Related News
Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
Targeting societal violence in international aid
Print Edition
WHAT is the biggest source of violence in our world? With the brutal conflicts in Syria, Ukraine, and elsewhere constantly in the news, many people would probably say war. But that turns out to be spectacularly wrong.
A study by James Fearon of Stanford University and Anke Hoeffler of Oxford University’s Center for the Study of African Economies argues that societal violence — homicides and especially violence against women and children — is a much bigger problem than civil wars. Nine people are killed in interpersonal violence for every battlefield death in a civil war, and one child is killed for every two combatants who die.
In 2008, there were 418,000 homicides around the world, with far too many countries recording a murder rate of more than 10 per 100,000, which the World Health Organization regards as an epidemic. A single homicide in America costs the individual and society US$9.1 million. If we scale this by national income across the world, this single category of violent crime costs 1.7 percent of global GDP.
Of course, this is not a direct financial loss to the global economy, but a way of expressing the impact. If murders could be eliminated, societies around the world would be better off in ways that can be valued at 1.7 percent of GDP. Compare this to the much lower cost of civil wars, which are equivalent to about 0.2 percent of global GDP.
But this is still much less than the biggest source of violence of all: violence against women in the home. The second-largest source of violence is the abuse of children, 80 percent of which is inflicted by parents.
A tiny fraction of international aid funding currently goes toward reducing societal violence and improving criminal justice systems.
The enormous cost borne by society and individuals seems to cry out for action. Unfortunately, there is still little hard evidence about where resources should best be focused.
All we can say is that the money spent to reduce violence might be better targeted. Considerable amounts of aid are directed toward “fragile states” to help stop or prevent civil war, but only 0.27 percent of international aid goes to projects with a “crime prevention” component.
Some solutions, it is clear, do work very well. Stronger social services can reduce violence against children. Studies in Washington state show that home visits from trained staff can reduce child abuse, improve children’s quality of life and physical and mental health, and reduce child-welfare and litigation costs. A dollar spent on this program produces benefits of US$14, making it a highly cost-effective policy.
In many cases, changes in social attitudes are needed.
While we still don’t know enough, two points are certain.
First, domestic violence against women and children imposes a social cost of US$8 trillion each year, making it a huge, and vastly underreported, global issue. Second, there are solutions that can help to tackle some of these problems very cost-effectively. That is why reducing domestic violence belongs on the short-list for the world’s next set of development goals.
Bjorn Lomborg is an adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School. Copyright: Project Syndicate. www.project-syndicate.org. Shanghai Daily condensed the article.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
