Sustainable Development: Vulnerability and Crises

Humanitarian crises contribute to underdevelopment, and violent conflict can have a devastating impact on particular societies not only in terms of human suffering, death and economic damage but it disrupts societal functioning, particularly in social institutions which play key roles in development. Furthermore, it can destroy the levels of development achieved by previous generations. This leads to greater underdevelopment contributing to further vulnerability and risk, and the cycle starts once again. Striking examples of such include Haiti and the DRC.

Humanitarian action must act in support of sustainable development. In an emergency location and situation, humanitarian workers prioritize the actions needed to bring relief at that particular time, but this must be interpreted in the wider context of the development process prior to the disaster and continuation of the development process after the crisis event. For instance, hospitals and schools may be (re)built, but to sustain them, structural maintenance and upkeep must be ensured, and staff have to be trained and paid regularly. Similarly, food may be distributed, but local food production must be resumed and enhanced for self-sufficiency and sustainability, in order to decrease the levels of dependence and vulnerability. Here the histories of countries in the Sahel region provide poignant patterns. Similarly, local and national capacity building and empowerment must be fostered during and after the crisis in order to consolidate the development process.

In the overall vision for a sustainable world, and nexus between food , power and hunger, the Global Hunger Index (GHI) tracks hunger globally, by country and region. The UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) has long raised awareness of the link between conflict and hunger, and the food weapon . The FAO, with the World Food Program, EU and partners, provides updates on food security to the UN Security Council and annually publishes the Global Report on Food Crises . There exists a wealth of expert data on malnutrition, food security and famine, yet the lessons of the past regarding famine, non-sustainable systems and geopolitics are not always heeded by the international public, until there is ‘breaking news’ of disaster as witnessed in Yemen once again with the civil war (2015 on) there becoming enmeshed in regional power struggles, and by association input from their global power allies. While over 50,000 children  in Yemen died from starvation in 2017, and in October 2018, the UN warned that 13 million people face starvation there in what could be the worst famine in the world in 100 years. As elsewhere, children remain the most visible victims of under-nutrition and famine , while it’s women that continue to play the prominent role in food production in the NICs.

The relationships between political-economy , poverty, modernity and development were articulated in US President Truman’s address to the UN as early as 1949. Nevertheless, the ideological struggles of the Cold War protagonists debilitated sustainable development in many NICs, where human vulnerability and risk of disaster remained prominent in the post-colonial countries. Adverse physical geographical and ecological conditions slowed the development momentum, while the struggle with nation-state building and consolidation continued, but was encumbered by lack of good governance and democracy in many cases. The old storylines of foreign imperialism and colonialism condemned by the new ruling regimes and their own national liberation narratives, often ring somewhat hollow to younger generations in the NICs, searching for a better life and paid work. The regional specialisations that were created to service economic policies of the colonizing countries, and the (New) International Division of Labour continued to impact. In this overall context, many NICs feel a sense of grievance that in the overall global climate debate and elaboration of UN protocols, that it is the former imperial and industrial countries, and their legacies that have been the main source of global warming and associated problems. Now many NICs feel that their chances for industrialization as a means for eradication of poverty and development could be constrained by the wealthiest states in the world.

Countries in Fig. 7.1 are shaded according to their ecological footprint in 2007 (Global Footprint Network, 2010). The map creators state that it is measured by the amount of global hectares that are affected by humans per capita of the country. Lighter shades denote countries with a lower ecological footprint per capita and darker shaded for countries with a higher ecological footprint per capita. There is a different colour for countries under 2.1 gha, the estimated limit of sustainability. The total ecological footprint (global hectares affected by humans) is measured as a total of six factors: cropland footprint, grazing footprint, forest footprint, fishing ground footprint, carbon footprint and built-up land.

Image version 30-Mar-2018 created by user:JollyJanner/Wikimedia Commons, with the Geocart map projection software, based on data (13-Oct-2010) from Global Footprint Network, [Public Domain]

World map of countries by their raw ecological footprint in 2007 (global average biocapacity: 2.1 gha per capita).

