1.

Main Argument/Thesis-Broad Schematic - Sachs - The end of poverty

Thesis/Claims/ Support or Evidence/Conclusion

1. The Big Push

1. The cycle of poverty can only be broken through a big push
2. Follows the philosophy of Rostow's teleological argument about
concrete "stages" of development based on American/European model
of industrialization/modernization
3. the state shld play a role in addressing market failure: uses economic
theory of Keynesianism (advocating state-led investments in development
through large infrastructure projects)
4. he is advocating for overseas development assistance ODA: rich
countries need to spend more money in global aid (for infrastructure,
investment in health, education)

2. The Ladder of Development

1. similar to Rostow's "take-off" draws from the "modernization" theory
2. It maintains that countries need to get on the ladder and then they will be
able to continue on their own and become self-sufficient
3. rich countries need to help poor countries to get their foot on the ladder
4. overall, the higher rungs of the ladder: steps up the path to economic well-
being while the lower rungs daily survival is assured to make end meet
and they lack basic amenities

1. The Poverty Trap

1. Poor cannot accumulate capital to pull them out of the cycle, can't get on
the "ladder"because of various traps: as the example of market failure
2. forms of traps: geographical, fiscal, governance failures, cultural barriers,
lack of innovation, geopolitics and demographics

2. Main Argument/Thesis-Broad Schematic – Easterly - White Man’s Burden

 Easterly is against the notion of Big Push, Big Development, and Planners
 top-down approach = The "White Man's Burden" or neo-colonialism
o it doesn't allow for poor countries to implement their own development
plans
o imprisons poor countries in big plans drawn by Western "technical"
development experts
o infringes upon sovereignty
 it is not about providing more aid (money) but about bad governance
  He uses Empirical Evidence to argue that there is no such a thing as the "poverty
trap"
 He argues that searchers not planners should provide the answer for what is there
to be done
o planners sort out what to supply, but searchers figure out what is in
demand; this is a more effective way of providing development
 E. argues for homegrown solutions, often provided by the poor themselves
 "Rich have markets, poor have bureaucrats"

3. Critical questions based on outlined ideas

 What is the main argument presented by Sachs in End of Poverty?

 How does Sachs address the role of the State in eradicating poverty?
 What are the main steps that a poor country need to take first in order to get on the
ladder?
 What are the various traps the Sachs claim to impede a country from developing?
 continuing assistance

 ‘pockets of poverty’,

 ‘spillover effects’ and

 ‘knowledge transfer’.

 moral obligation based on exploitative relations

Questions (Kanbur/Sumner-Poor Countries or Poor People?)

What precisely are the global moral obligations towards the poor in MICs?

Should aid allocation be targeted equally to poor people in the poorest countries and in
MICs, or should special weight be given to the poor in poorest countries?

How, if at all, should international agencies with a focus on poverty reduction re-
calibrate their engagement with MICs?

How do patterns of income poverty compare with patterns of deprivation in non-income

dimensions?

Will this pattern of concentration of the poor in MICs continue in the future?

What is the rationale for differentiated strategies between MICs and LICs and how would
it be affected by the new reality that the bulk of the world’s poor now live in MICs?

Why should development assistance flow to countries whose average per capita income is
nominally now above the international poverty line, with the implication that poverty
persists solely because of inequality in these countries?

WEEKLY SUMMY ASSIGNMENTS SCHEDULE Weekly Summary Assignments