Paul Collier: 4 ways to improve the lives of the "bottom bil

Prevoditelj: Josip Maras Recezent: Martina Mijuskovic

So, can we dare to be optimistic?

Možemo li se usuditi biti optimitični?

Well, the thesis of "The Bottom Billion"

Glavna teza "The Bottom Billion"

is that a billion people have been stuck living

je da milijardu ljudi živi

in economies that have been stagnant for 40 years,

u državama koje stagniraju već 40 godina,

and hence diverging from the rest of mankind.

i zbog toga se udaljuju od ostatka čovječanstva.

And so, the real question to pose is not, "Can we be optimistic?"

Pravo pitanje nije: "Možemo li biti optimistični?"

It's, "How can we give credible hope to that billion people?"

nego, "Kako možemo dati nadu toj milijardi ljudi?"

That, to my mind, is the fundamental challenge now of development.

Po meni, to je glavni izazov našem razvoju.

What I'm going to offer you is a recipe,

Ponuditi ću vam recept,

a combination of the two forces that changed the world for good,

kombinaciju dvaju faktora koji su promijenili svijet na bolje,

which is the alliance of compassion and enlightened self-interest.

suradnju suosjećanja i prosvijećenog osobnog interesa.

Compassion, because a billion people are living in societies

Suosjećanja, jer milijardu ljudi živi u društvima

that have not offered credible hope.

koja ne nude vjerodostojnu nadu.

That is a human tragedy.

To je ljudska tragedija.

Enlightened self-interest, because if that economic divergence

Prosvijećenog osobnog interesa, jer ukoliko se ovo ekonomsko udaljavanje

continues for another 40 years,

nastavi kroz slijedećih 40 godina

combined with social integration globally,

kombinirano s globalnom socijalnom integracijom,

it will build a nightmare for our children.

će dovesti do noćne more za našu djecu.

We need compassion to get ourselves started,

Potrebno nam je suosjećanje da počnemo,

and enlightened self-interest to get ourselves serious.

i prosvijećeni osobni interes da se uozbiljimo.

That's the alliance that changes the world.

To je savez koji mijenja svijet.

So, what does it mean to get serious about providing hope for the bottom billion?

Što znači ozbiljan pristup pružanju nade za najsiromašnijih milijardu stanovnika?

What can we actually do?

Što možemo napraviti?

Well, a good guide is to think,

Dobro je promisliti,

"What did we do last time the rich world got serious

"Što je bogati svijet napravio kada smo zadnji put ozbiljno

about developing another region of the world?"

pristupili razvoju druge regije svijeta?"

That gives us, it turns out, quite a good clue,

To nas stavlja na jako dobar trag,

except you have to go back quite a long time.

jedino što se moramo vratiti nešto dalje u prošlost.

The last time the rich world got serious

Zadnji put je bogati svijet ozbiljno pristupio

about developing another region was in the late 1940s.

razvoju drugog dijela svijeta u kasnim 1940-ima.

The rich world was you, America,

Taj bogati svijet je bila Amerika

and the region that needed to be developed was my world, Europe.

a regija koju je trebalo razviti je bila Europa.

That was post-War Europe.

To je bila poslijeratna Europa.

Why did America get serious?

Zašto je Amerika ozbiljno pristupila problemu?

It wasn't just compassion for Europe, though there was that.

Nije bila samo suosjećajna prema Europi.

It was that you knew you had to,

Već zbog toga što je Amerika znala da mora,

because, in the late 1940s, country after country in Central Europe

zbog toga što je kasnih 1940-ih zemlja za zemljom u središnjoj Europi

was falling into the Soviet bloc, and so you knew you'd no choice.

padala pod sovjetski blok, i Amerika je znala da nema drugog izbora.

Europe had to be dragged into economic development.

Europu se moralo ekonomski razviti.

So, what did you do, last time you got serious?

I što je Amerika napravila, zadnji put kada je ozbiljno pristupila problemu?

Well, yes, you had a big aid program. Thank you very much.

