Credit: Samuel Otieno/UNHCR
By External Source
IBADAN, NIGERIA, Apr 21 2020 (IPS)
Since the outbreak of coronavirus pandemic late last year in Wuhan, China, the global community has witnessed unprecedented policy responses to curtail, contain and control the disease. Many have proven to be successful. But others required critical context consideration.
For instance, the lockdown in Nigeria risks threatening the livelihoods of millions of people who are dependent on the informal market for their survival. Another example is the fact that the security measures being imposed are extracting a heavy price from ordinary citizens.
The situation is a learning curve for all countries.
The responses at national level have included policy measures consistent with recommended social and hygienic practices.
These have ranged from staying at home and regular washing of hands or use of sanitiser to social and physical distancing, wearing of protective masks and kits, limiting the number of people in public gatherings, restriction of human and vehicular movement or curfews or travel bans, and total or partial lockdown.
I think it is imperative that poor countries do not simply cut-and-paste interventions being imposed in rich countries. The specific differences between rich and poor countries should be taken on board
There have also been broad policy responses to help economies manage their way through the crisis.
Some policy responses have proven to be effective in some cases. But what’s become clear is that policy responses cannot be a one-size-fits-all. That is, the local realities of each country in terms of financial, social, cultural and environmental contexts should be considered.
Based on my academic work on public policy and sustainable development, I think it is imperative that poor countries do not simply cut-and-paste interventions being imposed in rich countries. The specific differences between rich and poor countries should be taken on board.
I have therefore identified six areas that countries in Africa would do well to focus on. The list comes from my experience of working with administrations seeking to meet development goals ranging from social inclusion to economic sustainability.
Six key areas to focus on
The first need is for proper data and information management. These play a critical role, right from the identification of the first case to tracing contacts, provision of medical care infrastructure and caring for infected and affected populations. Countries that have data about their residents, like the United Kingdom, are able to target the measures they put in place. Countries that don’t have data about their populations, like many in Africa, are unable to focus their responses.
Secondly, developing countries must avoid simply copying the policy responses of rich countries. Countries have different resources. It would be unrealistic to contain and control the COVID-19 pandemic in a uniform way. There is a need to reconsider and rejig the current policy responses by countries to suit their local contexts.
Home-grown initiatives – like support for households and livelihoods – would offer sufficient conditions for effective disease control and management. For example, Ghana and Rwanda have home-grown school feeding and health insurance programmes that have worked. These could be used to ensure national coverage of social inclusion and social protection during this period.
Thirdly, local resources should be used while soliciting greater partnership. The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the strength and weaknesses of both rich and poor countries. It has also shown opportunity for partnership for sustainable development. This includes monetary and material support from rich countries to help manage the disease.
The socio-economic foundations of most countries have been shaken, while resilience-building capacity – the ability to rebound and recover – has become the defining character for the survival of countries. For instance, the fall in the price of crude oil has affected the annual budget of many oil-producing countries, including Nigeria. Such countries will need to re-strategise on economic diversification of the revenue base.
The fourth need is to strengthen institutions and build human capacity for disaster and risk management. Having the right institutions in place – such as a national disaster and risk management commission, inter-ministerial capability and the right skill-sets – have also been effective in dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic. Poor countries have a lot to learn on this front.
Fifthly, citizens are at the mercy of government when there is an emergency like this pandemic. Trust can only be assured when the right leadership is in place. The important factors are respect for human life, and responsive and responsible institutions.
Lastly, all countries need a recovery and sustainability plan. COVID-19 is not the first pandemic to happen in the world. Each century has witnessed different pandemics, often resulting in global economic recessions. What is important, therefore, is to plan for recovery. Countries will emerge from the current pandemic in different economic conditions. Those that have robust economic recovery plans will recover faster and rebuild better.
Olawale Emmanuel Olayide, Research Fellow and Coordinator, Centre for Sustainable Development, University of Ibadan, University of Ibadan
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The post Coronavirus: Six Key Factors Poor Countries Should Focus on appeared first on Inter Press Service.
La pandémie poursuit sa progression lente mais régulière sur le continent africain. Les pays sont confinés pour certains, le port des masque se développe et la surveillance est constante. Mais si l’Afrique est encore relativement préservée, le risque d’une catastrophe sanitaire est réel alors que la catastrophe économique est déjà avérée. Le point sur l’épidémie […]
L’article L’évolution lente mais régulière du Covid-19 en Afrique, l’Ouest du continent en danger est apparu en premier sur Afrik.com.
Semmelweis Egyetem
Innovációs Központ
a Közalkalmazottak jogállásáról szóló 1992. évi XXXIII. törvény 20/A. § alapján
pályázatot hirdet
Ügyvivő szakértő (pályázati koordinátor)
munkakör betöltésére.
A közalkalmazotti jogviszony időtartama:
határozatlan idejű közalkalmazotti jogviszony.
