should rich nations help the poor essay

Policy@Manchester Articles

Expert insight, analysis and comment on key public policy issues

Banner image with Policy@Manchester visual branding

Why should rich nations help the poor? Because, morally, it is the right thing to do

800 million people went to bed hungry last night and 19,000 children will die today of easily preventable causes. Foreign aid alone isn’t the answer says David Hulme and the fixation with it means we miss more effective ways to promote development.

Over the last few years, UK aid has acted as a lightning rod for criticism as it has risen to meet the international target of 0.7% of Gross National Income (GNI), while other government spending has been subject to significant reductions.

The Daily Mail in particular has aggressively pursued a campaign against the aid budget and mobilised 230,000 supporters to sign a parliamentary petition calling for the 0.7% target to be scrapped as they claim it results in “huge waste and corruption”. The petition was recently debated by a packed room of MPs, the vast majority of whom lined up to defend UK aid spending, highlighting the positive impact it makes around the world.

UK aid is some of the most closely scrutinised in the world, by various parliamentary committees and independent external bodies. The Department for International Development is a leader in aid effectiveness and transparency, which helps drive up the standards of less progressive donors. And while the £12 billion annual aid budget is certainly a significant sum, it represents just 16p in every £10 of government spending. Collectively, we throw away much more in food waste (an estimated £19 billion) than we spend in aid.

However, I’m concerned that the apparent fixation we have on the aid budget in the UK means we’re ignoring even more effective ways to help poorer nations.

Foreign aid doesn’t equal development

The idea that development can be achieved largely through foreign aid alone has been discredited. Countries that have experienced significant improvements in the well-being of their population in recent years have largely achieved this through engaging with markets and international trade, boosted by the end of the Cold War, China’s return to the global economy and favourable commodity prices. The creation and diffusion of relatively simple technical knowledge about health, hygiene, nutrition, organization and technologies has also played an important role. While effectively given aid, provided in the right context can provide vital assistance to people in need, it cannot ‘create’ development for whole societies.

If the UK and other rich nations are serious about helping to catalyse development across the world, there are five key policy areas that require urgent attention, which I explore in depth in my new book ‘ Should Rich Nations Help the Poor’ :

Reform international trade policies so that poor countries and poor people can gain a greater share of the benefits derived from trade.
Recognize international migration as an element of trade policy and a highly effective means of reducing poverty.
Take action against climate change (mitigation and supporting adaptation) and take responsibility for the historical role of rich nations in creating global warming.
Reform global finance to stop the siphoning off of income and assets from poor countries to rich countries by corporations and national elites.
Limit the arms trade to fragile countries and regions and carefully consider support for military action (budgets, technology and even ‘feet on the ground’) in specific cases, such as the successful Operation Palliser in Sierra Leone.

Policy coherence lacking

This holistic approach to global development is the type of response envisaged by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which the UK signed up to just last September. However a recent report by the cross-party International Development Select Committee of MPs was highly critical of the lack of any sort of joined up thinking across government on key aspects of the 17 goals.

In strident tones, the report highlights “a fundamental absence of commitment to the coherent implementation of the SDGs across government.” Without a proper cross government strategy, they fear “it is likely that areas of deep incoherence across government policy could develop, and progress made by certain departments could be easily undermined by the policies and actions of others.” A formal mechanism to ensure policy coherence across Whitehall is called for.

Many of the SDGs are inherently political, calling for reductions in inequality, improvements in governance and for gender equality. In many areas, national ownership by citizens and state are vital. However in other issues that go beyond aid, there’s a clear agenda for action by countries of the Global North. But it’s precisely these issues, such as international tax and trade reforms, which will be hampered without clear commitment and coordination across governments like the UK. If we continue to focus on aid alone as a proxy for development, it’s also these issues that won’t receive the attention they deserve from policymakers.

From climate change to spiralling inequality, given the challenges the world faces it’s both morally right and in our own self-interests for rich nations like the UK to help the poor. But if we’re unable to move beyond aid and properly consider the most effective ways we can help poor countries, we’ll leave a world to our children and grandchildren that’s more unstable, less secure and with more people mired in poverty than there needs to be.

About David Hulme

Professor of Development Studies Executive Director, Global Development Institute CEO, Effective States and Inclusive Development Research Centre

Become a contributor

Would you like to write for us on a public policy issue? Get in touch with a member of the team, ask for our editorial guidelines, or access our online training toolkit (UoM login required).

Articles give the views of the author, and are not necessarily those of The University of Manchester.

