- ATD Fourth World

1. Introduction

A few years ago, in a region situated in the centre of Western Europe, the family S. with thirteen children lived in a tent. They were continually being chased from place to place and being met by hostility. In order for the children to be educated, they were looking to set up home but all their attempts to find housing were turned down by the local authorities. When the family had been living in a forest for several months, the authorities decided to install a toilet in the middle of the forest next to the tent. The family reacted by saying, “they do not want anything to do with us, but they are doing this to protect the forest”. This example shows that it is not always easy to reconcile the protection of the environment with the promotion of fundamental rights.

The European Commission touches on this subject in a “Working Document - Consultation paper for the preparation of a European Union strategy for Sustainable Development”. (SEC(2001)517) [1]. It has tried to bring together the reactions of civil society and the International Movement ATD Fourth World wishes to respond to this attempt in this document. The European Commission asks for replies to ten questions. We will do this as a conclusion, but first we wish to tackle two essential issues: the fact that the very poor are living proof of the indivisibility of human rights; and that everyone should be able to contribute to the well being of his family, his community and humanity.

2.The very poor, living proof of the indivisibility of human rights

The Commission working document reveals in a remarkable way the necessary coherence between economic, social and environmental policies. It clearly exposes how the six priority topics in the sustainable development strategy are interdependent. Certainly, since the Brundtland report, sustainable development was defined as “the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.Indeed, this same report presented the fight against poverty as a major challenge to sustainable development. But since the Rio Conference in 1992, community interest in sustainable development has concentrated on the environment.

The Commission proposes a significant advance in affirming that there is consensus on the fact that “development has an economic, a social and an environmental dimension. It will only last if an equilibrium is found between the different factors which contribute to the quality of global life.” In situating the fight against poverty as “central” to sustainable development, (p. 27), it recaptures the spirit which was at the heart of the Rio Conference. The Lisbon European Council, which took place in March 2000, has already shown the way, in wanting to reconcile the pursuit of economic growth with that of social cohesion. In this working document, the Commission clearly indicates that quality of life should be the objective of European policies.

The Commission working document shows very explicitly the effects of poverty on the state of health of its victims (pp. 14 & 21, topic 2) and that urban planning and land-use policies have a direct effect on social exclusion (p.12, topic 6). It could equally have shown that the poorest are the first to be hit by increases in the price of coal or domestic fuel (topic 1), that they do not have the same access as others to natural resources (topic 2), that they were the first professionals in the recycling of waste (topic 2). All these links confirm the assertions of Joseph Wresinski, founder of the International Movement ATD Fourth World: that the very poor are the living proof of the indivisibility of human rights. [2] For it is not only living conditions (resources, family life, health, housing, work, etc.) which have repercussions on each other, but also social consideration, social usefulness, having a voice, the political situation of people who are conditioned by the lack of access to fundamental social rights and vice versa. The indivisibility of rights is founded on equal human dignity. Taking account of this indivisibility of human rights is therefore at the heart of all sustainable development. The Charter of Fundamental Rights, adopted at the Nice European Council is clear proof that these rights are at the heart of all EU policies.

It is thus that the Objectives in the fight against poverty and social exclusion [3], approved by the Nice European Council in December 2000, propose in part to promote the participation in employment and universal access to resources, to rights, to goods and services such as the resources necessary to live, housing, health, education, justice, culture, sports, leisure, and, on the other hand the involvement of everyone in the fight against poverty, including the participation of the socially excluded.

We are also very please with the proposals made in the Commission working document on the coherence of the sector-based policies, on a better “understanding of the causes, effects and interdependencies between sectors” of sustainable development. There are two methods, which seem essential to us in this matter:

• For every one of the community policies (and particularly the economic, fiscal and monetary policies), a document should be drawn up on the impact of this policy on poverty (and particularly on the implementation of the Objectives in the fight against poverty and social exclusion).

• In the evaluation of policies in the fight against poverty and social exclusion, the effects of other economic, social and environmental policies should be systematically taken into account.

In this regard, we feel that the section in chapter 3, topic 6 on land use does not take sufficient account of the question of poverty, whereas in the introduction of this chapter 3 (p.12) these two topics are quite rightly presented as being interdependent: “the degree of social exclusion is influenced by urban planning and land use policies… uncontrolled development can aggravate segregation and social disparities”.

