The Saddest Thing In The World Is Not Poverty;

It’s Loss Of Dignity1

by Jonathan Glennie
In a much-awaited report released at the end of last year, UN secretary general Ban Ki-
moon set out his vision for after the millennium development goals expire this year. At
its heart, and in its title, is the word “dignity”.

It is not uncommon for “dignity” to be rolled out in the opening salvo of UN documents,
but it is a concept seldom contemplated in depth. In this report, it is used as a title to
gather the goals aimed at tackling poverty and inequality under one more manageable
theme – those at the bottom of the economic ladder lack dignity, and it is the job of the
rest of the world to help give it to them.

But that is actually a very limited interpretation of a word that, if understood properly,
could mean fundamental changes to our ways of working, and the overall story we are
trying to tell. The thing about dignity, and the reason it is a transformational concept, is
that it knows no social, economic, gender or ethnic barriers.

Some of the poorest people are the most dignified. And some of the richest lack dignity.
In a world of poverty and injustice, who are the undignified? Is it the poor or the rich? Is
it the victim of violence or the perpetrator? Is it those who lose out to corruption or the
corrupt official?

Dignity is a word that overturns traditional assumptions about north and south,
developed and developing. While charity is bestowed by the haves to the have-nots,
dignity does not work like that at all. If I fail to treat someone with dignity, it is me, not
them, who is undignified.

The dignity lens introduces an irony whereby the “less developed” can actually be more
dignified. In this way, development becomes a truly global endeavour, not by the
“developed” for the “developing”, but by all, for all, to achieve the dignity of all.

And that is why I think we should embed dignity, properly understood, at the heart of
the sustainable development goals and the post-2015 agenda. By casting global goals as
universal (not to be met only by poor countries, but by all countries), this new agenda
also seeks to end the rhetoric of us and them.

Don’t get me wrong. Extreme poverty is undignified – sometimes communities or

individuals do find themselves helpless and in need of crisis or ongoing assistance. But
that isn’t a sufficient understanding of the experiences of most poor people. Whether in
city or countryside, very poor people tend to work for a better life.

I have worked with people driven from their land for the sake of mega-plantations or
mineral resource extraction. Some became labourers, others moved to urban slums.
Sometimes they may even have made more money than they did before, but they told
me that, while they were poor they had their dignity, carving out a life for themselves
with responsibility.

As former president of Haiti Jean-Bertrand Aristide has pleaded, rebuilding his country
means “moving from misery to poverty with dignity”.

Amartya Sen (and others) transformed the development lexicon by defining

development as freedom rather than just economic or even social progress, and the
concept of dignity takes us a step further along that road.

It is said, quite sensibly, that if you can’t measure it you can’t manage it. But while it
may not be obvious how to fit dignity into a spreadsheet, it is at least an attribute that is
eminently knowable. While most poverty measures are disputed, dignity is perhaps the
one thing that humans across the globe, in myriad different contexts, most instinctively
recognise and long for.

Conceptualising development as dignity certainly does not provide a systematic

response to all its problems – in fact it implies as many questions as answers. But it
adds a further rich perspective.

In particular, it inspires us to think not only about the what of development but the how.
Not just the end, but also the means. It makes development more than just achieving
outcomes – it implies a different way of seeing the world and fellow human beings.

As I have argued elsewhere, it is quite plausible to reach certain development targets in

ways that disregard some people or communities. Development and even poverty
reduction can be excuses for some heinous crimes, by totalitarian regimes of both left
and right set on the path to wealth creation or industrialisation and by the liberal
capitalist hegemony.

Imagine if, as well as carrying out value-for-money analyses of interventions, we also

just asked the simple question: is this dignified? Does this enhance our dignity and that
of others?

I have seen a lot of poverty, and I have seen as much happiness in poor communities as
in rich ones. The saddest thing in the world is not poverty per se; it is the loss of human
dignity.

As we redefine development in this year of transition to the new, more

inclusive sustainable development goals, let me throw this into the ring. Development is
dignity or it is nothing. The opposite – development without dignity – is not worth
having.

__________________________
1
Glennie, Jonathan. "The saddest thing in the world is not poverty; it's loss of dignity | Jonathan
Glennie." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 28 Jan. 2015. Web. 29 June 2017.