| | Politics vital for human development says UNDP
By Ann Pettifor
24th July 2002
Politics and human development go together like a horse and carriage, argues the UNDP's latest Report "Deepening democracy in a fragmented world". And democratic politics, it asserts, is the best workhorse for the carriage of human development. 42 out of the 48 high human development countries are democracies.
At the same time, the Report notes, in a sweeping overview of governance across the world, "people seem to have lost confidence in the effectiveness of their governments - and often seem to be losing faith in democracy". Gallup International's Millennium Survey asked more than 50,000 people in 60 countries, "Would you say that your country is governed by the will of the people?" Fewer than a third said yes. The survey also asked "Does government respond to the will of the people?". Only 10% said that it did.
The UNDP Report ranks countries by subjective and objective indicators of good, democratic governance. Britain fares comparatively well on most of the subjective indicators - civil liberties; political rights; law and order; government effectiveness. The exception is concentration of power in the media. As Albert Camus once argued "the press is free when it does not depend on either the power of government or the power of money". In the UK the press depends on the power of money. Four groups own 85% of the daily press, accounting for two thirds of total circulation.
The UK also falls down on the UNDP's objective indicators. Our voter turnout is among the lowest (59%) of all democratic states; lower than Germany (82%); Greece (76%) and Spain (71%). Women are poorly represented in Parliament, holding only 17% of parliamentary seats. This is better than in Japan (10% ) and the US (13.8%); but worse than Germany (31%) Spain (27%) and the Seychelles (23%). Trade Union membership is low at 26% of the non-agricultural labour force; lower than Sweden (77%); Norway (52%) and Canada (31%).
Which makes it all the more significant that Britain has more NGOs (3,388) than any other country except France (3.551). How to explain that? Perhaps it has something to do with the attitude of British, but also most western political parties. Almost without exception they downgrade democratic politics; and instead promote the market as the most efficient, reliable and democratic mechanism for allocating resources. More efficient and democratic, according to some economists, than a "rent-seeking" parliament, government or local authority.
The electorate, particularly the young and women, have got the message. If the "invisible (and unaccountable) hand" of the market is allocating resources - to railways, football clubs and hospitals - then why bother with government, political parties and the democratic process? But there are still many who believe that the market should not displace democratic politics and governments. Having been abandoned by political parties, we have tried to achieve a fairer, and more sustainable allocation of resources by other means. We engage in campaigns like those which oppose the interests of the global rentier class by "looking to the local"; or those which challenge international injustice (like Jubilee 2000); and offer solutions to environmental degradation (like the Global Commons Institute).
The Report notes that over the period that the market has been freed up by governments to take over the role of allocating resources, "the world has become much more unequal…with the level of inequality worldwide grotesque." Between 1970 and the 1990s the world was more unequal than at any time before 1950. OECD countries have increased their incomes over the past two decades, but most have seen rising income inequality - "most consistently and dramatically in the United Kingdom and the United States" asserts the Report. Between 1979 and 1997 US real GDP per capita grew 38%, but the income of a family with median earnings grew only 9%. So most of the gain was captured by the very richest people. The income of the top 1% of families was 10 times that of the median family in 1979 - and 23 times in 1997.
So the invisible hand is working for some. This is mainly because the links between democracy and human development have been weakened.
There is now universal concern for "good governance", particularly from big corporations and the World Bank, desperate for legal systems that will guarantee property rights. But their concern seldom extends to the notion of good democratic governance. If we are to "enlarge human choices and build human capabilities" argues the UNDP, we cannot have the one without the other. The carriage will not advance without the horse.
Ann Pettifor is director of Jubilee Research at the New Economics Foundation; and is a member of the UNDP's advisory panel for the Human Development Report.
See also:
|