3. Everyone can contribute to the welfare of his family, his community and mankind.

“We are gathered here to commit ourselves, our governments and our countries to work for social development the world over, in such a way that everyone, men and women, in particular those living in poverty, can exercise their rights, use the resources available and share the responsibilities which enable them to live a satisfactory life and to contribute to the welfare of their families, their community and mankind”. [4] The European Commission’s working document on Sustainable Development shows equal conviction in its affirmation (p. 27) that “poverty has a high social cost, particularly the waste of human talents and energy implied by unequal opportunities”. It highlights here a little known aspect of poverty and social exclusion. This is more often seen as a problem to be solved, whereas we are face to face with people whose efforts, abilities and responsibilities are denied or hidden.

However, the Commission document maintains furthermore that poverty is badly defined (p. 27), or that its definition, its causes and its consequences are “complex and controversial” (p. 42). We do not feel this is quite accurate. Most of the questions are indeed complex and controversial. But among most of these as well (as is shown in the introduction on sustainable development) there is a consensus of opinion. Thus, about ten years ago, in the international community, there was a consensus about the fact that poverty is linked to lack of access to fundamental rights. This awareness came about as the result of the reflections of the very poor themselves and has led to a definition of poverty, born of the experience of the very poor, and increasingly adopted by the international community. This definition is due to Joseph Wresinski. [5] It firstly defines a lack of basic security as “the absence of one or more factor that enable individuals and families to assume basic responsibilities and to enjoy fundamental rights”. Chronic poverty results when this lack of basic security “simultaneously affects several aspects of people’s lives, when it is prolonged, and when it severely compromises people’s chances of regaining their rights and of reassuming their responsibilities in the foreseeable future”.

Thus the primary cause of precariousness and therefore of poverty is the lack of access to fundamental rights. In the context of the Lisbon strategy, the European Union must put in place indicators of poverty and social exclusion. It is presently looking for indicators with regard to fundamental social rights like resources, work, housing and health. It should also provide qualitative indicators in order to highlight the dignity of people and the efforts made by the populations concerned in the same way as others involved in the fight against poverty.

Like the Wresinski definition, the Commission working document emphasizes the persistence of poverty, often from generation to generation. Where the Wresinski definition speaks of “compromising chances”, the Commission speaks of “social cost”, of “waste”. It introduces an idea, used increasingly by economists, of “human cost”. The example of education is very eloquent, as one can clearly see that when so many young people leave school without any qualifications, some even illiterate, their future is jeopardised. It is the same for those families who, worn out by precarious living conditions, are forced into family break-ups or placing their children with foster parents. But most economists are better at calculating financial rather than human or social costs. They are wary of giving these costs the same level of importance. In a recent proposal for a directive on Public Procurement Procedures (presently being discussed by the Council and the European Parliament), the Commission has refused to bear in mind the social repercussions in the costs of the offer made, whereas it has agreed to consider the cost of the environmental repercussions. In the Commission working document, chapter 4, (Common solutions), it is proposed that “the costs and effects of all policies should be examined more systematically” (p.44). However, in the rest of this chapter, the costs which are envisaged are always economic and not economic, social and environmental. We would have wished that the Commission had placed greater emphasis on the studies made on human cost and sought inspiration in the thoughts of Mr. Amartya Sen, Nobel Prize winner for Economics: “Modern economics have been considerably impoverished by their distance from ethical economics” [6].

The following question should therefore be asked: will sustainable development be a fair development? What influence will the poorest sections of the population have, those who are often deprived of a voice and unused to being heard in the “coherent and rigorous evaluations” of the integrated policies proposed in the Commission document (p.47)? Will they be party to the “council of sustainable development” which the Commission wants to set up (p.48)? Will they be able to participate in the elaboration of qualitative indicators (p.50) on subjects of which they have experience like the quality of social relationships? Therein lies a new challenge with regard to the involvement of civil society. These new consultations, requested by all in the name of good governance, will they prove to be exclusive or will they innovate in a democracy whose very essence is the protection of the weak?

Would it not be paradoxical if the fight against poverty were seen as “central” to sustainable development if on the other hand the very poor were excluded from participating in the drawing-up, implementation and evaluation of these policies?