Pa, imala je veliki program pomoći. Hvala vam.

That was Marshall aid: we need to do it again. Aid is part of the solution.

Taj program je bio Marshallova pomoć; moramo tako nešto ponovo napraviti. Pomoć je dio rješenja.

But what else did you do?

Ali što je Amerika još napravila?

Well, you tore up your trade policy, and totally reversed it.

Pa, potpuno je promijenila svoju trgovinsku politiku.

Before the war, America had been highly protectionist.

Prije rata, Amerika je bila protekcionistička zemlja.

After the war, you opened your markets to Europe,

A nakon rata je otvorila tržište prema Europi,

you dragged Europe into the then-global economy, which was your economy,

uvukla je Europu u tadašnju globalnu ekonomiju, koja je bila američka ekonomija,

and you institutionalized that trade liberalization

inisitucionizirala je liberalizaciju trgovine

through founding the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

kroz osnivanje "Općeg sporazuma o carinama i trgovini".

So, total reversal of trade policy.

Potpuno zakretanje trgovinske politike.

Did you do anything else?

Da li ste još što napravili?

Yes, you totally reversed your security policy.

Da: potpuno ste okrenuli svoju sigurnosnu politiku.

Before the war, your security policy had been isolationist.

Prije rata, sigurnosna politika je bila izolacionistička.

After the war, you tear that up, you put 100,000 troops in Europe

Nakon rata postavili ste 100 000 vojnika u Europi

for over 40 years.

na 40 godina.

So, total reversal of security policy. Anything else?

Potpuna promjena sigurnosne politike. Još što?

Yes, you tear up the "Eleventh Commandment" --

Da: odbacili ste jedanaesti amandman-

national sovereignty.

državni suverenitet.

Before the war, you treated national sovereignty as so sacrosanct

Prije rata ste toliko čuvali vaš nacionalni suverenitet

that you weren't even willing to join the League of Nations.

da se niste željeli priključiti Ligi naroda.

After the war, you found the United Nations,

Nakon rata, osnovali ste UN,

you found the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development,

osnovali ste Organizaciju za Ekonomsku suradnju i razvoj,

you found the IMF, you encouraged Europe to create the European Community --

osnovali ste IMF, poticali ste Europu da stvori Europsku zajednicu.

all systems for mutual government support.

A sve su to sustavi međuvladine pomoći.

That is still the waterfront of effective policies:

Još uvijek najvažniji elementi učinkovite politike su:

aid, trade, security, governments.

pomoć, trgovina, sigurnost, vlade.

Of course, the details of policy are going to be different,

Naravno, detalji politike će biti različiti,

because the challenge is different.

zbog toga što je izazov drugačiji.

It's not rebuilding Europe, it's reversing the divergence

Izazov nije ponovna izgradnja Europe, već smanjivanje razlike

for the bottom billion, so that they actually catch up.

za najsiromašniju milijardu, tako da dostignu nivo razvoja.

Is that easier or harder?

Da li je to jednostavnije ili teže?

We need to be at least as serious as we were then.

Moramo biti ozbiljni barem kao onda.

Now, today I'm going to take just one of those four.

Danas ću se osvrnuti samo na jedan od ova četiri.

I'm going to take the one that sounds the weakest,

Odabrati ću čimbenik koji zvuči najslabiji,

the one that's just motherhood and apple pie --

čimbenik oko kojeg se svi slažu -

governments, mutual systems of support for governments --

vlade, međusobni sustavi pomoći za vlade -

and I'm going to show you one idea

pokazati ću vam ideju

in how we could do something to strengthen governance,

pomoću koje je moguće ojačati vlast,

and I'm going to show you that that is enormously important now.

i pokazati ću vam zašto je, u ovom trenutku, to izrazito bitno.

The opportunity we're going to look to

Prilika na koju ćemo se ugledati,

is a genuine basis for optimism about the bottom billion,

je iskrena osnova za optimizam kod najsiromašnije milijarde,

and that is the commodity booms.

a to je procvat proizvoda široke potrošnje.