Full size image

Sustainable development refers to long lasting, durable positive change—using the environment in such a way as to fulfil economic and social needs without destroying the resources upon which we, and future generations depend. Divergent viewpoints on sustainable development are dependent on what you believe to be the core causes of environmental degradation and poverty, and also distinguishing between societal and cultural attitudes to the different concepts of ‘needs’ and ‘wants’. Sustainable development theory aims at getting a balance between the ecological interconnected web of life, economic (earning a livelihood) and socio-cultural lifestyle needs, where none of these domains suffer irreversible damage via such phenomena as pollution, destruction of resources including soil and water, mass unemployment, heritage sites, or too rapid cultural change leading to social collapse. Resources may be defined as anything which society places a value on, but a resource can be renewable or non-renewable . If it is non-renewable, it becomes exhausted or destroyed, and then it is gone forever.

Development or positive change is linked to innovation and diffusion processes often associated with technology —ranging from domestication methods of animals and food cultivation, and stone tools of the Neolithic Revolution (10,000 BC) to the industrial revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries, and onto the software, Microchip and Fourth Industrial Revolution in recent decades. A society cut off from or blocked, or refusing to integrate innovative processes lags behind others, and often becomes further underdeveloped . However, the types, and scale and use of technological innovation have to be mediated by institutions and democratic inclusive processes in order to avoid environmental and economic or social breakdown. In the good governance framework, governmental organizations (GOs) or state funded top-down institutions such as the Ministry of Environment, Agriculture, Education, EU commissions, UN organs, World Bank and International Monetary Fund - must interact and plan policy in harmony with bottom-up or grass-roots people and organizations on the ground in order to avoid open conflict, and non-sustainable authoritarianism , as witnessed in the former Soviet countries before the implosion of the system; or anarchy as seen in Libya, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic and Democratic Republic of Congo in recent decades.

When it is often perceived ‘on the ground’ that there is too much top-down input, or that policy is not benefiting all sections of the community, nor connecting with peoples’ lived realities, or that the relationship between political and economic elites and transnational corporations is putting too much stress on people and environment, and their livelihood or cultures, causing injustice and risk, then there is conflict. Nigeria provides a significant example of this regarding oil production in the Niger Delta region and the local populations.^{Footnote 1} Hence the importance of Bottom-up organizations, those which are not directly financed nor controlled by the state including NGOs, unions, local development groups, farmers and residents associations, Greenpeace, Freedom House and so forth. However, real people in actual places, with local knowledge of needs and solutions often feel cut off from decision making not only in countries low on the democracy index, but also in mature democracies as witnessed during the 2016 UK referendum on Brexit and decision to leave the EU, and throughout the very divisive electoral campaigns in the USA, Netherlands, France, Germany, and Austria especially since 2016. It is here that top-down must interact with bottom-up regarding new policy, technology, economic, social and environmental change, and inclusive development for all sections of the population. Sustainability like democracy is an ideal, involving long-term processes.

In this, geographical local and regional scales must be viewed within the global framework ‘acting locally and thinking globally’. In order to implement sustainable strategies, certain experts advocate extreme neoliberal policies largely based on econometrics with market-led solutions, while others support reducing imbalances in use and access to resources between areas, regions, countries and peoples, along with local participatory approaches to resource control and power, and better governance, and development of global management policies as with the environment via international treaties such as UN Agenda 21, or the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs, 2016), or the UN Paris Agreement on Climate Change (UNFCCC, 2016) dealing with greenhouse gas emissions mitigation, adaptation and finance starting in the year 2020. Imbalances and breakdowns between the environmental, economic and socio-cultural factors lead to conflict at various levels, and possible crises and disasters.^{Footnote 2}

2.1 Food, Power and Hunger

The Global Hunger Index (GHI) (Fig. 7.2) is designed to measure and track hunger globally, and by country and region. It is calculated annually by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). The GHI highlights successes and failures in hunger reduction and provides insights into the drivers of hunger. By raising awareness and understanding of regional and country differences in hunger, the GHI aims to trigger actions to reduce hunger. In the 2016 GHI ranking, the top ten countries were: Central African Republic, Chad, Zambia, Haiti, Madagascar, Yemen, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan, Timor Leste, and Niger.^{Footnote 3} In IFPRI reports there are recurring patterns, with conflict, violence and war being the major causes of widespread poverty and food insecurity in most of countries with high GHI scores.

Image by International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) [CC0], via Wikimedia Commons

Global Hunger.

