Max Tallberg
In this text, the term “Global South” is used to refer to unequal global power relations rather than a homogeneous group of countries or societies.
In my earlier blog texts dealing with the Global South, I have highlighted basic background information related to the topic and focused on the historical conditions linked to these power relations and their cause–effect relationships. I also discussed aspects of everyday life in different contexts commonly associated with the Global South. In this text, I turn my attention to contemporary global inequalities often discussed in relation to the Global South, focusing in particular on structural challenges linked to poverty from a societal perspective.
First of all, poverty cannot be explained by differences between individuals. Instead, it is closely linked to structural factors such as unequal political and economic systems, historical exploitation, and forms of governance shaped by both domestic dynamics and global power relations. At the same time, economic and political systems are highly complex, making it insufficient to rely on single or simplified explanations. It is therefore also justified to look to the past when trying to explain present conditions, as I have done in my earlier texts.
When considering the eradication of poverty worldwide—that is, how more just and sustainable development pathways can be supported in contexts marked by deep global inequalities—it is of primary importance to first address extreme poverty, which remains a reality for a significant share of the world’s population. Extreme poverty refers to situations in which households are unable to meet the basic needs required for survival. This may involve chronic hunger, lack of access to healthcare, clean water and sanitation, education, or physical security. Such conditions are heavily concentrated in parts of the Global South, although severe deprivation and exclusion also exist elsewhere in the world.
Famine also continues to exist in today’s world, but not due to an overall lack of food. Rather, it is linked to unequal distribution and access. Famines have also been shown to be connected to political accountability and governance. Democracy, in turn, protects against famine in two ways: first, through a free press that brings risks of famine to light before they escalate and does not conceal them afterward; and second, through free and functioning elections, which help ensure that political power remains accountable to the population. If accountability is lacking or leadership fails to act responsibly, those in power may lose public support. One key advantage of democracy can therefore be considered the opportunity it provides for people to defend their rights and monitor whether these rights are respected.
In many Western countries, poverty is more commonly understood in relative terms, meaning that a household’s income falls below a certain threshold compared to the national average. People living in relative poverty may be unable to participate fully in social and cultural life or to access high-quality healthcare or education, which can limit opportunities for social mobility. In contexts of extreme material deprivation, however, individuals often face even more severe constraints. When poverty is extreme, it can form a trap from which individuals are unable to escape on their own. In such situations, people are too poor to save or invest in their future, making it difficult to improve their living conditions. This situation is commonly described as a poverty trap.
An individual or household may become caught in a poverty trap for many reasons, including illness, geographic isolation, environmental conditions, or broader economic deprivation. Poverty traps have also been identified in relation to armed conflict, access to natural resources, landlocked geography, or weak governance structures. Levels of economic development are significant in this regard. Research has shown, for example, that civil wars are more likely to occur in low-income countries. When income levels decline, the risk of conflict increases, and low or negative economic growth further intensifies this risk. Armed conflict—or even the anticipation of it—has severe negative effects on development, including economic performance. Low incomes are therefore often associated with poverty, which can severely restrict people’s opportunities and choices. In such circumstances, limited economic prospects and insecurity can increase vulnerability to armed mobilization, particularly among young people.
The discovery of valuable natural resources in countries often classified as part of the Global South can, under certain conditions, also contribute to development challenges. This is particularly the case when global markets, external actors, and unequal power relations shape how these resources are governed. In such situations, resource exports may lead to currency appreciation, making other export sectors less competitive. These other sectors might otherwise have contributed more strongly to technological development and long-term economic diversification.
Countries facing structural poverty traps often require substantial investments to address the associated challenges. However, these investments are difficult to finance precisely because resources are scarce. Addressing these challenges therefore requires more than free markets or formal democratic institutions alone. As a result, many scholars argue for a combination of domestic policy space, global structural reforms, and, in some cases, development cooperation to help initiate positive development dynamics and enable long-term investment.
Addressing the problems associated with poverty traps should therefore be given priority when striving for a more globally just and equal world. A further goal is to reduce moderate poverty and expand opportunities for social mobility across different contexts. Addressing global poverty and inequality can thus be understood as one of the most urgent shared challenges of our time.
Sources:
Andersson, K. et al. (2005) The samaritan’s dilemma : the political economy of development aid / Clark C. Gibson … [ja muita]. Oxford ; Oxford University Press.
Banerjee, A. Vinayak. & Esther Duflo (2011) Poor economics a radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty / Abhijit Vinayak Banerjee, Esther Duflo. New York: Public Affairs.
Collier, Paul. (2008) The bottom billion : why the poorest countries are failing and what can be done about it / by Paul Collier. New York: Oxford University Press.
Desai, V. & Potter, R. B. (2014) The companion to development studies / edited by Vandana Desai and Rob Potter. Third edition. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Kervinen, Anna. et al. (2007) Kehitysmaatutkimus : johdatus perusteisiin / toimittaneet: Juhani Koponen, Jari Lanki, Anna Kervinen. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
Kothari, U. (2019) A radical history of development studies : individuals, institutions and ideologies / Uma Kothari. Second edition. London: Zed Books.
Moloney, K. (2014) Development Aid Confronts Politics: The Almost Revolution by ThomasCarothers and Dianede Gramont. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2013. 347 pp. $19.95 (paper). Governance (Oxford). [Online] 27 (2), 361–364.
Nygren, A 2013 , Eco-imperialism and environmental justice . in S Lockie , D A Sonnenfeld & D R Fischer (eds) , Routledge International Handbook of Social and Environmental Change . Routledge International Handbooks , Routledge , London , pp. 58-69
Sachs, J. (2005) The end of poverty : economic possibilities for our time / Jeffrey D. Sachs. New York: Penguin Press.
Yanguas, Pablo (2018) Why we lie about aid: development and the messy politics of change. London: Zed Books.
Veltmeyer, H. & Delgado Wise, R. (2018) Critical development studies : an introduction / Henry Veltmeyer & Raúl Delgado Wise. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.
Wickstead, M. A. (2015) Aid and Development: A Brief Introduction. 1st edition. [Online]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Development : History and Power of the Concept Koponen, Juhani 2020 Koponen , J 2020 , ‘ Development : History and Power of the Concept ‘ , Forum for Development Studies , vol. 47 , no. 1 , pp. 1-21 .https://doi.org/10.1080/08039410.2019.1654542
