FROM the television images of suffering African children to the arguments used by Western governments to justify slashing their aid budgets, the message is the same "the poor will always be with us".
Poverty is ever present, the argument runs, so why intervene except to alleviate the most pressing disasters? Tunnels are built under the English Channel, manmade machines can defeat chess grandmasters, yet the problem of world poverty is regarded as insoluble.
Yet, as the 1997 Human Development Report attempts to show, global poverty can be successfully tackled. The report is optimistic enough to say that extreme poverty could be eliminated by early next century, at a cost of just 1 per cent of world income.
Even providing universal access to basic social services could be achieved at a cost of $80 billion - or less than the combined wealth of the world's seven richest men.
There are good reasons for agreeing with the UN Development Programme that this is not just wishful thinking. Over the past 30 years, the developing countries have made gains it took the industrialised world a century to achieve. At least a dozen developing countries, led by China and India have managed to eliminate absolute poverty.
To achieve the goal of poverty eradication, the UNDP says growth in the 100 or so countries caught in stagnation or decline has to be accelerated. "Propoor" policies have to be implemented, and the causes of decline - such as conflict. AIDS and environmental degradation - tackled.
Globalisation of the world economy is seen as a double edged sword; while helping economies like India's to expand, it has also widened the gap between the rich and the poor. Unless globalisation is carefully managed the UNDP says, poor countries and their peoples will become increasingly marginalised.
Already, losses to developing countries from unequal access to trade, labour and finance cost an estimated $500 billion a year, or 10 times what flows in aid.
