 |
|
|
Economic Development and Human Rights:
Presented at the Meeting on: Development Studies Programme November 1999 Economic development is becoming increasingly incorporated into the concept of human rights. For over 35 years now, the question of the relationship between development and human rights has been under discussion in the world community. At this point, it is common to equate economic development with the promotion of human rights, and to argue that human beings should be at the center of the development process. Indeed, one of the fundamental and universal rights of human beings is their right to development. According to a UN GA resolution 41/128 ??(1986), this is: An inalienable right by virtue of which every human person and all people are entitled to participate in, contribute to and enjoy economic, social, cultural, and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized. (p. ??1) According to this view, people have the right to chose and pursue a path of socio-economic development that brings them benefit. The full enjoyment of individual human rights requires certain human rights to devolve, wholly or in part, upon groups (Kamenka, 1988). The Convention on the Rights of Children is intended for the protection of groups defined by age criteria. It implies an acceptance that the ??group is qualitatively different from the sum of its parts. In away, children’s’ rights are peoples’ rights. Such rights represent “societal initiatives to project normative energy on behalf of those victimized by current political, economic, and cultural arrangements as administered by states” (Falk, 1988, p. 17). If the concept of people applies to groups defined by national, ethnic, racial, or religious criteria, it must equally apply to children. Such a group occupies a “minority status”, where a minority is defined on the basis of lack of power and alienation from decisions that ??affect their destiny. As such children deserve to enjoy all stated human rights (be it political, social, cultural, and economic). They must also enjoy those rights that apply to people such as the right to self-determination, the right to peace, and the right to development. The complexity of the relationship between human rights and economic development is further exacerbated by the role of the state. States must be acting in a fundamental representational role, and it is ultimately the legitimacy of the peoples that they represent, not their expression of state interests, this is the underlying ground of their validity. This argument is obscured by the fact that many governmental actors can govern only by reliance on coercion and intimidation. For children, the problem is more complex as their voices and concerns are not part of the process of constructing political and economic policies (as they are not ??considered as full citizens deserving of voting rights). Children are unable to assert their views in the development process as they lack the resources that give the power to articulate and advocate their views and interests. The arguments behind peoples’ rights pose moral challenge to the state system, and possibly augmenting political pressures on governments to be more protective of human claims emanating form various human claims including those of children. One of the best – known examples of peoples’ rights is the right to sovereignty over natural resources (UNGA, 1962). This right applies to children (as people) who deserve that their rights to economic and natural resources be protected. Closely related is the right of people to participate in economic and social development. A UN Report (1975) has defined such participation as: Active and meaningful involvement of the masses of people at the different levels in a) the decision – making process for the determination of societal goals and allocation of resources to achieve them; and b) the voluntary execution of resulting programs and projects. (p. 4) Add to that, the right of people to participate in the fruits of development. These collective rights apply to children more than any other group, as the present allocation of resources and the setting of societal goals have significant impact on their future rights and choices. Developmental thinking that takes into account the rights of children as people is consistent with the various conventions on human rights.? Development economists regarded concepts of human rights as irrelevant and disruptive to their attempt to expand GNP. They also treated development issues as non-political issues. This was, of course futile because no decision has such far – reaching political consequences for a country and, indeed, for the human rights of its people, as the choice of development strategy. In contrast, the right to development would require that:? The choice of development policies not be based solely on macro-economic
models, but that it should take fully into account the needs of the primary
subject of human rights law, the individual. (Rich, 1988, p. 54) Humanistic Development A humanistic approach to development questions traditional methods of economic development and call for simplicity, non-violence, and integration (Schumacher, 1973). The objective of economic development, in this view, is to achieve what ??Mahatma Gandhi called the realization of human potential (Todaro, 1985). For Malocm Adieseshiah, “development is a form of humanism” (M’baye, 1981). Development as humanism implies the absence of repression as well as of gross violations of human rights. M’baye (1981) suggested that if one could establish the parameters of development on the one hand and of respect for human rights on the other, ‘one would see that the two curves appear the same.” (p. 65) he argued that development as defined in terms of economic growth is incompatible with the respect of human rights. The need to emphasize the element of human development was recognized by the UN General Assembly when, at its thirty-fifth session, it adopted the Strategy for Development Decade (3), declaring that the ‘development process must promote human dignity” (UN GA, 1980, p. 8). The same document states that: The ultimate aim of development is the constant improvement of the well being of the entire population on the basis of its full participation in the process of development and a fair distribution of the benefits therefrom. (p. 8) Economic Development & Human Development Various UNDP reports define human development as: The process of enlarging the range of people’s choices – increasing their opportunities for education, health care, income and employment, and covering the full range of human choices from a sound physical environment to economic and political freedoms. (UNDP, 1992, p. 2) Human development broadens the development dialogue from a discussion of mere means (GNP growth) to a discussion of ultimate ends. A human development model draws its inspiration from the long-term goals of a society. In his report Initiative for Change, the UNDP Administrator suggested that ??sustainable human development be: Development that not only generates economic growth but distributes its benefits equitably; that regenerates the environment rather than destroying it; that empowers people rather than marginalising them. It is development that is pro-poor, pro-nature, pro-jobs, pro-women, and pro-children. Human development gives prime emphasis to the role of human beings in their social context. This emphasis is seen as highly beneficial to economic growth. The importance of appropriate macroeconomic policies is also acknowledged. Vylder (1995) argues that: The point is that policies at the macro-level should be explicitly designed in support of, rather than isolated from, the over-riding objectives of sustainability and human development. (p. 7) A sustainable human development approach differs, in some aspects, from a
more conventional approach to macroeconomic policy. Rates of growth in per
capita GDP are not always equated with rates of growth in human development.
