Syndicate content

Poverty

To promote peace and development, let’s talk about government spending on security and criminal justice

Ede Ijjasz-Vasquez's picture
Governments spend a lot of money to contain violence. In 2015, some $1.7 trillion was spent on defense by governments worldwide . While the primary responsibility for the provision of security and justice services lies with governments, those functions may carry a heavy fiscal burden as they often make up significant portions of national budgets. Yet little work has been undertaken on the composition of security sector budgets, or on the processes by which they are planned and managed.

In an effort to address this issue, the World Bank Group and the United Nations embarked on a three-year partnership that led to the publication of a new report titled Securing Development: Public Finance and the Security Sector. It is a sourcebook providing guidance to governments and development practitioners on how to use a tool called “Public Expenditure Review (PER)” adapted to examine the financing of security and criminal justice institutions.


 

Three must-haves to improve services for the bottom 40 percent

Hana Brixi's picture
Community at discussion of water supply and sanitation. Kaski, Nepal.
Photo: © Simone D. McCourtie / World Bank

Improving services for the bottom 40 percent of the population requires more than policy reforms and capacity building. The Inclusive Growth conference suggested that Bank operations may need to further encourage transparency of state performance, help internalize citizen feedback in the public sector, and empower local leaders to experiment and inspire others.
 
What will it take to engage citizens as a force toward improving services for the bottom 40 percent? 

In the session, “How to Make Services Work for the Bottom 40 Percent ”, Robin Burgess, Stuti Khemani, Jakob Svensson, drawing on their recent research, showed that quality services and prosperity requires citizen action to incentivize politicians and public servants.

A straightforward way for local governments to engage more with their citizens

Ravi Kumar's picture
​​Photo: © Jonathan Ernst/World Bank


A neighborhood road a minute walk away from my house in the southern plains of Nepal used to be paved. When I was a kid, it was usable during all seasons. Not anymore.
 
A few years ago, I’m told, residents worked with the municipal officials to get drinking water to their houses. Officials broke the road so they can connect drinking water pipes from the nearby main highway to neighborhood homes.
 
That road has yet to be repaired. When I asked my parents and neighbors why it has taken so long for the road to be repaired, they responded by saying the municipality officials have ignored it.
 
The town’s municipal officials said locals haven’t contacted them yet about that road and there are other projects the municipality is working on. The broken road in my neighborhood isn’t one of those projects. To put it gently, public services in my hometown remain in dire condition.
 
Would things have been different if residents of my hometown engaged more with their local government? Maybe.

Here are 10 ways to fight corruption

Robert Hunja's picture


1. Corruption is not only about bribes: People especially the poor get hurt when resources are wasted. That’s why it is so important to understand the different kinds of corruption to develop smart responses. 
 
2. Power of the people: Create pathways that give citizens relevant tools to engage and participate in their governments – identify priorities,  problems and find solutions.
 
3. Cut the red tape: Bring together formal and informal processes (this means working with the government as well as  non-governmental groups) to change behavior and monitor progress.

How is the conditional cash transfers program changing the politics of service delivery in Philippines?

Motoky Hayakawa's picture
Photo: Kenneth Pornillos / World Bank

Vote buying has shaped much of Philippine politics throughout history. For many politicians, distributing private goods and cultivating patronage to individual supporters is one of the most effective electoral strategies.

While the line between public and private is traditionally blurry, people who are used to this relationship with those who hold positions in government tend to measure politicians’ performance in terms of how much they provide private goods as opposed to broad public goods.
 
But though it may have been prevalent, vote buying has been a serious constraint in the country. Research has shown that practices such as vote buying and political dynasties undermine public service delivery and poverty reduction. How can these practices, which are so deeply embedded in Filipinos’ political way of life, begin to change?

More voices mean smarter cities

Stephen Davenport's picture
Urban cityscape.  Photo: © Curt Carnemark / World Bank


With the ink barely dry on the Sustainable Development Goals, naturally the just-completed Open Government Partnership annual summit focused on how greater openness can accelerate progress toward the goals.
 
The open government agenda is most closely linked to the ambitious Goal 16 on Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, which among other targets includes the objective of ensuring “responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.” Though progress in this area is maddeningly difficult to quantify, evidence increasingly shows that participation, the next transparency frontier, matters to development outcomes. Making the target explicit, it is hoped, will galvanize efforts in the right direction.
 
There are many issues one could propose to tackle with citizen engagement strategies, but to narrow the topic of discussion, let’s consider just one: enabling smart growth in the world’s exploding cities and megacities.  Estimates suggest that by 2035 most of the world’s extreme poor will live in urban areas.

​LGBTI people are (likely) over represented in the bottom 40%

SOGI Task Force's picture


World Bank President Jim Kim recently said “we will not reach our twin goals […] unless we address all forms of discrimination, including bias based on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

Sexual and gender minorities are particularly important for the Bank because they are (likely) overrepresented in the bottom 40% -- the target of the Bank’s goal to promote shared prosperity.

Why only “likely”? Because robust data on LGBTI development outcomes is rare, even in high income countries.  With support from the World Bank’s Nordic Trust Fund, we are seeking to fill some of these data gaps, starting with research in the Western Balkans.

What we do know is that, across the board, barriers to education and employment contribute to greater chances of being poor – and this may be worse for LGBTI individuals. 

Available data on Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people shows that youth are more likely to face barriers in getting a good education.  It’s also harder to find – and keep – a job, pushing LGBTI people further into poverty.

Financing for Development: World Bank's role in supporting tax and revenue mobilization reforms is critical

Rajul Awasthi's picture

Melissa Thomas, author of Govern like us, speaking at the World Bank recently raised a very interesting question: is our expectation that poor countries with limited resources can deliver high-quality governance unrealistic?

Can these countries provide the public goods and services that citizens demand and need, to be able to forge a strong social contract?

She compares the levels of revenue per capita in rich and poor countries and finds that in the poorest countries, levels of revenue per capita are so low that it would be years, or even decades, until they have enough to provide a decent level of public goods and services.

It is in that context that I thought of Sri Mulyani’s appeal during the Spring Meetings when she spoke of the need to clamp down on tax evasion and avoidance and boost the domestic resource mobilization (DRM) capacities of developing countries as a means of finding resources for financing development going forward.

How opinion leaders view the role of governance in development

Ravi Kumar's picture

Every year World Bank Group conducts country opinion surveys (COS) to better understand how its work is being perceived on the ground. These surveys help World Bank Group improve its operations, results, and bolster its engagement with countries.
 
These surveys also allow the Bank Group to get a sense of development priorities, and what kind of projects people think can contribute to poverty reduction and shared prosperity. We looked at these surveys to see how survey respondents view governance’s role in reducing poverty and whether they view governance as a development priority.
 
Survey respondents are opinion leaders who typically come from national and local governments, media, academia, the private sector and civil society. They are also from multilateral/bilateral agencies.
 
As you can see in the maps below, for example, in the 2014 survey, in Zimbabwe, 40% of respondents believed governance should be the top development priority and 34% of them believed that governance is the top contributor to poverty reduction.