden, Brazil, South Africa and Sri > Lanka have adopted special budgets for matters relating to children. > > But these steps forward are against the background of some grim realities > for children in other areas. For instance, Dr Jolly says, "HIV/Aids is the > disaster factor for a dozen or more countries in Africa, pulling down their > life expectancy and their ranking in the human development index. Meanwhile > life expectancy at the top end is going up". > > The cost of war > > > Botswana, which has enjoyed rapid growth in recent years, has income per > capita on a par with Russia and Brazil, but its life expectancy has fallen > by around 10 years as a result of the spread of HIV/Aids to more than 25% of > the population. > > Although the number of conflicts fell during the 90s, the cost to the > international community of the seven main wars (not including Kosovo) was > $200bn - four times the development aid in any one year. > > "Not too surprising then that the volume of development aid went down > substantially in the 1990s. The shift of resources away from development may > even be contributing to future conflicts - as assistance is withdrawn just > when needed to prevent escalation," the UN says. > > > > > Guardian 29-06-00 > > > > --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