The commodity booms are pumping unprecedented amounts of money

Procvat proizvoda široke proizvodnje dovodi ogromne količine novca

into many, though not all, of the countries of the bottom billion.

u mnoge, ali ne i sve, zemlje najsiromašnije milijarde.

Partly, they're pumping money in because commodity prices are high,

Djelomično dovode novac zbog toga što su cijene takve robe visoke,

but it's not just that. There's also a range of new discoveries.

ali nije samo zbog toga. Postoji i cijeli niz novih otkrića.

Uganda has just discovered oil, in about the most disastrous location on Earth;

Uganda je nedavno otkrila naftu, možda na najpogubnijem mjestu na Zemlji;

Ghana has discovered oil;

Ghana je otkrila naftu;

Guinea has got a huge new exploitation of iron ore coming out of the ground.

Gvineja je otkrila ogromne rezerve željeza.

So, a mass of new discoveries.

Velik broj novih otkrića.

Between them, these new revenue flows dwarf aid.

Ovi prihodi su znatno veći od pristigle pomoći.

Just to give you one example:

Samo da vam dam jedan primjer:

Angola alone is getting 50 billion dollars a year in oil revenue.

Angola ima godišnji prihod od nafte oko 50 milijardi $.

The entire aid flows to the 60 countries of the bottom billion last year were 34 billion.

U protekloj godini cjelokupna pomoć za najsiromašnijih 60 zemalja je bila oko 34 milijarde $.

So, the flow of resources from the commodity booms

Ovako velik prihod od resursa

to the bottom billion are without precedent.

je bez presedana u najsiromašnijim zemljama.

So there's the optimism.

Tu leži optimizam.

The question is, how is it going to help their development?

Pitanje je, kako će to pomoći njihovu razvoju?

It's a huge opportunity for transformational development.

To je velika prilika za razvoj koji će omogućiti transformaciju.

Will it be taken?

Hoće li se ta prilika iskoristiti?

So, here comes a bit of science, and this is a bit of science I've done

Sad u igru ulazi malo znanosti, i ovaj dio sam napravio

since "The Bottom Billion," so it's new.

nakon izdavanja knjige "The Bottom Billion", pa je ovaj dio novi.

I've looked to see what is the relationship between

Promatrao sam odnos između

higher commodity prices of exports,

viših cijena izvozne robe,

and the growth of commodity-exporting countries.

i gospodarskog rasta zemalja izvoznica te robe.

And I've looked globally, I've taken all the countries in the world

I promatrao sam globalno - sve zemlje svijeta

for the last 40 years,

u zadnjih 40 godina,

and looked to see what the relationship is.

i promatrao sam veze.

And the short run -- say, the first five to seven years -- is just great.

Kratkotrajno - recimo, prvih 5 do 7 godina - stvari idu super.

In fact, it's hunky dory: everything goes up.

Sve ide gore.

You get more money because your terms of trade have improved,

Dobivate više novca zbog toga što su se vaši uvjeti trgovine poboljšali,

but also that drives up output across the board.

i dovodi do ogromnog rasta proizvodnje.

So GDP goes up a lot -- fantastic! That's the short run.

Pa BDP raste jako brzo - fantastično! To se događa kratkoročno.

And how about the long run?

Ali, što se događa dugoročno?

Come back 15 years later.

Nekih 15 godina kasnije.

Well, the short run, it's hunky dory,

Kratkoročno, sve je super,

but the long run, it's humpty dumpty.

ali dugoročno nije tako dobro.

You go up in the short run, but then most societies

Kratkotrajno idete prema gore, ali zatim većina država

historically have ended up worse than if they'd had no booms at all.

kroz povijest, je završila puno gore nego da uopće nisu otkrili te resurse.

That is not a forecast about how commodity prices go;

Ovo nije predviđanje kako se kreću cijene roba;

it's a forecast of the consequences, the long-term consequences,

već predviđanje posljedica, dugoročnih posljedica,

for growth of an increase in prices.

rasta temeljenog na povećanju cijena.

