Human society has long been separated under the influence of the economic factor: while a small group of the elite has been enjoying prosperity, the majority of people have been suffering from continuous shortages and disorders. Today, over one billion people in the world subsist on $1 a day or even less than that. With regards to the possible solutions of the poverty problem and elimination of the division between the economically disadvantaged and the rich, there is a growing recognition of the value of technology for facilitating infrastructure in community development in order to reduce the economic differences.
However, not all analysts agree on the assumption that the infrastructure improvement actually promotes economic growth among the poor population. The skeptics claim that technology as a means of infrastructure development is insufficient due to the associated issues. Yet, a row of researchers have formed an authoritative body of evidence supporting the conclusion that there is a strong interdependence between the infrastructure development of a society and the financial situation of people in this society. Overall, social and economic infrastructure upturn with the implementation of modern technologies is the solution to decrease the disparity between rich and poor.
First, to lessen the distance between those who have and those who do not, such technological solution as the development of social infrastructure should be implemented. In essence, the problem of economically disadvantaged people is the scarcity of basic recourses that would help them improve their situation. Namely, these people are lacking social infrastructure to obtain sufficient education and medical care, and of course, they suffer from the shortage of basic resources such as drinking water or clean air due to the use of harmful fossil fuels such as coal.
Other problems the poor face are insufficient supply of electricity, the absence of modern sanitation systems, the absence of flood protection facilities and drainage, the absence of irrigation systems, and the information vacuum due to having no access to telecommunications and the Internet. According to Madzivhandila, less than 50 percent of people in Sub-Saharan Africa have the supply of safe drinking water (90).This data means that those people’s daily reality is the struggle with the high rate of morbidity and mortality due to the chemical and bacterial pollution of the drinking water. Thus, it is impossible for them to solve their economic issues as they have to fight for mere living.
Another notorious comment is made by Howe who claims that less than one-third of African population has the access to adequate sanitation systems (225). Judging from this fact, these disadvantaged people must be coping with serious intestinal diseases and infections. There are other ugly facts demonstrating the scope of the problem. In particular, fewer than 5 percent of Africans have electricity; telecommunications are available only to the urban population in Pakistan; in India, despite its considerable progress during the last decade, the residents of most rural areas have no access to the Internet; in Bangladesh, most rural citizens are illiterate (Adams and Brunner 366; Bhola 232; Zagha 138; Zaman and Khilji 393).
The evaluation of the above-mentioned sobering facts demonstrates that the absence of social infrastructure is the barrier that prevents the poor from escaping of the trap of the squalidness. As the solution to all these complicated problems, the facilitation of infrastructure offers social protection to the poor. People gain freedom from the burden of disease, illiteracy, and the lack of education. As a result, they obtain a chance to change their lives and the understanding on how to do it. However, it is not enough. To explain, being a critically important condition for the ultimate success of poverty eradication, social infrastructure is not the only essential condition. Below, the significance of the economic infrastructure for reducing the distance between those who have and those who do not will be considered.
To ensure the alteration of the poor people’s status, the economic infrastructure in developing areas should be build up with the help of modern technologies. The absence of efficient economic infrastructure such as transportation and roads prevents people from finding employment as the instant source of the family income. To illustrate, in Zambia, Uganda, and Burkina Faso, walking is the only means of transport for 87 percent of rural inhabitants; at that, most of these people spend over two hours to get to the working areas (Ile, Garr and Ukpere 635). Reasoning on this information, it is clear that the poor in those countries have neither enough time nor strength to earn the living.
From this simple example, it becomes clear that the poor need assistance in facilitating the economic infrastructure; otherwise, they are not able to break through this measurable cycle of poverty. Another example is the positive experience of one of the prominent countries in Africa, Ghana. In this country, the use of technology has helped the facilitation of effective economic structure which laid to a considerable improvement of social status of the majority of people.
According to Ile et al., in Ghana, it became evident that “infrastructure can lead to higher productivity of other factors of production, and this translates into more jobs and high income”, as well as it “affects prices through labor and output productivity, economies of scale, and cost adjustment; lower prices make it possible for the poor to afford their basic needs” (636).