Foglalkoztatás jellege:
Teljes munkaidő
A munkavégzés helye:
Budapest, 1085 , Üllői út 26.
A munkakörbe tartozó, illetve a vezetői megbízással járó lényeges feladatok:
Illetmény és juttatások:
Az illetmény megállapítására és a juttatásokra a Közalkalmazottak jogállásáról szóló 1992. évi XXXIII. törvény rendelkezései az irányadók.
Pályázati feltételek:
Elvárt kompetenciák:
A pályázat részeként benyújtandó iratok, igazolások:
A munkakör betölthetőségének időpontja:
A munkakör legkorábban a pályázatok elbírálását követően azonnal betölthető.
A pályázat benyújtásának határideje: 2020. április 29.
A pályázatok benyújtásának módja:
A pályázat elbírálásának határideje: 2020. május 14.
A pályázati kiírás további közzétételének helye, ideje:
A munkáltatóval kapcsolatos egyéb lényeges információ:
A Semmelweis Egyetem valamennyi szervezeti egységben a próbaidő mértéke 4 hónap. Kérjük, a pályázatban tüntesse fel a hivatkozási számot: 34100/IKP/2020
A munkáltatóval kapcsolatban további információt a http://semmelweis.hu honlapon szerezhet.
A KÖZIGÁLLÁS publikálási időpontja: 2020. március 31.
A pályázati kiírás közzétevője a Belügyminisztérium (BM). A pályázati kiírás a munkáltató által a BM részére megküldött adatokat tartalmazza, így annak tartalmáért a pályázatot kiíró szerv felel.
Le ministre conseiller de la communication, porte-parole officiel de la présidence de la République, Mohand Oussaid Belaid, a déclaré que le Chef de l’état , Abdelmadjid Tebboune a ordonné à l’ensemble des départements ministériels et des institutions de l’Etat de cesser d’utiliser l’expression « sur orientations et sur instructions du président de la République ». En effet […]
L’article Tebboune ordonne de cesser d’utiliser l’expression « sur instructions du Président » est apparu en premier sur .
.
Le ministre de la Justice, Belkacem Zeghmati, a affirmé que le parquet général , selon le projet de loi relatif à la prévention et à la lutte contre la discrimination et le discours de haine, pouvait automatiquement engager une action de poursuite judiciaire contre les auteurs de délits relevant de ce champ , et les […]
L’article Zeghmati : » jusqu’à 10 ans de prison pour les auteurs des discours de la haine « est apparu en premier sur .
An adequate cross-country comparison of multidimensional poverty requires sound poverty measures. This paper focuses on two central, but often neglected, challenges: the identification of the best theoretical framework and the selection of poverty dimensions. Regarding the first problem, it is argued that Amartya Sen’s capability approach provides the most rigorous analytical apparatus since it views poverty in terms of people’s lack of freedom to live a life they have reason to value, rather than as deprivation of means (income/commodities). In line with the capability approach, the paper then proposes a new solution to the problem of how to select dimensions of poverty. It consists of the expansion of the Constitutional Approach, recently developed by Burchi, De Muro and Kollar, according to which (some) national constitutions could be used as sources of ethically sound poverty dimensions. This approach, so far implemented only at the national level, could be extended to the international context by looking at a minimum list of overlapping dimensions across several countries. Finally, the paper applies this approach, examining several constitutions from all world regions, and supplementing it with three other well-known approaches to the identification of poverty dimensions: the public consensus approach, participatory studies, and surveys. This exercise leads to a clear list of valuable dimensions for international comparisons of poverty. We conclude that international poverty indicators should ideally always contain at least the dimensions of health, education and decent employment.
An adequate cross-country comparison of multidimensional poverty requires sound poverty measures. This paper focuses on two central, but often neglected, challenges: the identification of the best theoretical framework and the selection of poverty dimensions. Regarding the first problem, it is argued that Amartya Sen’s capability approach provides the most rigorous analytical apparatus since it views poverty in terms of people’s lack of freedom to live a life they have reason to value, rather than as deprivation of means (income/commodities). In line with the capability approach, the paper then proposes a new solution to the problem of how to select dimensions of poverty. It consists of the expansion of the Constitutional Approach, recently developed by Burchi, De Muro and Kollar, according to which (some) national constitutions could be used as sources of ethically sound poverty dimensions. This approach, so far implemented only at the national level, could be extended to the international context by looking at a minimum list of overlapping dimensions across several countries. Finally, the paper applies this approach, examining several constitutions from all world regions, and supplementing it with three other well-known approaches to the identification of poverty dimensions: the public consensus approach, participatory studies, and surveys. This exercise leads to a clear list of valuable dimensions for international comparisons of poverty. We conclude that international poverty indicators should ideally always contain at least the dimensions of health, education and decent employment.