So, what goes wrong? Why is there this "resource curse," as it's called?

Što krene po zlu? Zašto postoji ovo "prokletstvo resursa"?

And again, I've looked at that, and it turns out

Promatrao sam i to, i ispada da

that the critical issue is the level of governance,

je kritičan problem vlast,

the initial level of economic governance,

početna razina ekonomskog upravljanja

when the resource booms accrue.

kada dođe do otkrića resursa.

In fact, if you've got good enough governance,

Ukoliko imate dobru vlast,

there is no resource boom.

nema ogromnog kratotrajnog rasta.

You go up in the short term, and then you go up even more in the long term.

Stvari krenu nabolje kratotrajno, a dugoročno postaju još bolje.

That's Norway, the richest country in Europe. It's Australia. It's Canada.

To su npr: Norveška - najbogatija zemlja Europe. To je Australija, Kanada.

The resource curse is entirely confined to countries

"Prokletstvo resursa" se isključivo događa u zemljama

below a threshold of governance.

ispod određenog praga uprave.

They still go up in the short run.

Kratotrajno se situacija poboljšava.

That's what we're seeing across the bottom billion at the moment.

To se trenutno događa u najsiromašnijim zemljama.

The best growth rates they've had -- ever.

Najbolje stope rasta.

And the question is whether the short run will persist.

I pitanje je da li će se to održati.

And with bad governance historically, over the last 40 years, it hasn't.

A s lošim upravljanjem, gledano u zadnjih 40 godina, stvari se nisu poboljšavale.

It's countries like Nigeria, which are worse off than if they'd never had oil.

Radi se o zemljama kao što je Nigerija, kojima bi bilo bolje da uopće nisu pronašle naftu.

So, there's a threshold level above which you go up in the long term,

Postoji prag vladavine prava iznad kojeg i dugoročno zemlje napreduju,

and below which you go down.

a ispod kojeg dugoročno nazaduju.

Just to benchmark that threshold,

Samo da odredimo taj prag,

it's about the governance level of Portugal in the mid 1980s.

radi se o razini vlasti u Portugalu u 1980-im.

So, the question is, are the bottom billion above or below that threshold?

Pitanje je, da li su najsiromašnije zemlje iznad ili ispod tog praga?

Now, there's one big change since the commodity booms of the 1970s,

Došlo je do velike promjene u odnosu na 1970-e,

and that is the spread of democracy.

a to je širenje demokracije.

So I thought, well, maybe that is the thing

Pa sam pomislio, možda je to čimbenik

which has transformed governance in the bottom billion.

koji je transformirao nivo vlasti u najsiromašnijim zemljama.

Maybe we can be more optimistic because of the spread of democracy.

Možda možemo biti optimističniji zbog širenja demokracije.

So, I looked. Democracy does have significant effects --

Promatrao sam. Demokracija ima velik utjecaj -

and unfortunately, they're adverse.

ali nažalost učinci demokracije nisu dobri.

Democracies make even more of a mess of these resource booms than autocracies.

Ukoliko dođe do otkrića resursa, demokracije naprave veći nered nego autokracije.

At that stage I just wanted to abandon the research, but --

U tom trenutku, htio sam napustiti istraživanje, ali -

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

-- it turns out that democracy is a little bit more complicated than that.

- ispada da je demokracija ipak nešto složenija.

Because there are two distinct aspects of democracy:

Zbog toga što postoje dva aspekta demokracije.

there's electoral competition, which determines how you acquire power,

Postoji izborno natjecanje, koje određuje način stjecanja moći,

and there are checks and balances, which determine how you use power.

ali postoji i različite provjere i kontrole vlasti, koje utječu na način kako koristiti tu moć.

It turns out that electoral competition is the thing

Ispada da je izborno natjecanje čimbenik

that's doing the damage with democracy,

koji oštećuje demokraciju,

whereas strong checks and balances make resource booms good.

dok jake provjere dovode do dobrog iskorištenja novo otkrivenih resursa.

