Rethinking poverty - again!

[This is the 5th post in a series that I am writing in the run up to the Goa Thinkfest organized by Tehelka]


Before you read this, think for a moment. If I were to ask you "What do you think is poverty", what would your reply be? This is not a rhetorical question to provide an interesting start to my post. I really want you to think. This is what I think - or rather thought almost 3 years back - "Poverty is the lack of opportunity". Mahatma Gandhi, understandably, had a more profound outlook and said "Poverty is the worst form of violence".

When I first read about Poor Economics, my first reaction - and reaction would be the right word because it was not well thought out - was "Not another theoretical literature on how (amazingly) the poor go about their daily business". I have to confess I have not read the book yet but I do intend to after reading some great reviews and feedback. I guess, the scepticism was more pronounced because Abhijit and Esther are both economists. And I feel that this world suffers from over-theorizing. If you remember, some years back we made a big deal of BoP - oh, you are one those who has not heard of BoP. Bottom of the Pyramid - duh!! Even I made a big deal of it. Writing about it in blogs and throwing the word around in discussions.

But, how much of these discussions have changed the situation on the ground for the poor (remember, I am still waiting for your answer on what you think poverty is). I mean despite the existence of reams of knowledge (which I believe is more of information and less of knowledge), we would have expected the poor to have got a much better deal in our country. But sadly that is not the case. Our own Planning Commission and its beautiful conclusion of "anyone earning above Rs 32 is not poor" are proof. Not to mention that babus (many times well-meaning ones) take decisions which are nothing but modern day versions of "Let them have cake".

Having said this, I should say that the approach taken by Abhijit and Esther - conducting randomized trials - is definitely interesting. And as the Economist review notes, at the least, it makes the economists go out among the people they write about. Theirs is one talk that I am eagerly looking forward to. Here is an excerpt from their book Poor Economics. 

This urge to reduce the poor to a set of clichés has been with us for as long as there has been poverty: The poor appear, in social theory as much as in literature, by turns lazy or enterprising, noble or thievish, angry or passive, helpless or self-sufficient. It is no surprise that the policy stances that correspond to these views of the poor also tend to be captured in simple formulas: “Free markets for the poor,” “Make human rights substantial,” “Deal with conflict first,” “Give more money to the poorest,” “Foreign aid kills development,” and the like. These big ideas all have important elements of truth, but they rarely have much space for average poor women or men, with their hopes and doubts, limitations and aspirations, beliefs and confusion. If the poor appear at all, it is usually as the dramatis personae of some uplifting anecdote or tragic episode, to be admired or pitied, but not as a source of knowledge, not as people to be consulted about what they think or want or do.

I think they would be most well-placed to answer my question. First one being (remember!) - who is poor? Do the goals of a free economy and poverty alleviation have common ground? Are we as individuals capable of doing simple things to contribute towards poverty alleviation? Is poverty normal? And last but not the least, what do they think of a defining poverty lines based on daily earnings like "Living on a dollar a day" or "Rs 32 a day".

Creating steeper climbs for the paralyzed

"Bhaiya, I got through the written round for CRPF", my cousin who lives in my native informed me in chaste Bhojpuri. From his voice, I could gather that he was more relived and less ecstatic. I was feeling neither of those feelings. Instead I was sad – I already knew what he had to do to get through the written exam. But before I get to that let me give you a background on my cousin and his quest for the holy grail of most youth from rural backgrounds intending to get a government job – a rank of jawan in the armed forces or allied forces like CRPF/BSF.

Let us call my cousin Baboo. Baboo has been desperately trying for a job in the armed forces for more than 2 years now. There is a reason for such an obsession for being a jawan. For Baboo and many thousands like him, the minimum entry qualification of tenth standard makes this job one of the most reachable for youth like him who strayed away from studies after passing tenth. The reasons could be many – lack of guidance, lack of financial resources, lack of interest (which in a way relates to the first one). Once they pass the age of getting back on the academic track, the need for a stable job is felt. The fact that they are young and hence physically quite capable propels them towards these jobs. I remember my cousin describing how he used to run long distances every morning and evening - barefoot or in hawai chappals – to prepare for the first round of selection. Baboo also told me how he faced a particular predicament – a handful of chana – and not knowing whether to eat it before the run or before the chest measuring test. Both tests are important and both require him to eat it especially since he had not eaten for a day.

Earlier he could not even clear the initial runs meant to filter a large part of the candidates. With enough practice he started clearing the runs every time. Once the run is cleared, comes the written test. He started preparing for them too but it seems like he hit a stone wall with the written rounds. Even after much trying he was not able to clear the written exams for any of the umpteen tests he wrote over a period of two years.

Finally, he got through the written time this time. But this success came with a rider. He had to pay around 1.5 lakh rupees to ensure that he passed the exam. In fact this is how it was happening in most of the recruitments, he told me once. I had heard the same thing from many other people about recruitment for the posts of clerks and TT in railways. That Baboo had to sell off a good part of his land to arrange for this kind of money makes the situation even more poignant. Despite his hard work for 2 years, Baboo could not get his break until he submitted to the demon of corruption. I am sure if things were cleaner he would have been recruited earlier.

Now contrast this with another cousin of mine. Being born to urban upper middle class parents, the problems he faced in life were different. Finishing school and completing engineering was something that he did with relative ease. Once he graduated he already had an offer from Infosys – one of the most revered companies (when it comes to freshers). At the same the Indian Navy came to his college for recruitment. He was able to clear the interviews, group discussions and written exams with ease. Now he is already on his way to a settled life living the life of a Navy officer and riding the Bullet that he bought with his own money.

If you analyze the situation, it is not hard to see that the way our society functions even in something as undesirable as corruption – the odds are stacked heavily against the one who did not have the headstart. And many of the activists (including me) would venture to point out a finger at the former and say “See, this is how meritorious candidates lose out. Because the non-deserving ones pay money and get their way through”. That is wrong. Almost every time you have to pay your way through – deserving or otherwise. The one with an urban upbringing and good communication skills did not have to tread a treacherous path to becoming an officer who would ultimately lead men similar to the former. The more things change, the more they remain the same.