Full size image

Another common pattern is lack of general freedom in terms of political rights and civil liberties, as borne out in the Freedom House Index regarding non-free or partly free countries.^{Footnote 4} Issues regarding food as a weapon in coercing, controlling, or attacking people, and also trends in famine over the decades are regularly updated by the World Peace Foundation. It states that civil conflict is the driving factor in nine of the ten worst humanitarian crises, underscoring clear linkages between conflict and hunger. Post-conflict countries with high food insecurity are 40% more likely to relapse into conflict within a 10-year timespan.^{Footnote 5}

The UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) has long raised awareness on the link between conflict and hunger. The FAO, with the World Food Programme, EU and other partners, provides regular updates on food security to the UN Security Council and publishes the annual Global Report on Food Crises.^{Footnote 6} The concept of food power refers to when a government, company, leader, country or faction takes food security away from others in order to coerce or get something in return. Overtly or covertly food supply can be used as a weapon. Countries can exploit their food power to threaten another country’s food security, just as imperial, or coercive, or authoritarian regimes, or other cliques can do within their own state.^{Footnote 7}

Following humanitarian catastrophes, of course analyses is important in attempting to prevent a reoccurrence, or in planning how to react to future disasters; however, a frequent political cliché has become ‘what lessons can be learned’ - unfortunately very similar human-made disaster processes reoccur. From an historical perspective, contested narratives and memorials remain around famines in the learning process, and this can sustain political grievance, especially when denial exists. Here examples include those experienced in Ireland (1845–48), and the Holodomor (to kill by starvation), known also as the Terror-Famine and Famine-Genocide in Ukraine (1932–33).^{Footnote 8} Other strong grievance narratives regarding the concept of the food weapon, power and famine exist ranging from the separatist Biafran war and famine in Nigeria (1967–70), to those in Ethiopia (1983–85), and more recently in the Yemen Civil Wars.

2.2 Sustainable Development: Famine and Learning from the Past

While each famine context is unique, comparting and contrasting specific cases such as the famines of the 19th century in India and Ireland, and those of the Sahel states as with Ethiopia in the latter 20th century and those of the Horn of Africa with Somalia, Sudan and Republic of South Sudan, using the following criteria, many similar characteristics and patterns emerge regarding the (non)sustainable development framework. This takes into account getting a balance between the following geographical pillars: (i) Ecological and Physical, (ii) Economic and Political, and (iii) Society and Culture. Resource and technology levels are core here, and especially political and social institutions, and how bottom-up grass-roots people interact with top-down authorities, within the context of governance. This underlies effective planning, or not, and responses to problems.

By its very name, An Gorta Mór—The Great Famine, this implies that it was the big one, as opposed to the smaller famines and food shortages that had occurred before 1845 in Ireland. There were early warnings from the previous four decades of what was occurring, but the socio-economic systems, or political will, were not there to prevent, or attenuate the Great Famine. The population of Ireland was approximately 8 million in 1845, and fell to 6 million by 1850, with circa one million deaths and one million fleeing to Britain, USA, Canada, Australia, Argentina and elsewhere. The trend in emigration continued, with accentuated political agitation for land reform laws and distribution, and eventually armed revolution. With Independence in 1921, the population stood at 3 million, and the country was partitioned between the Free State of Ireland, and Northern Ireland within the UK. By 2017, the population in the Republic was 4.7 million and 1.8 million in Northern Ireland.^{Footnote 9}

By applying the Sustainable Development Framework concepts to the Great Famine, we can see how the system was not sustainable. The same Framework can be applied to other parts of the world today regarding food security or not. Famine is rare, geographically localised and temporary, whereas malnutrition is common and covers vast geographical areas especially most of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, Middle East and Asia. Malnutrition results from nutritional imbalances in the diet of people and essentials include protein (amino-acids), carbohydrates, fats, minerals, vitamins and water.

Ecology: disease hit the potato crop with blight which was the main component in the diet for a large percentage of the population and especially the rural poor rent-paying tenant and sub-tenant peasants. Labour, and other crops and livestock went to pay rent to the landlord elites, their agents and middle-men. Regarding potato production in specific areas such as the western counties and along the Atlantic seaboard, the population density was high, and the ecological carrying capacity was under much stress, especially in marginal lands. Vestiges of this can still be witnessed with the relic lazy beds—potato drills—visible in the landscape on very low production higher mountain slopes and marginal lands.

