Bottom Billion Research Articles

Neglected tropical diseases and the millennium development goals: why the "other diseases" matter: reality versus rhetoric.

Since 2004 there has been an increased recognition of the importance of Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) as impediments to development. These diseases are caused by a variety of infectious agents - viruses, bacteria and parasites - which cause a diversity of clinical conditions throughout the tropics. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has defined seventeen of these conditions as core NTDs. The objectives for the control, elimination or eradication of these conditions have been defined in World Health Assembly resolutions whilst the strategies for the control or elimination of individual diseases have been defined in various WHO documents. Since 2005 there has been a drive for the expanded control of these diseases through an integrated approach of mass drug administration referred to as Preventive Chemotherapy via community-based distribution systems and through schools. This has been made possible by donations from major pharmaceutical companies of quality and efficacious drugs which have a proven track record of safety. As a result of the increased commitment of endemic countries, bilateral donors and non-governmental development organisations, there has been a considerable expansion of mass drug administration. In particular, programmes targeting lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis, schistosomiasis, trachoma and soil transmitted helminth infections have expanded to treat 887. 8 million people in 2009. There has been significant progress towards guinea worm eradication, and the control of leprosy and human African trypanosomiasis. This paper responds to what the authors believe are inappropriate criticisms of these programmes and counters accusations of the motives of partners made in recently published papers. We provide a detailed response and update the information on the numbers of global treatments undertaken for NTDs and list the success stories to date.The paper acknowledges that in undertaking any health programme in environments such as post-conflict countries, there are always challenges. It is also recognised that NTD control must always be undertaken within the health system context. However, it is important to emphasise that the availability of donated drugs, the multiple impact of those drugs, the willingness of countries to undertake their distribution, thereby committing their own resources to the programmes, and the proven beneficial results outweigh the problems which are faced in environments where communities are often beyond the reach of health services. Given the availability of these interventions, their cost effectiveness and the broader development impact we believe it would be unethical not to continue programmes of such long term benefit to the "bottom billion".

Scaling Up for the “Bottom Billion”: “5×5” Implementation of Community Mental Health Care in Low-Income Regions

Common mental disorders pose tremendous health and social burdens in the poorest countries. This Open Forum describes a planning framework to advance effective, sustainable design and implementation of mental health services in these settings. It builds on research in treatment dissemination and on the authors' experience in several initiatives-including the Millennium Villages Project in sub-Saharan Africa and the Partners In Health system in Haiti (Zanmi Lasante). The authors describe a "pyramid of care" approach that specifies five key skill packages to address common mental disorders in low-resource settings and five implementation rules: assess context first; identify priority care pathways and map them across skill packages; specify decision supports, supervision, and triage rules; use quality improvement practices; and plan for sustainability and capacity building. The framework addresses the need for a shared vocabulary and a set of tools to coordinate and compare efforts to scale-up mental health treatment across diverse settings.

Sustainability-based knowledge management performance evaluation system (SKMPES): Linking the higher learning institutes with the bottom billions

Knowledge has become one of the most invaluable resources to the organizations and their main source of sustainable competitive advantage; hence, more and more knowledge management (KM) systems and approaches are undertaken by organizations. Yet, possessing knowledge management systems and approaches alone will not guarantee organizational success. It is crucial to monitor KM practices and evaluate the performance of KM in the organization and at different levels. The article studies some of the main existing knowledge and KM-related frameworks and highlights their weaknesses. The analysis shows that, existing KM frameworks cannot accommodate the increasing role of organizations toward the society and its sustainable development. Therefore, in line with the scope of the research in the academic setting, the need for considering social responsibility of the institutes of higher learning and universities as part of their knowledge management performance evaluation is emphasized. Moreover, some of the main existing knowledge and KM-related frameworks have been studied and an enhanced comprehensive Sustainability-based Knowledge Management Performance Evaluation System (SKMPES), along with the requirements for its development are introduced. Finally, the way forward and suggestions for future research are provided. Key words: Knowledge management (KM), knowledge management performance evaluation, management control, sustainability-based knowledge management performance evaluation system (SKMPES), sustainable development, organisational competitiveness.

