Tags:
Journalism of Courage
If one had to choose one word to describe both Jeffrey Sachs, the man and his vision, the word that comes to mind is audacious. The End of Poverty is doubly audacious. It chronicles one of the most astonishing careers an economist has ever had. Sachs tamed hyperinflation in Bolivia, was credited with the success of Poland8217;s economic reforms, and was associated with shock therapy in Russia, a charge he denies. Subsequently, Sachs emerged as amongst the most indefatigable champions of the world8217;s poor, a principal architect of the Millennium Development Goals.
The book chronicles his attempts to understand the complexities of development, and lobbying rich countries to get their policies right. The second half is a vigorous argument in favour of new approaches to confront fatal diseases and debilitating poverty in developing countries, especially Africa. Its central message is that poverty and disease can be eradicated, but it will require, especially in Africa, generous aid. The book is held together by the centrality of Sachs himself. The ubiquity of the pronoun 8220;I8221; is sometimes jarring in a book that is otherwise rich, brilliant and unfailingly interesting. Sachs, unquestionably the most important public intellectual of his generation, threatens to overwhelm his subject.
His second target is his fellow economists, who consistently confuse theory with thoughtfulness. My economics teacher used to tirelessly remind us that the most important part of any model in economics is the ceteris paribus other things being equal clause. Sachs message to his fellow tribesman is just that: economics decisions have to be modulated according to context. There simply are no magic bullets. This is a lesson Sachs was himself accused of forgetting in Russia, but at least he is making sure that no one will forget it again. He likens development economics to eighteenth century medicine, 8220;when doctors used leeches to draw blood from their patients often killing them in the process.8221;
His third target is hypocritical Western governments. Sachs shows with untiring vigour how developed countries have blocked every single move that could benefit really poor countries: blocked aid, reneged on debt forgiveness, refused to open their own markets, and then attached conditions to aid that were designed to ensure that aid programs failed. Sachs often writes with a great sense of historical parallel and irony. His comparison of the predicament of Poland and Spain is apt, as is his consternation at the fact that companies are given bankruptcy protection under US law, but countries are not.
| nbsp; | Sachsdemolishes the pretensions of so many powers that be. He has been one of the most trenchant critics of the World Bank and IMF, and he repeats the refrain that these organisations are more beholden to American banking interests than they are concerned about the people they serve |
Sachs defends Africa against critics who argue that aid cannot work. Africa actually received much less aid than is advertised, and usually it was directed to schemes that did nothing to break the vicious circle of poverty. He writes: 8220;Pessimism about Africans8217; ability to utilise aid is very deep, reflecting an amazing reservoir of deep prejudices. I have heard those prejudices for years and have come to expect them, always with sadness.8221; Paradoxically, in order for aid to actually work, it must be significantly large so that all the bottlenecks to development can be adequately tackled. The book offers a melange of aid worthy schemes. But unlike in the first half of the book where Sachs8217; interventions deal with the basic architecture of an economy, the second half often remains just that: a litany of inventive and plausible schemes. But along the way the reader will learn of the intimate connections between geography, climate, ecology and economics, lessons that few economists care to remember.
The central lesson of this book is that development is difficult but not esoteric. Indeed, it is a failure to grasp the obvious that has most stymied the process of development.