Today, from an ecological standpoint, the UN FAO tracks plant pests and diseases listing locusts, armyworm, fruit flies, banana diseases, cassava diseases and wheat rusts amongst the most destructive, and they are spread in three principal ways: (i) environmental forces—weather and windborne, (ii) trade or other human-migrated movement, and (iii) insect or other vector-borne—pathogens. For instance, Ug99 a new strain of black stem rust that is destructive to wheat is spreading across Africa and into Asia.^{Footnote 10}

Other ecological and physical geographical factors threatening food security include global warming and rising sea levels, as in the Bay of Bengal area and impact on impoverished communities there, and similarly drought prone areas with vulnerable populations in Mali, Niger, northern Nigeria, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Sudan.

Economy: Due to poverty and economic vulnerability of a majority of the Irish population, for the tenant farmers whose staple potato crop was no longer available, basic food prices rose. They did not have the money nor possessions to buy or barter for food. Whatever financial resources they had went to pay rent, while exportation of non-potato foodstuff to Britain continued in order to create wealth for the landlords in the prevailing economic system, to feed the rapidly increasing populations of the burgeoning Industrial Revolution cities such as Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham. Due to the very limited industrialization in 19th century Ireland, with the exception of the Belfast region, and Dublin and Cork to a lesser extent, the destitute and excess rural population could not find factory employment in urban areas as was well underway in Britain, France, Belgium, Germany and other countries.

In short, the wealthy minority controlled the assets—with approximately 90% of land ownership being held by 10% of the population—and systems of production and distribution, in contrast to the poor majority, the gap between them was too large for the political-economic system to be sustainable.

Here as in other colonies, the central contentious issue was that of the self-regulation of those with financial power, as opposed to the politics of state-intervention, due to the prevailing standpoint on political economy as witnessed also in French Algeria, Portuguese Angola, German Namibia and elsewhere. In the UK context, the two major political parties held opposing stances on famine issues in Ireland, and other areas of empire as with India. The Conservatives held that free market economics , based on the ‘law of supply and demand’ driven by entrepreneurs, or individuals and companies competing, with only a limited role for the state to regulate these processes, was primordial and that individuals and markets would solve famine and ‘excess population’ issues by natural or Darwinian means. The Liberals favoured some state intervention in regulating market and food supply. Regarding India , fourteen major famines occurred under British rule with an estimated death toll of 55.1 million people that may have died—17% of the entire population. Significantly no famines have occurred there since independence in 1948.^{Footnote 11}

Today, poor economically vulnerable populations exist within the stranglehold of unjust landlord-tenant and sharecropping relationships as in many Latin American states, but also India, Pakistan, Uganda (Buganda region), and areas of Ghana and Zimbabwe.

Society and Culture: In Ireland, economic disparities between rich and poor, and especially ownership of land and resources was reinforced by the ethno-religious divide created by colonial processes as with land confiscation by the imperial power, with a substantive percentage of the native Irish-speaking and Roman Catholic population being dispossessed, and the incoming planter population and power elite from Britain being Protestant, and largely English-speaking.

Throughout the colonized world, such ‘othering’ and ‘divide and rule’ power strategies exploited existing and imagined racial and cultural differences, and sometimes already existing tensions within the colonized countries due to the tenure and land use systems and control. Language, religion, ethnicity or race often came into play, and were used by the colonial powers in Africa, between Black and White in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe and South Africa; ethnicity in Rwanda (Hutu, Tutsi and European), Sri Lanka (Sinhala, Tamil and British), and Algeria (Berber, Arab and European). In Ireland, the ruling protestant and English-speaking elites were more integrated into the lifestyles and culture of Britain, than the majority population, especially in rural areas. This had a long-lasting impact on Ireland with the partition of the island in 1921 into two states, and civil, political and armed conflict in Northern Ireland (1968–98).

Today many people in the ruling economic and political elites in numerous NICs ranging from Nigeria to Uganda, and Pakistan, El Salvador and Haiti may have more vested interests in common with elites in the core economies in the USA and Europe than with populations in their home countries in the economic globalization processes.

Technology: In 19th century Ireland , there was a major technological lag behind economic core industrial and innovative regions in Britain. This technological lag in Ireland also manifested itself in agricultural techniques, production and organization as was evidenced during the Famine. The minimal State institutional structures were too weak to collaborate with the wealthier entrepreneurial elite and foster the innovation and technological changes necessary, while lack of democracy excluded a majority of the population from decision making processes. Such technology lags and gaps within countries and between countries constitute the differentiation patterns between the developed and underdeveloped places and countries, closely linked to core-periphery economic disparities.