Biofacade for Urban Development: Pest and Diseases, Its Control and Prevention

Biological façade (biofacade) is an ecological friendly building design. Biofacade represents a new idea that is beneficial in reducing the carbon in the atmosphere and provide foods or medicine for the benefit of bottom billions. During our research, there was lots of obstacle from the environment factors such as pest and disease which attacked the plants. Without proper prevention, the plants cannot survive until the end of their life span and this is the main problem for biofacade in the tropical environment. This paper discusses the maintenance of biofacade, including the prevention of pests and diseases that attack wall-climbing legume plants such as Bemisia tabaci and fungi. Four types of legume, namely the Pisum sativum, Vigna unguiculata sesquipedalis, Psophocarpus tetrogonobulus and Phaseolus vulgaris were studied. The plants were allowed to overgrow on a chain-fence attached to a typical brick wall at Desasiswa Tekun, Universiti Sains Malaysia. The plants were grown from January until May 2010. Every legume species were grown from seedlings. There were three pots for each species; altogether there were 12 potted plants. In the first month of growth, the seedlings were grown under 50 % of shade and were subsequently transferred under open sunlight after its maturation. All potted plants received direct afternoon sunlight from 1 pm until 5 pm. The dry weight of the pods was taken during the observations. Pisum sativum and Vigna unguiculata sesquipedalis was recorded on the average of 58.1 g and 18.8 g, respectively.

Unleashing “Civilian Power”: A New American Diplomacy through Neglected Tropical Disease Control, Elimination, Research, and Development

In a November/December 2010 article published in the influential journal Foreign Affairs, United States Secretary of State Hilary Rodham Clinton articulated a new vision for American diplomacy and development through the strengthening of what she terms ‘‘civilian power’’ [1]. Stated briefly, the new doctrine calls for the creation of a new cadre of civilian experts who could jointly pursue diplomacy and international development for purposes of solving global challenges related to health, agriculture and food insecurity, environmental degradation, drugs and organized crime, energy, and climate change [1]. Through joint programs between the US Department of State and its United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the additional hiring of more than 1,000 Foreign and Civil Service Officers in each organization, and reflecting the results of a new Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, in the coming years the State Department and USAID would now work more closely to enhance global development in the context of diplomacy. The world’s conflict and post-conflict zones and fragile states would represent key targets for international development efforts [1]. In this new doctrine, Secretary Clinton proposes that together the State Department and USAID would establish a premier global civilian service for responding to complex diplomatic and development challenges [1]. Achieving such an ambitious goal would also mandate that USAID look beyond its walls to embrace business, philanthropist, and citizen groups, with dual emphases on partnering with some of the large emerging market economies (EMEs), i.e., China, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, and South Africa, for joint problem solving, and harnessing selected technologies, such as rapidly expanding cell phone access, for establishing a sustainable and lasting impact [1]. The control and elimination of the world’s major neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) represents a substantive global health and economic challenge, yet one that with a well-coordinated assault in the mode as proposed by Secretary Clinton could become the first major victory for civilian power. The NTDs are the most common infections of the world’s poor, and almost all of the ‘‘bottom billion,’’ i.e., the 1.4 billion people, who live on no money, are infected with one or more NTD [2,3]. In addition to causing a level of global disability that compares with that of HIV/AIDS or malaria, NTDs actually cause poverty through their ability to impair child development, pregnancy outcomes, and agricultural productivity and food security [3]. These diseases also destabilize communities and promote civil and international conflicts [4]. There are a number of reasons why taking on the NTDs would be a worthy early first test for civilian power. It is now possible to control or in some cases eliminate one or more of the seven most common NTDs, i.e., ascariasis, hookworm infection, trichuriasis, schistosomiasis, lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis, and trachoma, through mass drug administration using a ‘‘rapid impact package’’ of drugs that are either donated by the major pharmaceutical companies or available as low cost generics and administered as a part of national control programs [2,3,5]. Mass drug administration for NTDs through rapid impact is one of the lowest cost and cost-efficient mechanisms for both improving maternal child health [6] and lifting the bottom billion out of poverty [3]. The United States government (USG), through its Global Health Initiative (GHI) and USAID’s NTD Program, is already providing financial support for 12 national NTD programs, more than all other countries combined, with additional programs scheduled in the coming years [7]. With assistance from the Department of State, the USAID NTD Program can now reach out to the major EMEs listed above in order to join forces on global NTD control efforts. A USAID–EMEs link makes sense on two fronts: First, it has already been noted that Nigeria has the largest number people infected with the seven NTDs among the sub-Saharan African countries, while South Africa suffers from high rates of some of the soil-transmitted helminth infections and schistosomiasis [8]. Similarly, China, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan have the largest number of ascariasis, trichuriasis, hookworm, lymphatic filariasis, and trachoma cases, as well as other NTDs such as leprosy in Asia [9,10]. Working jointly with experts from USAID and other branches of the USG and GHI, a focused effort on NTDs in the EMEs could ultimately double the total number of at-risk populations receiving rapid impact packages. In addition, China invests billions of dollars in sub-Saharan Africa annually and could also make substantial contributions

