Liberals' DDO Tournament R1: Poverty and the Enviroment

Thanks to Lordgrae for accepting. I will use this round to clarify the framework and to present my own case. FRAMEWORK Should - indicates propriety and desirability. For example, if I say "I should not slurp my soup" I am saying that it isn't proper and/or desirable for me to slur soup. Global Poverty - World Bank has established a global poverty line of 1.25 USD per day [1, 2], and I will use this as my definition for "poverty." Environment - "the complex of physical, chemical, and biotic factors (as climate, soil, and living things) that act upon an organism or an ecological community and ultimately determine its form and survival." [3] When in Conflict - this phrase implies that we are evaluating which two policies (global poverty reduction or environmental protection) should be prioritized only when they are in conflict. Therefore, it is not my burden to show that the UN should defund all environmental protections everywhere in order to focus on global poverty reduction. Rather, my burden is to show that where poverty reduction efforts and environmental protection efforts conflict, poverty reduction should be prioritized/ Now that the resolutional framework has been addressed, I will move on to constructing my core case. I will do so in two parts. First, I will establish that poverty is a very pressing concerns that demands redress; second, I shall illustrate how the environment is not such an immediate and enormous concern, extrapolation that poverty reduction should take priority over environmental protection. PRO's CASE Overview: It is important to understand, before I get into the meat of my arguments, that poverty is a wide-spread problem. While for Westerners like myself it can be hard to fathom the notion that literally billions of people can live on such a pittance, it is true. Between 1 and 1.44 billion people are considered impoverished. [4, 5, 6] Moreover, in 2008 alone, the number of those in poverty alarmingly grew by 100 million people. [7] I. Poverty is an enormous problem. Sub-point A: Poverty kills more than armed conflict. "The fact that poor people around the world have shorter and harder lives is the result of human design. This phenomenon is called "structural violence."...18 million people died as the result of structural violence in 1965, more than all of World War II"s battlefield casualties and 150 times more than in all of 1965s armed conflicts"Poverty kills and it does so relentlessly, invisibly, and in far greater numbers than the armed conflicts that understandably command our attention." [8] "The 14 to 18 million deaths a year caused by structural violence compare with about 100,000 deaths per year from armed conflict. Comparing this frequency of deaths from structural violence to the frequency of those caused by major military and political violence, such as World War II (an estimated 49 million military and civilian deaths, including those caused by genocide--or about eight million per year, 1935-1945), the Indonesian massacre of 1965-1966 (perhaps 575,000 deaths), the Vietnam war (possibly two million, 1954-1973)...it was clear that even war cannot begin to compare with structural violence, which continues year after year. In other word...every single year, two to three times as many people die from poverty throughout the world as were killed by the Nazi genocide of the Jews over a six year period. This is, in effect, the equivalent of an ongoing, unending, in fact accelerating, thermonuclear war, or genocide, perpetrated on the weak and poor every year of every decade, throughout the world." [9] Sub-point B: Poverty increases the likelihood of violent conflict and death. "Poverty increases the risks of conflict through multiple paths. Poor countries are more likely to have weak governments, making it easier for would-be rebels to grab land and vital resources. Resource scarcity can provoke population migrations that result in conflicts between social groups, as in Darfur...Without productive alternatives, young people may turn to violence for material gain...Poor farmers who lack basic infrastructure and access to agricultural markets may turn in desperation to narcotics production and trade, such as growing poppy in Afghanistan or coca in the Andes. Many slums are controlled by gangs of drug traffickers and traders, who create vicious circles of insecurity and poverty. The lack of economically viable options other than criminal activity creates the seedbed of instability and increases the potential for violence. While violent conflicts surely result from a combination of factors, research suggests a strong causal impact of poverty and adverse income shocks on the onset of conflict. The risk of civil conflict declines steadily as national incomes increase. Negative economic growth