Top-down and bottom-up: The gap between these voices in 19th century Ireland led to agitation, violence and eventual revolution in the decades following the Famine. Similar patterns of bad and unjust governance and processes can be observed today throughout many states in the Arab world, Sudan, Madagascar, Mali, Myanmar, Peru, and rural areas of India spurring on the Naxalite revolutionaries.^{Footnote 12}

3.1 Patterns of Global Malnourishment

The most frequently cited data for food and ‘under-nutrition’ is that of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).^{Footnote 13} Some 795 million people continue to suffer from hunger according to The State of Food Insecurity in the World (FAO, IFAD and WFP, 2015), and almost one billion people live in extreme poverty (World Bank, 2015). Most of these people live in rural areas in the global south and rely on agriculture for much of their incomes. The FAO produces annual reports and much critical material, including executive summaries.^{Footnote 14}

Children are the most visible victims of under-nutrition. Children who are poorly nourished suffer up to 160 days of illness each year. Poor nutrition plays a role in at least half of the 10.9 million child deaths annually, i.e. five million deaths. Under-nutrition magnifies the effect of every disease, including measles and malaria. The estimated proportions of deaths in which under-nutrition is an underlying cause are roughly similar for diarrhoea (61%), malaria (57%), pneumonia (52%), and measles (45%). Malnutrition can also be caused by illnesses, such as the diseases that cause diarrhoea, by reducing the body’s ability to convert food into usable nutrients.

Malnutrition, as measured by stunting, affects 32.5% of children in developing countries. Geographically, over 70% of malnourished children live in Asia, 26% in Africa and 4% in Latin America and Caribbean countries. In many cases, their plight began even before birth with a malnourished mother. Under-nutrition among pregnant women in developing countries leads to 1 out of 6 infants born with low birth weight. This is not only a risk factor for neonatal deaths, but causes learning disabilities, psychological and retardation issues, poor health, blindness and premature death.^{Footnote 15}

3.2 Women Play a Major Role in Food Production in the NICs

Besides the tenure of farms, and farming systems being in the control of small elites in many NICs such as India, Bangladesh, Guatemala, Peru, Uganda and Burundi—ownership, inheritance and, or contractual rights are essentially under male control. In many societies, males do other types of work besides producing food on the farm, as casual labourers often living far from home, or as seasonal and migrant workers abroad. Also in conflict areas, males constitute the majority of combatants, so food production is handled by female labour.

Hence women’s farm labour in the NICs is crucial for food supply. Over half of all the world’s farmers are women, who cultivate approximately 75% of all food grown. It is estimated that if women were to receive the same education as men, farm yields could rise by as much as 22% (FAO, 2008). Women often do not own the land they work, instead this land is owned by male community leaders, or relatives of a deceased husband. This results in the fact that rural women are amongst the poorest and most dis-empowered groups in the world.^{Footnote 16}

3.3 Political-Economy and Poverty

Capitalism in various forms was the predominant political economic force in Europe and North America from the 17th century on, and was fuelled by the European scramble for colonies with their resources and markets. This was heightened by the industrial revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries. From the mid-19th century on, the idealized nation-state model became the territorial blueprint for European states, which they inadvertently exported to their colonies along with iterations of capitalism. While the vast majority of observers interested in development agree that industrialization is necessary to produce and create wealth, what they disagree on is how the profits of industrialization should be distributed and spent.

Following the Russian Revolution (1917) and creation of the USSR (1922), the Communist theories of Karl Marx , adapted by Vladimir Lenin, were introduced to counteract the negative aspects of capitalism and especially poverty in society. These socialist communist concepts were based on the theory of a state centrally-planned economy , supported by collectivist principles and intentional or calculated development planning. This was in contrast to liberal economic theory as fostered in the colonial countries. Democracy became further entwined with this especially in North America and Europe. After WWI, the ruling elites in such countries as the UK and France, had to make concessions to ordinary men and women, in order to avoid greater social agitation and possible revolution, and especially among the so called working classes, in such areas as voting rights to elect members to parliament. This was intended to ensure socio-political stability. After WWII, citizens of many European countries demanded greater rights as with the creation of the social welfare state in the UK, France, the Netherlands, Germany and Belgium. Between 1945 and 1991, led by the USA and USSR Superpowers and their allies, Western capitalism and the communist states competed for ideological, territorial and economic control of the former colonies or Newly Independent States (NICs).

