《經濟學人》精選精練:全球貧困 誰的問題?

解決全球貧困問題，是該援助最窮的國家，還是救濟最窮的人們？這難道不是一回事嗎？做口譯積累的同時關心時政，小編精選《經濟學人》材料供大家練習。

Measuring global poverty: Whose problem now? | The Economist

Awkward questions about how best to help the poor

Sep 30th 2010

POOR people—the destitute, disease ridden and malnourished“bottom billion”—live in poor countries. That has been the central operating assumption of the aid business for a decade.

The thesis was true in 1990: then, over 90% of the world's poor lived in the world's poorest places. But it looks out of date now. Andy Sumner of Britain's Institute of Development Studies* reckons that almost three-quarters of the 1.3 billion-odd people existing below the $1.25 a day poverty line now live in middle-income countries. Only a quarter live in the poorest states (mostly in Africa).

This change reflects the success of developing countries in hauling themselves out of misery. In 1998 the World Bank classified 61 countries (out of 203) as low-income (meaning an annual income per head of less than $760, in money of that era). In 2009 the number had shrunk to 39 out of 220. India, Pakistan, Indonesia and Nigeria all moved to middle-income status during that time (China passed the thresholdearlier). But even excluding China and India, the share of global poverty accounted for by other middle-income countries tripled between 1990 and 2008, to 22%. Other figures support Mr. Sumner's finding. Of the world's undersized children (a good indicator of malnutrition), 70% live in middle-income countries.

In one sense it hardly matters to a destitute Nigerian or Indian that his country has been reclassified by some distant development bank. But it raises hard questions about whether foreign aid should be for poor people or poor countries. Britain, for example, has a rule that 90% of aid is supposed to go to the poorest countries. Aid charities strongly support that focus. The result, as taxpayers' money runs scarce, is that donors have consigned programmes in middle-income countries to a “bonfire” says Alex Evans, a former adviser at Britain's Department for International Development. Yet these are the countries where the vast majority of the poor live.

On September 29th, Bob Zoellick of the World Bank called for a profound “change [in] how we conduct development research”. President Barack Obama wants a rethink of America's muddled aid programme. Mr. Sumner's data make that look overdue. Poverty, he says, may be turning from being an international distribution problem into a national one. Most middle-income countries, through national conditional-cash-transfer schemes such as Brazil's Bolsa Família, have proved better at helping their own poor than anything invented and financed by the international aid industry. Giving is easy. Thinking can be a lot harder.

* “Global poverty and the New Bottom Billion”. By Andy Sumner. Institute of Development Studies.小編選注背景資料：

The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It（最底層的十億人）is a 2007 book by Professor Paul Collier exploring the reason why impoverished countries fail to progress despite international aid and support. In the book Collier argues that there are many countries whose residents have experienced little, if any, income growth over the 1980s and 1990s. On his reckoning, there are just under 60 such economies, home to almost 1 billion people.(Wikipedia)

Bolsa Família（巴西社會福利計劃“家庭津貼”）: roughly translated as "Family Stipend" or "Family Grant" or more precisely as "Family Allowance" in English, is a part of the Brazilian governmental welfare program Fome Zero (Zero Hunger). Bolsa Família provides financial aid to poor and indigent Brazilian families on condition that their children attend school and are vaccinated. The program attempts to both reduce short-term poverty by direct cash transfers and fight long-term poverty by increasing human capital among the poor through conditional cash transfers. The Economist described Bolsa Família as an "anti-poverty scheme invented in Latin America" (which) "is winning converts worldwide." (Wikipedia)

Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) programs（有條件的現金資助計劃）aim to reduce poverty by making welfare programs conditional upon the receivers' actions. The government only transfers the money to persons who meet certain criteria. These criteria may include enrolling children into public schools, getting regular check-ups at the doctor's office, receiving vaccinations, or the like. According to the World Bank, Conditional cash transfers provide money directly to poor families via a “social contract” with the beneficiaries – for example, sending children to school regularly or bringing them to health centers. For extremely poor families, cash provides emergency assistance, while the conditionalities promote longer-term investments in human capital.(Wikipedia)

小編筆記：

1.3 billion-odd: odd直接接在具體數字之後，表示“超過”、“多於”、“逾……”。

Focus: 此處focus指代爲上一句中”90% of aid is supposed to go to the poorest countries”這種“集中式的做法”。

Bonfire: 原指“篝火”，此處根據上下文聯繫，可作“付之一炬”、“化爲灰燼”解。即“隨着納稅者的錢減少，結果導致捐助中等收入國家的方案付之一炬。”

Giving is easy. Thinking can be a lot harder. Giving: 給予援助 Thinking: 思考如何給予援助