shocks increase the risk of civil conflict dramatically." [10] Sub-point C: Poverty leads to illness and death. "Poverty is a major predictor of overall poor health status. Today, as many as one-fifth of the world"s citizens (about 1.3 billion people) lack access to safe drinking water, and about one-third lack access to proper sanitation. The absence of these basic needs alone causes millions of preventable deaths worldwide each year. Malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV/AIDS kill over six million people annually, the majority of whom live in developing areas, where funds and health care systems are often inadequate. These diseases also add to population vulnerability and diminish local productivity." [11] Sub-point D: Poverty has negative psychological impacts. "Vulnerability comes because poor people are defenseless against damaging loss. Together these generate worry and fear: of natural disaster, of violence and theft, of loss of livelihood, of dispossession from land or shelter, of persecution by the police and powers that be, of debt, of sickness, of social ostracism, of the suffering and death of loved ones, of hunger and of destitution in old age...The stigma of poverty is a recurring theme. As a consequence, poor people often try to conceal their poverty to avoid humiliation and shame. One deeply felt deprivation is not being able to do what is customary in the society." [12] II. Poverty should take priority over the Environment Sub-point A: It is more productive to focus on poverty reduction. (1) "Spending $800 billion (in total present-day terms) over 100 years solely on mitigating emissions would reduce temperature increases by just 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of this century. When you add up the benefits of that spending -- from the slightly lower temperatures -- the returns are only $685 billion. For each extra dollar spent, we would get 90 cents of benefits -- and this is even when things like environmental damage are taken into account." [13] (2) "Providing micronutrients -- particularly vitamin A and zinc -- to 80% of the 140 million or so undernourished children in the world would require a commitment of just $60 million annually, a small fraction of the billions spent each year battling terrorism or combating climate change. The economic gains from improved productivity and a lower burden on the health system would eventually clear $1 billion a year. Every dollar spent, therefore, would generate economic benefits worth $17." [13] Thus, combatting poverty is more productive than the focusing on the environment, Sub-point B: Reducing poverty is a prerequisite to effective environmental protections. (1) "Unless the world commits to steady, long-term investments...poor communities and countries will continue to suffer disproportionately...The result is a vicious cycle of ill health, poverty, and economic stagnation or recession. People that are ill and dying cannot lift themselves out of poverty. Sick, malnourished children cannot attend school and reach their full potential. And populations that are burdened by major diseases cannot contribute to their country"s socio-economic growth." In essence, poverty reduction is key to economic growth. [14] (2) "With prosperity comes a desire to improve one's air and water--and, in addition, a greater moral awareness of the dangers and evils of pollution. Think of clean air and water as goods that a society can purchase--but only after it has satisfied its basic needs for food, shelter and rudimentary income...pollution per unit of production drops sharply once citizens receive a comfortable income." Thus, growth helps the environment. [15] SOURCES 1 - http://data.worldbank.org... 2 - http://www.globalissues.org... 3 - http://www.merriam-webster.com... 4 - http://www.worldbank.org... 5 - http://abcnews.go.com... 6 - http://www.panarmenian.net... 7 - http://www.sciencedaily.com... 8 - Edward O"Neill, Jr., Professor Emergency Medicine, Tufts University, Awakening Hippocrates, 2006, p. 13-4 9 - James Gilligan, Department of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, Violence: Reflections on Our Deadliest Epidemic, 2000 edition, p. 195-196 10 - UN Millennium Project, Investing in Development: A Practical Plan to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals, 2005, p. 9 11 - Paul R. Epstein, Harvard Medical School and Greg Guest, Family Health International, Globalization, Health and the Environment: an integrated perspective, ed. Greg Guest, 2005, p. 241 12 - http://documents.worldbank.org... 13 - Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus, How to Get the Biggest Bang for 10 Billion Bucks", Wall Street Journal op-ed, July 28, 2008 14 - http://www.who.int... 15 - James K. Glassman, Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute, August 12, 2002