Rather than confronting each other in open or hot nuclear warfare, the Superpowers maintained a balance of nuclear fear of mutual destruction, and fought their battles by proxy, indirectly through their ‘partners’ and client states, and factions within states in the NICs. The Superpower allies often exploited the internal development problems and political power struggled within the NICs in order to advance their respective geopolitical capitalist, or socialist, or communist agenda as witnessed in proxy conflicts : Chinese Civil War (1944–49), Greek Civil War (1944–49), Indochina War (1946–54), Vietnam War (1953–75), Korea (1950–53), Paraguay (1947), Malayan Emergency (1948–60), Myanmar (1948–present), Baluchistan (1948–present), Arab-Israel conflict (1948–present), Kenya and the Mau-Mau (1952–60), Indonesia (1960s), Cuba (1953–59), Algeria (1954–62), Sudan (1955–72), Tibet (1959–62), Nicaragua (1979–90), Chile coup d’état (1973), Congo Crisis (1960–65), Portuguese colonial wars and opposing liberation movements especially in Africa (1960–74), Iraqi-Kurdish War (1961–70), Eritrean War (1974–91), North Yemen Civil War (1962–70), Sarawak Insurgency (1962–90), Rhodesian (Zimbabwe) Bush War (1964–79), Dominican Civil War (1965), Chad (1965–79), Thailand (1965–83), South Africa (1966–90), and Naxalite uprising in India (1967 on).

Operation Condor (1968–89) in Latin America was to eradicate any real or perceived communist and socialist influence: key collaborating members were governments in Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Brazil, supported by the US administration providing technical support and military aid. Other proxy wars continued in the Philippines (1969–present), Angola (1974–2002), Ethiopia (1974–91), Lebanon (1975–90), Western Sahara (1975–91), Indonesian Occupation of East Timor—former Portuguese colony (1975–99), Cabinda war (an exclave and province of Angola: 1975–present), Laos (1975–present), Mozambique (1977–92), Chad-Libya (1978–87), South Yemen (1979), Soviet-led war in Afghanistan (1978–89) with civil wars (1989–92), and US War on Terror there (2001 on).

Enduring legacy proxy conflicts continued in Peru (1980–present), Georgia-Ossetia (1989-present), Georgia (1991–93), Yugoslav Wars (1991–2001), Tajikistan civil war (1992–97), Congo (1996–97 and 1997–99), Nepal Civil War (1996–2006), Guinea-Bissau (1998–99), Ivory Coast (2000–07), Darfur—Sudan (2003–present), Paraguay insurgency (2005–present), Ukraine (2013–present), Iraq (2011–14) and the strategies of the USA and Russia and their respective allies regarding the civil war in Syria (2011–present). Nonetheless, the USA and Russia promoted development in word, and in deed in the NICs since WWII, but unfortunately a lot of human and physical resources of the NICs have been squandered in conflict fuelled by the Cold War protagonists.

In 1949, US President Harry Truman delivered his landmark vision of development and a new world order in his four-point speech at the UN stating that the USA will:

1. 1.

   “Continue to give unfaltering support to the UN and related agencies and we will continue to search for ways to strengthen their authority and increase their effectiveness.”

2. 2.

   “Continue our programs for world economic recovery.”

3. 3.

   “Strengthen freedom-loving nations against the dangers of aggression.”

4. 4.

   “Embark on a bold new program for making the benefits of our scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas.”^{Footnote 17}

Truman’s speech marks a milestone in attempting to further global peace and prosperity through multilateral state cooperation, promote liberal economics and democracy , and diffuse the achievements and potential of science, technology and industry to the poorer or underdeveloped areas of the world.

However, from ethical and philosophical perspectives, distinguishing the boundaries between one’s own needs including water, food and a place to live, along with collective necessities including space, territory, infrastructure and protection, and individual and social wants has always been challenging for society, leading to competition, negotiation, or conflict. It has been argued that conflict have been exacerbated by mass consumerism as enmeshed in specific cultures, and has become the driving force in political-economic globalization . Analysts agree that industrialization is key to eradication of poverty and creation of development, but the distribution of the profits of industrialization remains the core contentious point in society and development discourses.