A Handful Of ‘Antipoverty’ Vaccines Exist For Neglected Diseases, But The World’s Poorest Billion People Need More

So-called neglected tropical diseases are the most common infections of the world's poor. Almost all of the "bottom billion"--the 1.4 billion people who live below the poverty level defined by the World Bank--suffer from one or more neglected diseases including hookworm infection, sleeping sickness, or Chagas disease. These diseases are actually a cause of poverty because of their adverse effects on child growth and development and worker productivity. Vaccines to combat such diseases have come to be known as "antipoverty vaccines." Unfortunately, the recent surge in the development and delivery of vaccines to combat the major childhood killers--such as pneumococcal pneumonia and measles--has bypassed neglected diseases. Nevertheless, some vaccines for these neglected diseases are now entering the clinical pipeline. In this article I describe how some antipoverty vaccine development is proceeding and offer recommendations for stimulating further development such as through pooled funding for innovation, developing-country manufacturers, and public-private partnerships for product development.

Global Inequality: Beyond the Bottom Billion – A Rapid Review of Income Distribution in 141 Countries

This working paper: (i) provides an overview of global, regional and national income inequalities based on the latest distribution data from the World Bank, UNU-WIDER and Eurostat; (ii) discusses the negative implications of rising income inequality for development; (iii) calls for placing equity at the center of development in the context of the United Nations development agenda; (iv) describes the likelihood of inequalities being exacerbated during the global economic crisis; (v) advocates for urgent policy changes at national and international levels to ensure a “Recovery for All”; and, (vi) to serve as a general reference source, Annex 2 provides a summary of the most up-to-date income distribution and inequality data for 141 countries.

NCDs Among the Bottom Billion

NCDs Among the Bottom Billion

Address of the president, Lord Rees of Ludlow OM KT PRS, given at The Anniversary Meeting on 30 November 2010

Address of the president, Lord Rees of Ludlow OM KT PRS, given at The Anniversary Meeting on 30 November 2010

Sport, development and aid: can sport make a difference?

It is the ability to combine sport with other social forces such as education that has facilitated an increased profile for sport with international aid and humanitarian organizations. This article recognizes the role that sport has to play in the field of international development, the promise and possibilities brought about by presidential elections in the United States of America and the distinct poverty traps that some countries continue to face. The lack of growth in those countries that make up the bottom billion of the world's poorest people requires particular strategies for particular circumstances and it is open to question as to whether sport can bring about change or be a resource of hope. Improving life chances requires a coordinated effort and as such any contribution that sport can make must also build upon a wider coalition of sustained support in order to narrow the gap between rich and poor. In a substantive way this article, drawing upon international evidence, notes the potential of education through sport to help with influencing life chances, if not levels of poverty, in the world today.

The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are Failing and What Can be Done About It / Paul Collier [book review

The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are Failing and What Can be Done About It / Paul Collier [book review

Doha, Dohalf, or Dohaha? The WTO licks its wounds

Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:Table Normal; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Times New Roman; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} The most flattering statement regarding the Doha Round is that there is a lot of uncertainty surrounding its fate. The Doha Round, as originally designed and understood, is not an option anymore. Although a formula has been found to keep the ball rolling, at this stage it is impossible to predict what direction it will take. There exists a lack of leadership to conclude the round and it suffers from inherent birth defects. This absence of a conclusion might send the wrong message at a moment when the WTO is emerging as the only genuine forum of multilateral cooperation. Though this is not the first trade round in the history of the multilateral trading system and definitely not the only one that is taking longer than planned to complete, it is the first time that the round risks being ditched altogether. In all previous rounds, which were essentially ‘business’ deals, trading nations managed to come up with an agreement in the end. This is the first time that they have announced ‘we do it for development’, and they now risk delivering nothing. Something has got to give at this stage, and we are running out of time as far as options regarding ‘deliverables’ are concerned. The accent has correctly been placed on priority issues for the bottom billion. The WTO, even if this effort succeeds, will have to face some tough tests in the near future arising from issues which were not at all addressed during the Doha Round.

The Global Economic Crisis and Beyond: What Possible Future(s) for Development Studies?

