In our country the fundamental mission of development is to eliminate poverty. In developed nations, average per capita consumption increased by 70 percent in real terms, life expectancy rose from 51 to 63 years, and enrollment rates in primary education reached 89 percent. If these advances had been distributed equally, much of the world's destitution would have been eliminated; on the contrary, more than a fifth of humanity lives in extreme misery.
Poverty alleviation is both a moral imperative and a prerequisite for achieving environmental sustainability. The poor are both victims and agents of the deterioration of the environment. Thus, for example, land-hungry farmers resort to cultivating unsuitable areas, such as mountain slopes, semi-arid lands and tropical forests. Let us not forget that approximately 60 percent of the annual deforestation in Peru (250 to 300 thousand hectares) is produced by the so-called “migratory agriculture”.
The poor who live crowded together in illegal settlements endure inadequate services for potable water, sanitation and flooding, landslides, emissions and air pollution. Having to assume the externalization of environmental costs due to the development of economic and industrial activities that are harmful to the environment and, therefore, threaten their quality of life.
They are exposed to the greatest health hazards that environmental wear and tear represents and are often the most vulnerable to these risks due to their standard of living. Low-income families often lack the means to avoid the depredation of their environment. This is pointed out by the World Bank's “Environmental Analysis of Peru” report, stating that the impact of environmental degradation for the poor in relation to the non-poor is 20 percent higher in terms of impact per 1,000 people.
Similarly, this documented work indicates that the cost of degrading our environment is higher than in other countries with similar income levels, and that health impacts are between 75 and 300 percent higher among the poor. The effects of indoor pollution are concentrated on the poor. An estimated 80 to 85 percent of the total health effects would be among these less favored sectors.
La pobreza se ha convertido en causa y efecto de la degradación ambiental. Existe una interacción muy fuerte entre estos dos elementos, componentes de un mismo sistema que, influye en otros sectores productivos, niveles de gestión y grupos de población. No podemos dejar de considerar al crecimiento de la economía como un sistema contenido y continente de la variable ecológica. Para alcanzar el desarrollo se requiere la implementación y consecución de diversas políticas. Además, una estrategia que armonice con el mercado, considera básicamente el logro de una macroeconomía estable e inversión en recursos humanos. Estos no son incompatibles con los objetivos ambientales, ya que el quehacer económico y el ordenamiento ambiental son aspectos complementarios de un mismo programa.
Thus, economic growth is essential to reduce poverty. The negative effects caused by this growth, fortunately, can be reduced if resources are allocated to achieve better management of the environment. For the poor, environmental management should not be a distant option in their lives, but rather an element embedded in the social development agenda. Consequently, it is important to develop proposals that include the “green” component and its social, economic, political and cultural impacts on the lower-income population.
Eliminating poverty must be the priority commitment of our leaders. The needy have the right to enjoy a "healthy environment, ecologically balanced and suitable for the development of life and the preservation of the landscape and nature."
(*) Teacher, conservationist, consultant, member of the Life Institute and former president of the Board of Trustees of Parque de Las Leyendas - Felipe Benavides Barreda.