With economic and media globalization, it is increasing difficult for any state political elite to implement a purely political-economic ideological approach. In the past decade especially, inequality has increased within and between countries. According to a Credit Suisse Report (2015), half the world’s wealth is now in the hands of just 1% of the population with extreme inequality out of control; the top 1% own half the wealth and the poorest half own just 1%.^{Footnote 18}

3.4 Human Vulnerability and Risk of Disaster in Post-colonial Countries

The majority of post-colonial states are located in the Southern hemisphere which has the highest level of: (a) adverse physical geographical conditions ranging from earthquakes to tsunamis, and droughts to flooding, and (b) difficult ecological situations such as the occurrence of malaria and Ebola, and are part of the so-called Less Developed Countries. The NICs are struggling with the political processes of (c) nation-state building and (d) development, not only in economic and social terms, but also regarding (e) good governance and democracy.

In the context of an adverse physical geography, challenging ecological situations, state-building and development, the colonial experiences has left enduring legacies enmeshed in the post-colonial architecture and international order, with the nation-state model and its boundaries and development challenges.

3.5 Imperialism and Colonialism

Colonialism may be defined as the practice of acquiring full or partial political-economic control over another country, often occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it. This is based on imperialism which is a strategy of extending a country’s power and influence through colonization, use of military force, or other means such as economic penetration via loans to merchant and ruling elites, in order to exploit the native people, their territory and resources. Neo-colonialism is the use of economic, political, cultural, or other pressures to control or influence other countries, especially former colonies such as the NICs. Post-colonialism studies analyse, explain, and respond to the cultural and economic legacies of colonialism and imperialism.^{Footnote 19}

In brief, from the 17th century on local and regional economies were transformed into colonial ones by the European powers specializing in the production of primary produce for their home needs, and also foreign markets. This was organized through: (i) Tribute from territorial control (16–17th centuries); (b) enclaves and slave plantations, (18th century); and (c) capital domination as epitomized with the 19th century European scramble for Africa.

Regional specialisations were created to service economic policies and trade of the colonizing countries such as sugar in the Caribbean, cotton in the USA, India and Egypt, and from the 19th century on, bananas in Central America, rubber in Malaya and tea in East Africa and Sri Lanka. This shaped physical, economic and trading networks and structures that usually continued after the formal political independence of the colonies in the 20th century, Great Britain was at the epicentre of this multilateral-system of trade, of world economy, from the late 19^th century till the mid-1950s, and closely followed by other imperial countries such as France and the Netherlands.

Here it must be remembered that often in analyses of imperialism and colonialism, emphasis is usually placed on European powers and their overseas empires, but other imperial countries were implementing similar processes with their land-based empires as with Russian geo-strategy expanding eastwards towards the Pacific Ocean, Central Asia and Baltic Sea; German and Austrian expansion in Central, Eastern and Balkan Europe; Ottoman enlargement in the Balkans and MENA; and Han Chinese strategy moving north, west and south in Asia. The Japanese empire existed from 1868 to 1947 in Asia, with the acquisition of islands and colonies at different periods, and bloody rule especially in Manchuria in China (1931–45), Korea (1910–45) and the Philippines (1942–45).

The main maritime European colonizing countries since the 17th century were Spain, Portugal, Great Britain, France and the Netherlands. Transport and communications systems such as ports, rail, canal e.g. Suez and Panama, and cable systems were created in order to facilitate this imperial economic system. Urban centres were created, or added to existing ones, for exploitation of the hinterlands. A European ‘state system of boundaries’ was introduced as the geographical unit for economics, without deference to existing territorial polity systems based on clans, tribes, ethnic groups and nations. Western values were imposed regarding law, land tenure, work and wage systems, and private property ownership. By 1945, the USA had much control over the political economies of many Latin American countries much linked to the rise of US transnational firms.

Regarding decolonization , with the formal independence of many colonies between 1955 and 1975, the new states often attempted industrialisation targeting import substitution. Transnational corporations set up branches in the former colonies. However, some Newly Independent Countries such as India started exporting their own produce. Nonetheless, the majority of NICs were dependent on export of primary commodities with low prices and volatile markets. The majority of the NICs remained heavily dependent on importation of finished products from the industrialized world of the former colonial powers and the USA that had gained the major advantages of the Industrial Revolution since the 19th century. Hence the rise of the industrialized countries, in contrast to the non-industrialized countries, or NICs. Cartels of the NICs have not been able to stabilise prices except for OPEC—Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, for a while in the 1970s.^{Footnote 20}