Policy@Manchester

IELTS Mentor "IELTS Preparation & Sample Answer"

Skip to content
Jump to main navigation and login

Nav view search

IELTS Sample

IELTS Writing Task 2/ Essay Topics with sample answer.

Ielts writing task 2 sample 608 - rich nations should help poor countries with their basic needs, ielts writing task 2/ ielts essay:, some people say that rich nations should help poor countries with their basic needs like food and education while others oppose the idea and argue that the poor nation themselves should try to improve their condition. do you agree with the idea that rich and developed nations should help the poor nations.

IELTS Materials

IELTS Bar Graph
IELTS Line Graph
IELTS Table Chart
IELTS Flow Chart
IELTS Pie Chart
IELTS Letter Writing
IELTS Essay
Academic Reading

Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
Copyright Notice
HTML Sitemap

IELTS Luminary - Free Tips, Strategies, eBooks and Detailed Essay Feedback . Overall, this is the best free IELTS and other test prep website.

Wealthy Nations Should Assist Poorer Countries with Humanitarian Relief During Natural Disasters - IELTS Essay

Wealthy Nations Should Assist Poorer Countries with Humanitarian Relief During Natural Disasters - IELTS Task 2 Band 9 Sample Essay

Get your personalised IELTS Essay Feedback from a former examiner

Download IELTS eBooks , get everything you need to achieve a high band score

Model Essay 1

The imperative for affluent nations to extend humanitarian aid to their less fortunate counterparts in the wake of natural calamities is a topic of considerable ethical import. I firmly believe in the obligation of wealthier countries to offer such support, predicated on principles of global solidarity and the tangible benefits of fostering stability and resilience. This essay will elucidate the moral imperative and the pragmatic advantages of this stance.

Firstly, the moral argument for assistance is grounded in the concept of global citizenship, where humanity's collective welfare transcends national borders. Wealthy nations, equipped with ample resources, have a duty to mitigate the suffering caused by natural disasters in poorer countries. This not only exemplifies compassion and empathy but also reinforces a sense of global unity. For instance, the international response to the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami showcased how concerted relief efforts can alleviate human suffering significantly, underlining the potential of international solidarity in times of crisis.

Moreover, from a pragmatic perspective, aiding countries in distress fosters global stability and economic development. Disasters can exacerbate underlying vulnerabilities, leading to socio-economic downturns that affect global markets. By assisting in the immediate aftermath and contributing to rebuilding efforts, wealthier nations can help ensure that affected countries rebound more swiftly, thus stabilizing regional economies and by extension, the global economic landscape. The rebuilding of Haiti post the 2010 earthquake, heavily supported by international aid, illustrates how such endeavors contribute to the stabilization of affected nations, indirectly benefiting donor countries through enhanced global economic stability and security.

In conclusion, the rationale for wealthier nations to assist poorer ones during natural disasters is twofold: it is a moral imperative rooted in a sense of global community and a practical strategy for promoting worldwide stability and prosperity. This dual perspective not only highlights the inherent duty of wealthier nations but also underscores the mutual benefits derived from such humanitarian acts.

Model Essay 2

The proposition that wealthy nations should provide humanitarian aid to poorer countries during natural disasters is not merely an act of charity, but a cornerstone of international responsibility and mutual benefit. This essay advocates strongly for such assistance, emphasizing the dual rationale of ethical duty and strategic self-interest for affluent countries. The forthcoming discussion will delve into these facets, illustrating the imperative for and advantages of global solidarity in disaster response.

The ethical dimension of this debate hinges on the principle of shared humanity. Prosperous nations, by virtue of their resources and technological advancements, hold a unique position to alleviate the human cost of natural catastrophes in less affluent regions. This responsibility stems not from benevolence but from an acknowledgment of a shared destiny. The aid rendered to Nepal during the 2015 earthquake by countries far and wide serves as a poignant example of how the international community can mobilize to support recovery, underscoring the premise that compassion knows no borders.

Strategically, the extension of aid is a sound investment in global stability and security. Disasters do not respect national boundaries, and their aftermath can precipitate regional conflicts, migration crises, and economic downturns that have far-reaching implications. By intervening promptly and effectively, wealthy countries can help mitigate these risks, ensuring a quicker path to recovery and stability. The support given to Indonesia following the 2018 tsunami by international partners not only facilitated immediate relief but also helped prevent a longer-term humanitarian and economic crisis, showcasing the interconnected nature of our global system.

In summary, the argument for affluent nations aiding poorer counterparts in the aftermath of natural disasters is compelling both on moral grounds and as a matter of enlightened self-interest. It embodies a recognition of our collective humanity and the interlinked fate that binds us across geographical and economic divides.