LDCs still unable to move forward
By John Madeley
LONDON: In 1971 the international community, under the auspices of the UN, recognized the existence of a group of countries which could be described as the planet's least developed and very poorest nations.
Twenty five nations were named on that 1971 least developed country (LDC) list -- 15 of them in Africa. But in the ensuing 30 years what has become of them and what, if anything, apart from compiling a list, has the world community done?
The depressing answer, in the forefront of the minds of delegates to the third United Nations Conference on Least Developed Countries held in Brussels last week, has to be very little. Of the original 25 only Botswana has formally graduated by the realization of mining wealth, especially diamonds, while another, Sikkim, was removed from the list through its annexation by India in 1975. And to an almost entirely unchanged first list, another 24 countries have been added -- this time 35 of them from Africa.
For "least developed" read the "very poorest" and for "very poorest" read the 610 million people -- around 10 percent of the world's population -- who struggle to survive on less than US$1 a day. A country is considered "least developed" if it has a low income, as measured by gross domestic product per head; weak human resources, calculated on indicators such as life expectancy, per capita calorie intake, primary and secondary school enrollment and adult literacy; and a low level of manufacturing industry. Countries on the list are also considered to be vulnerable to external shocks and natural disaster.
In 1971 there were 25 countries on the ldc list. By 1981, when the UN held its first conference on the LDCs, 31 countries were listed. That 1981 conference, held in Paris, ended with a "Substantial New Program of Action" for these countries.
But as it turned out there was little substantial about it. Western countries avoided giving specific commitments to step up their aid and, according to the Geneva-based UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) which organized the ldc conference, despite major reforms carried out by ldcs themselves in the 1980s, the economic situation of ldc countries as a whole worsened during the decade.
A second conference, nearly 10 years on and held in Paris in 1990, ended by adopting the "Program of Action for ldcs for the 1990s". The international community then committed itself to "to urgent and effective action" to reverse the deteriorating economic situation of these poorest of the world's countries.
But this action proved neither urgent or effective. The aid that Western countries gave to the ldcs fell from 0.09 percent of their national incomes in 1990 to 0.05 percent in 1998. And in the 1990s many ldcs were hit by a new shock in the form of HIV/Aids. This led to acute strains on health services and slashed 10 years off average life expectancy in some countries.
When the third conference was held last week, the number of ldcs had grown to 49 with only one graduate -- Botswana -- in 30 years. But undaunted by past failures, the conference launched yet another "Program of Action". But depressingly, there were no new commitments by Western countries and the question whether this third program will fare any better than its 1981 and 1990 counterparts must have occurred to Rubens Ricupero, Secretary- General of UNCTAD who admitted that the conference results were not satisfactory.
He said it had not been possible to make major breakthroughs on such issues as debt relief, trade or official development assistance, while the Belgian chairman of a preparatory committee for the Brussels conference Jacques Scavee warned that if poverty in the ldcs is not reduced substantially in the coming decade, international targets for halving poverty worldwide by 2015 will remain an empty slogan.
Christine Mandela speaking on behalf of non-governmental organizations in Brussels was equally forthright. "The Brussels program must be followed through or the conference would have no impact whatsoever in ldcs," she said.
Despite observers and commentators being pessimistic, hope is still alive, with committed professionals working towards a set of concrete goals. And with these, the world has yet another chance to show that it cares about the poorest of the earth. The question remains: will it do so?
Factbox One -- The original 1971 list of least developed countries (ldcs):
Afghanistan, Bhutan, Botswana, Burundi, Chad, Dahomey (Benin), Ethiopia, Guinea, Haiti, Laos, Lesotho, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Rwanda, Samoa, Sikkim, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Upper Volta (Burkina Faso) and Yemen.
Factbox Two -- The 2001 list:
The 49 least developed countries are Afghanistan, Angola, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo DR, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Haiti, Kiribati, Lao PDR, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Rwanda, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sudan, Togo, Tuvalu, Uganda, Tanzania, Vanuatu, Yemen and Zambia.
-- Observer News Service