For many NICs, the Superpower Cold War (1947–91) had negative effects directly and, or indirectly as they were used as proxies. The debt crises of the 1980s and early 21st century sent the NICs into a spiral of debt where integration of production in the world economy did not matched their consumption. New modes of development have tried to challenge the neo-liberalism of the industrialized countries, but with little success. The BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries adapted the neo-liberal economic system to their cultural and political contexts.^{Footnote 21}

Significantly, the Non-Aligned Movement —officially neither pro-Western nor pro-Soviet—was founded in 1956 by the governments of Yugoslavia, India, Indonesia, Egypt and Ghana and attempted to counteract the dominance of the Superpowers, and establish a politico-military independent voice for the former colonies, but with varying degrees of success; today it numbers 120 countries.^{Footnote 22}

Factors linking human vulnerability and risk of disaster in many post-colonial countries, indicate that former colonies are struggling with the process of development and nation-state construction, not only in territorial, and economic and social terms, but also regarding good governance and democracy. Low levels of development lead to a decreased capacity to cope with negative unfolding events such as cyclones or armed conflict. For instance, death rates due to cyclones are higher in Honduras than in Cuba, as Cuba has a highly developed EWS (Early Warning System) whereas Honduras does not. Where bad governance and large scale human rights abuses exist as in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar, Haiti and Zimbabwe, this has led to conflict, seriously contributing to poverty for the majority of citizens and underdevelopment which exacerbates the impact of crises and disasters.

The greater the poverty levels, then the more fragile the coping mechanisms and safety nets are. The debilitating effect that disease can have on society is manifestly obvious as with the HIV/AIDS epidemic at household, local, national and wider scales in Swaziland, Botswana, Lesotho, and South Africa to name but a few. The loss of entire generations of a healthy workforce and those who care for families has had devastating effects, retarding development processes. States including Sierra Leone, Liberia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Zimbabwe, Rwanda and Haiti have all experienced humanitarian crises in the past two decades and also register very high levels of HIV/AIDS . Both poverty and health are high on the priorities of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Regarding access to, and allocations of resources , many humanitarian crises take place in predominantly agricultural societies where the demand on land resources is high as witnessed in Darfur, Republic of South Sudan and Niger. If land is scarce, and there is a dependent population, then economic development is hampered. Nonetheless, some humanitarian crises are taking place in countries with ample resources such as Zimbabwe, Sudan, Mali and the DR Congo. Here a core issue is the unjust allocation of resources. For instance, with the distribution and management of water, interest groups—farmer, tourism, and environmentalist—often compete for them. Comprehensive and effective mechanisms to deal with demands and challenges need to be in place. Other resources including minerals, diamonds, oil and wood are also abundant in countries that have experienced, or will probably experience human-made disasters in the future as with Myanmar, Sudan and Indonesia. This is due to bad governance at national levels, and often the collusion of international actors with vested interests or other states such as China in relation to oil in Sudan.

Good and effective governance in the face of hazard is crucial in decreasing a populations vulnerability. Such governance can prevent lack of rainfall from escalating into a famine situation, and once again an EWS (Early Warning System) is crucial.^{Footnote 23} It must be noted that famine has not occurred in India since independence in 1947 and that India is the largest democracy in the world and has a free press.

Hence there is a nexus between low levels of development, vulnerability and risk that can fall into a negative cycle. Intervention to break this cycle is crucial, but may seem like a ‘which came first story’—the chicken or the egg. However, without addressing the levels of underdevelopment—micro (individual, household), and mezzo (group) to macro (region and state) scales, it will not be possible to address vulnerability and decrease the risk of humanitarian disasters. In the quest for a sustainable world, the nexus between food, power and hunger exists. The FAO has long raised awareness of this along with conflict, hunger, and the food weapon. Some 50,000 children in Yemen died from starvation in 2017. As elsewhere, children remain the most visible victims of under-nutrition and famine, while it’s women that continue to play the salient role in food production in the NICs. Relationships between political-economy, poverty, modernity and development are well known, yet geopolitical struggles continue to debilitate sustainable development in many NICs, with human vulnerability and risk of disaster in too many post-colonial countries. Adverse physical geographical and ecological conditions challenge the development momentum, and the struggle with nation-state building and consolidation continues, with lack of good governance and democracy in many cases. The discourse of government and international agencies often sound hollow to younger generations in the NICs, frustrated by marginalization and lack of democracy.