One of the most cited statistics about China might well be the number of Chinese who have been lifted out of poverty over the past 35 years. At more than 800 million, it is a huge number — and an extraordinary feat. Indeed, no other country has achieved such a level of poverty reduction in such a short period.
However, what about the millions of Chinese who have remained behind?
China’s government is committed to finishing the task, with the aim of reducing rural poverty essentially to zero by 2020. The authorities first made the pledge at the UN in 2015, and have reiterated it in subsequent official settings.
However, fulfilling that promise — which would entail improving the well-being of about 45 million people, about equivalent to Sudan’s entire population — will carry significant costs.
Poverty reduction, like so many important endeavors, is subject to the law of diminishing returns: The more you do something, the less productive your efforts become. Think of winding a watch: The more it is wound, the more resistance builds up in the mainspring and the more energy it takes to move the stem the same distance.
When it comes to poverty reduction, the people who benefit first are most likely those who were best equipped to do so, owing to, say, their background or geography. By the time there are only a few — or even a few million — left, one can expect reaching them to be much harder.
China’s experience illustrates this phenomenon perfectly. During the first seven years of China’s official “reform and opening up,” which began in 1978, it is estimated that about 110 million people annually rose out of poverty.
For the next 15 years — from 1985 to 2000 — the pace of progress slowed considerably, with about 26 million people moving above the poverty line each year. From 2000 to 2015, the figure stood at a little more than 22 million per year. The government’s target now is to lift 10 million people out of poverty annually.
As the pace of poverty-reduction has slowed, its costs have risen — a trend illustrated in a new UN report, together with World Bank data.
In 2000, lifting a person out of poverty in China cost the central government about US$48 per year, in nominal terms. By 2010, this figure had increased more than threefold, to US$150 per year. Now that the government is working to reach the most remote people — those without access to roads, electricity, or clean water — the cost exceeds US$200 per year.
This is not to say that China will not be able to meet its 2020 target. On the contrary, the government’s plans and implementation appear as strong as ever.
Last year, the government exceeded its target, with 12.4 million people escaping rural poverty, and the budget for this year is 30 percent larger, meaning that at least US$1,000 has been allocated for each of the 10 million people China’s government plans to lift out of poverty this year.
However, as the government attempts to “get to zero” on rural poverty — by moving all people above the national rural poverty line of 2,230 yuan (US$324) per year — it should not lose sight of broader poverty-related challenges.
China continues to experience rapid urbanization — a phenomenon that contributed substantially to past poverty reduction, but that also places a growing number of urban dwellers at risk of destitution.
According to official figures, the average income of the poorest 5 percent of households in Chinese cities amounts to about US$1,128. That is about 3.5 times China’s rural poverty line.
However, overall, the average income in cities is at least four times higher than that in the countryside, suggesting that living on such a budget might be even tougher than living at the rural poverty line. That does not even account for the many migrant workers who live under the radar in cities and are likely to earn even less than the poorest 5 percent.
These forms of poverty might be even harder to address, not least because China has less experience doing so. Given this, just as China’s successful efforts to reduce rural poverty can serve as a model for others, other countries’ successes in managing urban poverty can — and should — help to guide China’s efforts.
China is far from alone in focusing on the fight to end poverty; indeed, the very first Sustainable Development Goal calls for an end to poverty in all of its manifestations by 2030. With the process becoming increasingly challenging and costly, looking across borders could prove vital to enabling all Chinese to live decent, dignified lives.
Hannah Ryder is a former head of policy and partnerships for the UN Development Program in China.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing