|
|
Poverty Reduction in a Federated Uganda |
|
Home | News | Discussion | FAQ | Federal Model | Regional Models | Addendum | What's New |
|
|
By
C. Nabukeera Uganda’s economic success has
been well documented, but its impact on the poor is controversial.
Economic transformation has been associated with the attempt to generate
higher rates of economic growth. However, substantial economic
transformation never affects everyone in the same way.
When there is great change the distribution of economic rewards
also changes, thus leading to both winners and losers. Uganda’s poor
and the rural populations have been over-represented among the losers. Secondly, behavioral and social sciences perpetuate a notion of “deviance” with respect to poverty and those who are poor resulting in irreversible psychological damage. Poverty is not a result of deviance but a consequence of the way society is organized – these are the structures of unequal relationships. ‘Structured’ inequality refers to society’s unequal distribution of its valued resources of wealth, power and privilege among citizens. With an extreme mal-distribution of wealth, some get more than they can possibly use, while others get barely enough to survive, and in the case of Uganda, a majority aren’t getting any! The material and psychological conditions that result from the above social relations bring about structured inequalities manifesting themselves in people’s experiences of class, ethnicity, gender, age, disability and other mechanisms of exclusion. Therefore, poverty is but a symptom of prolonged hopelessness resulting from political neglect which makes its eradication a governance issue. It is not in the genes, I hasten to
add. We are simply born in environments and conditions that are
deprived. The poor in Uganda are not able to improve their life chances
without collective efforts. These efforts are made possible through
state funding. For example, wealth is distributed between regions
through transfer payments, and among people through a variety of social
and economic programs. These can range from the creation of educational
and employment opportunities, to the provision of health services that
are open to as many citizens as possible. How then can poverty reduction
be separated from public policy or governance when the whole notion of
‘politics’ is, in my view, a struggle to control resources and
wealth distribution? Federalists cannot afford any kind
of ‘reductionism’ in our analysis. Our approach to analysis should
encompass and address implications at the social, economic, and
political levels at all times. For example, our analysis should also
seek to understand how our actions or inaction affect people both
individually and as groups. As
we continue to engage in social, economic, and political discourse that
seeks to dismantle structured oppression, we have to be mindful that our
democracy has become in a large measure, a democracy of the fortunate.
We advocate for the “opening up” of democracy by
re-structuring Uganda’s social, economic, political institutions, to
allow states to address poverty at the grassroots levels. Poverty
reduction initiatives should not be “add-on” programs/activities.
They are integral to public policy. We need to acknowledge that failing
to do so, contributes to the prevalence of abject poverty that a
majority of Ugandans experience. Additionally, the poor in Uganda
need much more than material wealth. We have psychological and emotional
needs as well. We have been traumatized by a succession of brutal
regimes for the last 41 years. We watch as our land is appropriated, we
watch the killing of our relatives, the raping and mutilation of our
children; we are ill and diseased. We need ‘health’ as a resource so
that we can engage in productive activities. For successful poverty reduction
interventions, we need to restore “hope” as a starting point.
Give people a reason to live longer than today! Community
economic programs such as “entandikwa” should be understood
in their literal sense - to begin - because one had nothing.
Charging explosive interest rates on these loans is sinister because
such schemes are not reducing poverty, but augment powerlessness and an
intensified sense of hopelessness. Build mechanisms and systems to
assure us that when we grow our produce, remuneration will be immediate
and adequate; that our children have a fair chance of competing in the
workforce irrespective of their class, ethnicity, gender; age; and that
our elected MP’s represent ordinary Ugandans as well as the
government’s representation is evident and felt in every corner of our
villages. |
| © 2002 Federo for all Uganda, All Rights Reserved | |