And so, what the countries of the bottom billion need

Znači da najsiromašnije zemlje

is very strong checks and balances.

trebaju jake provjere i kontrolu vlasti.

They haven't got them.

Ali nemaju ih.

They got instant democracy in the 1990s:

Imaju instant demokraciju 1990-ih:

elections without checks and balances.

izbori bez ikakve kontrole.

How can we help improve governance and introduce checks and balances?

Kako možemo povećati vladavinu prava i uvesti provjere i kontrolu?

In all the societies of the bottom billion,

U svim najsiromašnijim zemljama,

there are intense struggles to do just that.

postoje intezivne borbe za to.

The simple proposal is that we should have some international standards,

Najjednostavniji prijedlog je da bi trebali postojati međunarodni standardi,

which will be voluntary, but which would spell out the key decision points

koji će biti dobrovoljni, ali koji bi trebali ocrtavati najvažnije točke odluke

that need to be taken in order

koje se redom trebaju ispuniti

to harness these resource revenues.

da bi se iskoristili prihodi od resursa.

We know these international standards work

Znamo kako ti međunarodni standardi funkcioniraju

because we've already got one.

zbog toga što već postoji jedan.

It's called the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative.

Naziva se "Inicijativa transparentnosti ekstraktivnih industrija".

That is the very simple idea that governments should report

To je vrlo jednostavna ideja da bi vlade trebale izvještavati

to their citizens what revenues they have.

svoje građane o prihodima.

No sooner was it proposed

Čim je ova inicijativa predložena

than reformers in Nigeria adopted it, pushed it and published the revenues in the paper.

prihvaćena je u Nigeriji, čija je vlada objavila prihode u novinama.

Nigerian newspapers circulations spiked.

Naklada nigerijskih novina je naglo porasla.

People wanted to know what their government was getting

Ljude je zanimalo koliki su prihodi

in terms of revenue.

od resursa.

So, we know it works. What would the content be of these international standards?

Znamo da ovo funkcionira. Što bi ovi međunarodni standardi trebali sadržavati?

I can't go through all of them, but I'll give you an example.

Ne mogu proći kroz sve, ali dati ću vam primjer.

The first is how to take the resources out of the ground --

Prvo je kako izvaditi resurse iz tla -

the economic processes, taking the resources out of the ground

ekonomski proces, vađenja resursa iz tla

and putting assets on top of the ground.

i dobivanje prihoda.

And the first step in that is selling the rights to resource extraction.

I prvi korak je prodavanje prava na vađenje resursa.

You know how rights to resource extraction are being sold at the moment,

Znate kako se prava na vađenje resursa trenutno prodaju,

how they've been sold over the last 40 years?

kako se prodaju zadnjih 40 godina?

A company flies in, does a deal with a minister.

Kompanija doleti, napravi dogovor sa ministrom,

And that's great for the company,

i to je super za kompaniju,

and it's quite often great for the minister --

i često je super za ministra -

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

-- and it's not great for their country.

- ali nije super za zemlju.

There's a very simple institutional technology

Postoji jednostavna institucijska tehnologija

which can transform that,

koja može to transformirati,

and it's called verified auctions.

zove se "ovjerena aukcija".

The public agency with the greatest expertise on Earth

Javna agencija s najvećim iskustvom na Zemlji

is of course the treasury -- that is, the British Treasury.

je naravno državna blaganja - to jest Britanska državna blagajna.

And the British Treasury decided that it would sell the rights

I Britanska državna blagajna je odlučila prodati prava

to third-generation mobile phones

na mobitele treće generacije

by working out what those rights were worth.

izračunavajući koliko ta prava vrijede.

They worked out they were worth two billion pounds.

Izračunali su da vrijede oko 2 milijarde funti.

Just in time, a set of economists got there and said,

Tada je nekoliko ekonomista reklo,

"Why not try an auction? It'll reveal the value."