4. 10 questions, 10 brief answers and 7 proposals

We are using the 10 questions asked in the European Commission working document, to make proposals. (N.B. We have summarised the questions asked by the Commission).

Question 1: Are the six chosen topics valid?

These six topics are excellent. The fight against poverty and social exclusion is central to the topic of sustainable development.

Question 2: Sustainable Development in Europe and Sustainable Development on a world scale. Could these investments be incompatible?

By fighting against poverty at a local level and by associating the very poor with sustainable development, Europe can encourage other countries to do the same. It will also avoid presenting itself as a model to these other countries and will be able enter into discussion with them as to the best ways of assuring fundamental rights for all.

Question 3: Sustainable Development and Accession Countries to the European Union

Proposal 1:

In order to enable Accession countries to have a coherent sustainable development policy, the European Union must commit itself to giving concrete support to these countries in order to achieve a positive implementation of the Objectives of the fight against poverty and social exclusion. All the policies negotiated by the Union with regard to these countries must seek to “answer to the essential needs” of the populations of these countries (and not to adapt itself at any cost to an exclusive economic model). They must be evaluated in relation to the access of all to fundamental rights.

Question 4: Are you in agreement with this analysis? Do you wish to add suggestions concerning the strategic tools?

Proposal 2:

The analysis of poverty and social exclusion presents several positive aspects, particularly the emphasis placed on persistent poverty (chronic poverty). It could however be deepened on the basis of the definition given by Joseph Wresinski on precariousness and great poverty, placing the emphasis on real access to fundamental rights, on the indivisibility of these rights and the equal dignity of all.

Proposal 3:

In the context of the Lisbon strategy, a greater emphasis must be placed on the Objectives of the fight against poverty and social exclusion, approved at the Nice European Council. They are on the one hand a theoretical reference, based on the Wresinski definition, and on the other a methodology of action based on the participation of the populations concerned.

Question 5: Which measures should be taken to improve the coherence and integration of these policies?

Proposal 4:

For each of the community policies (and particularly the economic, fiscal and monetary policies), a study on the impact of this policy on poverty (and particularly on the implementation of the Objectives of the fight against poverty and social exclusion) should be carried out.

In the evaluation of the policies of the fight against poverty and social exclusion, the effects of other economic, social and environmental policies should be systematically calculated.

Question 6: What is the role of civil society?

Civil society and particularly the populations living in great poverty have their share of responsibilities to shoulder in the policies of sustainable development. In order to achieve this, they must be associated with this strategy in its entirety. There are two clear proposals to be made:

Proposal 5:

Within the context of good governance, the strategy for sustainable development in its entirety must be prepared, drawn up and evaluated within the framework of a structured civil dialogue. The participation of European NGOs, familiar with the six chosen topics, in “the Council for Sustainable Development” is indispensable.

In addition, people living in poverty must equally be associated with the whole process, through the NGOs of which they are members and who represent them, and particularly with the drawing-up of appropriate indicators. They must be represented at the “council for sustainable development”.

This structured civil dialogue must have a legal basis at Union level, which does not exist at present.

Proposal 6:

In public campaigns destined to mobilise European populations, emphasis must be placed on the fight against poverty. The 17th October, chosen by the UN as the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, is an opportune moment to carry out such campaigns.

Question 7: How can minimum costs for the adaptation of sustainable development be guaranteed?

Proposal 7:

In depth consideration must be given to the relationship between economic and human cost. It must lead to human investment, avoiding the waste of human talent (even imposed inactivity [7] ) experienced by so many people living in conditions of poverty and social exclusion.

Question 8: In which field of Sustainable Development does the European Union have a clear role to play?

It has a clear role to play in:

• Supporting the implementation of the Objectives of the fight against poverty and social exclusion in the European Union countries as well as the accession countries, ensuring effective access to indivisible fundamental rights (see Propositions 1, 2, 3, 6)

Question 9: Which are the most urgent measures to be taken by the European Union?

Two measures are urgent:

• To measure the impact of the different European policies on poverty - see Proposition 4.

Question 10: Which objectives would you wish to integrate into the European Union strategy, which will be presented at the Gothenburg Summit? What precautions should be taken to guarantee their implementation?

The Objectives in the fight against poverty and social exclusion must be introduced into the objectives of sustainable development to be presented at the Gothenburg Summit. To guarantee their implementation, all seven Proposals made above must be borne in mind.