Until 1990, countries like Saudi Arabia and Bolivia were witnessing decline in
their GDP, but an increase in their HDI. In contrast, China and the United
States were witnessing higher per capita GDPs than HDIs. Introducing gender adds
to the complexity of measuring human development. Some countries that achieved
growth in their HDI did not improve the status of women. In some cases the
gender gap has increased. Human Development & Children’s Rights 1. The relationship between economic growth and human development is not
automatic. Countries that have achieved comparable growth rates don’t
necessarily rank equally on the HDI (see for example: Costa Rica and Libya;
Paraguay, Indonesia, and Morocco). In fact some countries that have higher GDPs
don’t have a higher HDI (see for example, UAE and Antigua & Barbuda, and
Bahrain; Dominican Republic and Tunisia). 3. The most problematic finding is that achieving a higher HDI does not necessarily mean that children are better off. The table shows that UAE, Bahrain, and Antigua & Barbuda have rank high on the HDI scale. They also have higher percentages of underweight children than countries like Paraguay, Dominica, Dominican Republic, and Lebanon (all are countries that rank low on the HDI scale). The same applies to ratios of enrollment in elementary education: UAE has an enrollment rate of 77.8% (and a HDI rank of 43), while Tunisia’s enrollment rate is 99.9% (and an HDI rank of 102). Morocco ranks 126 (HDI) and has almost similar enrollment rates to those in UAE and Lebanon. It must be noted here that UNDP’s literature that tackles the issue of human development rarely mentions children. The concern for a gender perspective (as illustrated in the 1995 HDR and the GDI and the GEM) is fundamental and is good for children. However, this concern must be accompanied with equal concern for a ??children – perspective. In the coming HDRs, it must be demanded that (A Children – Related Index CRI) must be introduced to address the integration of children’s interest in development. Another index that measures the preservation of children’s rights in the future (sustainability) must also be introduced. Towards A Children – Related – Human development (Index) Conclusion As the overall development model is evolving, a correspondent shift in paradigm must take place as regards to the analysis of children and development. Such an analysis must go beyond focusing on children as a vulnerable or even (marginalised) group, for whom children-specific projects are designed in the hope of providing better living conditions. Such a model assumes that children’s needs and concerns are primarily related to social welfare or to sectors such as health, nutrition and education. Projects in other areas are tacitly assumed to be (age – neutral). A children-perspective (children & development) must challenge this view, arguing that a children lens needs to be applied to every aspect of development work, especially in relation to macro-economic policies. In this sense, children must be viewed as participants, not objects or targets for outside intervention. And while children are not all capable fully capable of participating on equal terms in economic and social affairs, a point of departure must be the existence of discrimination against children. From a human development perspective, equity for children is a human right that is not only justified by direct contribution in the production of goods and services, but from the intrinsic value of childhood and the necessary role of a children – perspective for the good of society as a whole. Lack of integration is bad for economics. Investing in children’s education, health and sustainable utilization of resources benefits society as a whole. For example, improved child nutrition, decreased incidence of disease, and lower population growth relieves the stress over existing resources and results in better utilization. The integration of a gender – perspective is most telling. And if gender
analysts can argue (rights and contribution to development), a child –
perspective can claim (rights and the future): what’s good for children is
good for society. References Adisehiah, M. S. (1972). It is time to begin, the human role in development. Paris: UNESCO. Falk, R. (1988). The rights of people (in particular indigenous peoples). In J. ??Crawford (Ed.), The right of peoples (pp. 17-38). Oxford: Clarendon. Kamenka, E. (1988). Human rights, people’s rights. In J. Crawford (Ed.), The rights of people (pp. 127-140). Oxford: Clarendon. M’Baye, K. (1981). Chairman’s opening remarks. In International Commission of Jurists, Development, human rights and the rule of law (pp. 5-8). Oxford: Pergamon. Rich, R. (1988). The right to development: A right of people. In J. Crawford (Ed.), The right of peoples (pp. 17-38). Oxford: Clarendon. Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is beautiful, economics as if people matter. New York: Harper & Row.? Todaro, M. P. (1985). Economic development in the Third World (3rd ed.). new York: Longman. United Nations. (1975). Report on Economic Development (UN sales No. E.75.IV.10). New York: UN Information Office. United Nations. General Assembly. (1980). International Development Strategy for ??the Third Development Decade (Resolution 35/56). New York: UN Information Office. United nations. General Assembly. (1986, December). Declaration on the Right to Development. (Resolution 41/128). New York: UN Information Office. UNDP. Human Development Report (1990-1999). New York: Oxford Press. Vylder, D. S. (1995). Sustainable Human Development and Macroeconomics,
strategic links and implications. New York: UNDP. |
|