Obviously, facilitation of economic infrastructure through the technologic growth critically changes the variables of the poor people’s productivity. Economic growth occurs due to the employment enhancement. Overall, to underpin the reduction of distance between the poor and the rich, technology implements for building quality roads, creating transportation networks, and producing new jobs as individuals and organizations acquire a chance to respond to the new types of demand at the global market.
With regards to the position of opponents, they think that the implementation of technology has no far-reaching implications for solving social and economic issues in the communities inhabited by the poor. To support, according to Kaberuka, the use of technology does not significantly contribute to solving the issues that the economically disadvantaged people face performing their daily activities since it is connected with a number of related problems (23).
To illustrate, the poor are not prepared to the use of new facilities due to the lack of education. In addition, the use of technology fails to eliminate the environmental problems and thus, it results in additional health endpoints for the poor, which reduces their living standard even further. Speaking about the argument suggested by Kaberuka, its essence is that the implementation of technological solutions is not the panacea for the poor because it initiates more problems.
Second, Canadian researchers have claimed that “technological change can create an employment environment that favors more highly skilled workers” and “a changing job market structure with its increase in the proportion of very short-term employment may also affect earnings inequality” (“Technology Leaving Poor Behind”, 1999, p. 6).
From these quotations, it is evident that the poor are not able to compete with the rich at the global market of employment because of inability to use modern technologies. In general, the opponents argue that technology does not decrease the gap between the rich and the poor but instead it sets up more difficulties.
In conclusion, modern technologies have made an immense contribution into the resolution of many problems of humankind. Still, the growing disparity between the rich and poor continues to be a complicated issue. The economically disadvantaged people suffer from the burden of disease, illiteracy or being undereducated, unemployment, and the lack of resources to change the situation for the better. The analysis of the underlying causes of the poverty problem suggests that to eliminate the distance between those who have and those do not, technology can be applied with an objective to improve social and economic infrastructure in the economically disadvantaged areas.
To be specific, technology can help the creation of safe and efficient drinking water distribution systems, sanitation systems, drainage, electric lines, telecommunications, and educational facilities. Moreover, with the implementation of progressive technologies, the low-cost transportation system and quality roads can be built up in the poor communities. In general, expansion of social and economic infrastructure on the basis of modern technologies is the answer to the problem of disparity between the rich elite and the poor people because it helps to ensure high productivity of their labor.
Works Cited
Adams, John, and Hans-Peter Brunner. “Technology and Institutions in the Process of Economic Reform: Achieving Growth with Poverty Reduction in South Asia.” Journal of Economic Issues 37.2 (2003): 363-9. Print.
Bhola, Herman. “Adult and Lifelong Education for Poverty Reduction: A Critical Analysis of Contexts and Conditions.” International Review of Education 52.3 (2006): 231-46. Print.
Ile, Isioma, Ewald Garr, and Wilfred Ukpere. “Monitoring Infrastructure Policy Reforms and Rural Poverty Reduction in Ghana: The Case of Keta Sea Defence Project.” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 5.3 (2014): 633-42. Print.
Howe, Laura. “Subjective Measures of Socio-Economic Position and the Wealth Index: A Comparative Analysis.” Health policy and planning 26.3 (2011): 223-32. Print.
Kaberuka, Donald. “Boosting Infrastructure Investments in Africa.” World Economics 12.2 (2011): 7-24. Print.
Madzivhandila, Thanyani. “The Misconception of Rural Development in South Africa: A Recipe for Socio-Economic Stagnation.” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 5.8 (2014): 89-93. Print.
“Technology Leaving Poor Behind”. Canadian HR Reporter, 12.5 (1999) 6. Print.
Zagha, Roberto. “India’s Inequality: An Uneasy Reconciliation with Economic Growth.” Current History 112.753 (2013): 137-45. Print.
Zaman, Khalid and Bashir Ahmad Khilji. “The relationship between growth–inequality–poverty triangle and pro-poor growth policies in Pakistan: The twin disappointments”. Economic Modeling 30.1 (2013): 375-393. Print.