The context for ‘development’ – however defined – is changing, not only because of the global economic crisis, but also in light of broader changes. If the context for development is changing, then the study of this ‘development’ will also need to adapt to these changing circumstances. This article seeks to contribute to debates on the future of development studies (DS), and consider what the changing context for ‘development’ might mean for a new ‘operating system’ within DS. The article outlines two possible stylised futures to trigger debate, respectively based on a widening or a narrowing of the scope of DS: A future DS with a broader scope via global perspectives on inter-connected development (a ‘one-world’ DS); and a future DS with a narrower scope via attention to the needs of the poorest countries or the poorest people (a ‘bottom billion’ DS).

Schumacher meets Schumpeter: Appropriate technology below the radar

Innovation and technological change play an important role in poverty reduction through their contribution to growth, their use of factors of production, their environmental spillovers, the social relations associated with production and the characteristics of the products which they produce. It was only after the 1960s that these linkages were identified, with the recognition that much of global technological progress was directed to meet the needs of the global rich, and was best-suited to operation in high-income environments. The development and diffusion of “appropriate technologies” was an agenda largely pursued by the not-for-profit Appropriate Technology movement. However, with the global diffusion of innovative capabilities, and the rapid rise of incomes of the very poor – the “second bottom billion” – innovation for the poor and innovation appropriate for production in low-wage and poor-infrastructure environments has increasingly become an arena for profitable production. The very large size of China and India, coupled with their growing technological capabilities and the rapid growth of low-incomes, makes it likely that they will become the dominant sources of innovation for the poor.

Global Poverty and the New Bottom Billion: What if Three‐quarters of the World's Poor Live in Middle‐income Countries?

SummaryThis paper argues that the global poverty problem has changed because most of the world's poor no longer live in low income countries (LICs). Previously, poverty was viewed as an LIC issue predominantly; nowadays such simplistic assumptions/classifications are misleading because some large countries that graduated into the MIC category still have large numbers of poor people. In 1990, we estimate 93 per cent of the world's poor lived in LICs; contrastingly in 2007–8 three quarters of the world's poor approximately 1.3bn lived in middle‐income countries (MICs) and about a quarter of the world's poor, approximately 370mn people live in the remaining 39 low‐income countries – largely in sub‐Saharan Africa.This startling change over two decades implies a new ‘bottom billion’ who do not live in fragile and conflict‐affected states, but in stable, middle‐income countries. Such global patterns are evident across monetary, nutritional and multi‐dimensional poverty measures. This paper argues the general pattern is robust enough to warrant further investigation and discussion.

Bringing neglected tropical diseases into the spotlight

The correlation between poverty and the neglected tropical disease (NTD) burden is undeniable. NTDs are a brand without copyright; an international movement gathering momentum towards a common goal of tackling major causes of preventable illness in low-income countries. New reports by Liese and Schubert and Moran et. al. act as a call to arms, highlighting a need for research into NTD treatment and control that is essential to improving the lives of the 'bottom billion.'

The Impact of the Economic Crisis on the World’s Poorest Countries

When G20 leaders gathered in London in April 2009, they confronted the greatest challenge to the world economy since the Great Depression, as global output was falling, trade flows drying up and jobs disappearing around the world. Yet whereas the failure of world leaders to act together in the 1930s led to terrible consequences, the decisive action taken by the G20 in London – in the shape of the largest global fiscal stimulus ever – prevented the precipitous decline of the global economy into depression (G20, 2009a). Today, while the recovery is not assured, the banking system has been stabilised, industrial output is rising again across major and emerging economies, international trade is starting to recover and confidence has improved. With the process of recovery far from complete and 61 million people unemployed as a result of this crisis (ILO, 2009), we must continue to guard against complacency. Sustained assistance will be vital not only for the G20 economies, but also for the more than 160 countries that lie outside that grouping – particularly the low-income countries that are home to the ‘bottom billion’ (Collier, 2007). Far from being insulated from the financial crisis, as many observers had thought, people in these countries are finding their livelihoods – even their lives – under threat. In this article I examine the impact of the global economic crisis on these low-income countries, outline the impact of the immediate response package agreed by the G20 and suggest three priorities for collaborative global action this year in order to ensure that low-income countries are part of the recovery: reforming the World Bank; completing the Doha Round; and committing to a partnership for development in order to meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015.

Collier, Paul The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It

Collier, Paul <i>The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It</i>

The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About Itby Collier, Paul

<i>The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It</i>by Collier, Paul

A Worldwide Pact for Security and Accountability in Fragile "Bottom Billion" States

If security and accountability are critical public goods for development, and if the countries of the bottom billion are structurally unable to supply them internally, then some form of international supply is necessary.