Posted on September, 7, 2018 at 10:21 am
Natural resource wealth has not yet translated into gains for its people. Levels of extreme poverty, for Tanzania’s example, have been stuck at about 65 percent of the population for the past twenty years.
The government should capture more domestic resources and spend them on basic services, such as health, education and nutrition. Today just “64 percent of primary-aged children are enrolled in school and the country accounts for a quarter of all child deaths in the continent”.
But Tanzania also needs to stamp out corruption. A conference can help there by supporting international agreements on tracking down illicit capital flight.
It could also ensure that oil/gas and mining companies pay the governments what they should – and are open about what they have paid.
Tanzania, on the other hand, has a unique set of problems. It relies heavily on foreign assistance, which accounts for 9 percent of its GDP. The country manages to raise around 17 percent of GDP in revenues.
Because incomes are so low, however, that only translates into woefully small sums to spend on its people.
Tanzania has made huge strides. It has reduced the proportion of its residents living in poverty by almost 40 percent since 1995 and increased school enrollment from 51 percent to 83 percent over the same time.
But to meet basic needs in the short term, overseas assistance remain crucial. Indeed, Tanzania is a classic example of why the wealthiest countries need to prioritize aid to the poorest by committing to give 50 percent of their aid to the least-developed countries.
True leadership to knock heads together until both wealthy and poor nations agrees to take action. The poorer countries must agree to mobilize more public and private domestic revenues for national development.
Meanwhile, the wealthy nations must agree to deliver more foreign assistance – and send that assistance to those that need it most. Do that and millions of people will have the chance to live better, more healthy and prosperous lives; around the continent, social movements are inspiring important conversations about the inequitable practices women have long faced in every aspect of their lives.
In some cases, these discussions have led to measurable changes in how women are treated on the job, at home, and elsewhere in society.
Unfortunately, most of the focus to date has been on women in the villages, or those living in urban areas. Rural women, and particularly poor female farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa, have not yet benefited from the recent focus on gender equality.
But if Africa’s gender gap is ever to be closed, the unique obstacles that African women confront must become part of the global dialogue.
Sub-Saharan Africa is among the world’s most gender-unequal regions. According to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) “perceptions, attitudes, and historic gender roles” limit women’s access to health care and education, and lead to disproportionate levels of family responsibility, job segregation, and sexual violence.
But perhaps the biggest obstacle to gender equality in Sub-Saharan Africa is money; simply put, women have less of it. According to the World Bank, “37% of women in the region have a bank account, compared to 48% of men”.
And, while the percentages are low for both sexes, what is troubling is that the gap has widened over the past several years, even as total financing available to the world’s poor has increased steadily.
Today, women dominate African agriculture, the continent’s most important industry. But this has not translated into greater control of finances.
One measure of this deficiency is rates of borrowing; in East Africa, where the organization works, women borrow 13% less money for farm-related activities than men do.
Illiteracy, limited land ownership, and restrictions on agency and mobility all conspire to reduce rural women’s access to farm financing.
These barriers have had a dramatic impact on social and economic progress. For starters, the lack of capital makes it difficult for women to buy quality seeds and fertilizer, or even to access farmland, which in turn reduces agricultural productivity.
Crop yields in the region lag far behind global averages, in part because women are unable to invest enough in their operations. Gender inequality is also costly on a macro level.
The UNDP estimates that failure to integrate women into national economies costs the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa a combined ‘$95 billion in lost productivity every year’. When women living in poverty are unable to work or contribute socially, growth stagnates.
On the other hand, when women farmers have access to financing, the benefits go far beyond the fields. Financial empowerment has been proven to increase female participation in community decision- working.
Moreover, women’s financial inclusion helps combat social marginalization and improves family wellbeing; when mothers have a degree of control over household finances, their children are less likely to die from malnutrition and more likely to thrive.
Given these benefits, the question is not whether women in rural Africa need expanded access to farm-related capital, but rather how to provide it.
One solution is to craft programs that consider disparities in education and mobility when awarding loans. Accounting for social discrimination is essential if girls and women are to benefit fully from available financing.
Another option is to build on successful mediation efforts that help women discuss financial inclusion with their husbands. But one of the most important changes would be committed leadership by financial institutions.
If banks and lending services offered products that meet the needs of women, more women would have access to financial resources. For example, banks could devise specific loan programs for crops that are traditionally grown by female farmers – such as groundnuts or sunflowers.
Financial institutions could also encourage female leadership in farmers’ cooperatives, and support markets where women sell their harvests.
At current rates of financial inclusion, it will take the world more than two centuries to achieve gender parity. That is unacceptable. Progress toward women’s empowerment does not have to be that slow.
If governments, international actors, and the financial industry make a concerted effort to devise and sustain more gender-focused policies, it won’t be.
Source: IPP Media