"Zašto ne održimo aukciju? Tako ćemo otkriti vrijednost."

It went for 20 billion pounds through auction.

Preko aukcije su dobili 20 milijardi funti.

If the British Treasury can be out by a factor of 10,

Ako Britanska državna blagajna može biti u krivu za faktor 10,

think what the ministry of finance in Sierra Leone is going to be like.

pomislite koliko će u krivu biti minstarstvo financija u Sierra Leone-u.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

When I put that to the President of Sierra Leone,

Kada sam to rekao predsjedniku Sierra Leone-a

the next day he asked the World Bank to send him a team

idući dan je zamolio Svjetsku banku da mu pošalje tim

to give expertise on how to conduct auctions.

koji će ih naučiti održavati aukcije.

There are five such decision points;

Postoji pet takvih točaka odluke;

each one needs an international standard.

i svaka od njih treba međunarodni standard.

If we could do it, we would change the world.

Kada bi to mogli napraviti, mogli bi promijeniti svijet.

We would be helping the reformers in these societies,

Pomagali bi reformatorima u tim društvima

who are struggling for change.

koji se bore za promjene.

That's our modest role. We cannot change these societies,

To je naša skromna uloga. Mi ne možemo promijeniti ta društva,

but we can help the people in these societies

ali možemo pomoći ljudima u tim društvima

who are struggling and usually failing,

koji se bore i koji obično ne uspijevaju,

because the odds are so stacked against them.

jer su im šanse toliko male.

And yet, we've not got these rules.

I još uvijek, nemamo takva pravila.

If you think about it, the cost of promulgating international rules

Ako bolje promislite, cijena objavljivanje ovih međunarodnih pravila

is zilch -- nothing.

je nula.

Why on Earth are they not there?

Pa zašto ih nemamo?

I realized that the reason they're not there

Shvatio sam da ta pravila ne postoje

is that until we have a critical mass of informed citizens in our own societies,

jer dok u našim društvima ne postoji kritična masa informiranih građana,

politicians will get away with gestures.

političari će se izvući s gestama.

That unless we have an informed society,

Ukoliko nemamo informiramo društvo,

what politicians do, especially in relation to Africa, is gestures:

političari se obično, naročito ako se radi o Africi, služe gestama:

things that look good, but don't work.

stvari koje izgledaju dobro, ali ne rade.

And so I realized we had to go through the business

I onda sam shvatio da moramo proći kroz posao

of building an informed citizenry.

izgradnje informiranog građanstva.

That's why I broke all the professional rules of conduct for an economist,

Zato sam prekršio profesionalna pravila ponašanja za ekonomiste

and I wrote an economics book that you could read on a beach.

i napisao knjigu o ekonomiji koju možete čitati na plaži.

(Laughter).

(Smijeh).

However, I have to say, the process of communication

Međutim, moram reći, komunikacija

does not come naturally to me.

mi baš ne leži.

This is why I'm on this stage, but it's alarming.

Zato sam na ovoj pozornici, što je uznemirujuće.

I grew up in a culture of self-effacement.

Odrastao sam u kulturi skromnosti.

My wife showed me a blog comment on one of my last talks,

Žena mi je pokazala komentar na blogu o jednoj od mojih posljednih prezentacija,

and the blog comment said, "Collier is not charismatic --

i komentar je glasio: "Collier nije karizmatičan -

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

-- but his arguments are compelling."

- ali su njegovi argumenti uvjerljivi."

(Laughter)

(Smijeh).

(Applause)

(Pljesak).

If you agree with that sentiment,

Ako se slažete s tom izjavom,

and if you agree that we need a critical mass of informed citizenry,

i ako se slažete da trebamo kritičnu masu informiranih građana,

you will realize that I need you.

shvatiti će te da ste vi potrebni meni.

Please, become ambassadors.

Molim vas postanite ambasadori.

Thank you.

Hvala vam.

(Applause)

(Pljesak).