State of the World

[drplokta]

So, disregarding the dodgy anecdotal evidence, how are the developing countries and the world's poor actually doing from globalisation? Karl Schroeder (an excellent SF author whose novels Ventus and Permanence you should all read) has posted some figures from the UN. And the answer is, they're doing very well indeed.

From 1982 to 2002:

• World infant mortality per 1000 live births dropped from 86.7 to 52.4
  
• Calories of food per capita in poor countries went from 2382 to 2740
  
• Percentage of households with access to safe water supplies went from 60.7% to 80.9% -- more households now have safe water than the total number of households in 1982, I should imagine
  
• Literacy rate in poor and middle income countries went from 64.7% to 78%
  
• World life expectancy went from 56.8 years to 63.8 years, despite the impact of AIDS

Apparently, the world is not going to hell in a handbasket, but rather in the other direction.

Comments

[easterbunny.livejournal.com]

On the plus side, there are far more peole that think about long term (and even short term) trends than in the past. I wonder if there were many people worried about the long terms effects of pollution during the first upswing of the Industrial Revolution, or even in the medieval tanneries in London? I remember being impressed with the foresightedness of Thoreau when I read Walden Pond in high school, but even Silent Spring seemed fairly unsettling when it appeared in the 1960's. I visited Cheddar Gorge last Christmas and was surprised by the museum exhibit on Roman mining in that area, which suggested that 1) this is not the first time in history that pollution, poor drinking water and deforestation have been a problem, and 2) 2,000 years will do a lot of good for the natural landscape.