Name: 如何消除全球極端貧困 (How to Eradicate Global Extreme Poverty)
Uploaded: 2025-02-10T12:14:48.000Z
Duration: 14 min 46 s

More than 600 million people worldwide can't afford basic needs like enough food, clean water or basic life-saving health care.

全世界有 6 億多人負擔不起基本需求，如足夠的食物、清潔的水或基本的救生保健。

Their day-to-day survival is under threat in ways unimaginable to most people watching this video.

他們每天的生存都受到威脅，這是觀看這段視頻的大多數人無法想象的。

情態副詞

It's honestly kind of embarrassing for humanity as a whole that hundreds of millions of us are suffering so much simply because they don't have enough money.

老實說，我們數以億計的人僅僅因為沒有足夠的錢而遭受如此多的痛苦，這讓整個人類都感到有些尷尬。

Could we actually end global extreme poverty with such an enticingly simple approach?

我們是否真的可以通過這樣一個誘人的簡單方法來結束全球極端貧困？

We would like to thank GiveDirectly for helping us write this video by providing their detailed research on the topic.

我們要感謝 GiveDirectly，感謝他們提供了有關該主題的詳細研究，幫助我們撰寫本視頻。

They're a non-profit that delivers donations as cash directly to people in extreme poverty across the world.

他們是一家非營利組織，將捐贈的現金直接送到世界各地極端貧困的人們手中。

Giving money for people to spend without any restrictions is a type of aid called Unconditional Cash Transfers, or UCTs.

不加任何限制地把錢交給人們花，這種援助被稱為無條件現金轉移，或 UCTs。

Like all forms of aid, there are both advantages and limitations to cash transfers as a whole, and UCTs in particular.

與所有形式的援助一樣，現金轉移作為一個整體，特別是統一現金轉移，既有優勢， 也有侷限性。

If we want to end global extreme poverty through cash transfers, we'll need to raise enough funds and send them to the people who need them.

如果我們想通過現金轉移結束全球極端貧困，就需要籌集足夠的資金，並將其送到需要的人手中。

We also need to be sure that we are actually helping the recipients, and not hurting people who are not receiving anything.

我們還需要確保我們確實在幫助受援者，而不是傷害那些沒有得到任何東西的人。

We also recognise in advance that there are a host of moral and ethical questions involved with such a large undertaking.

我們也事先認識到，如此大規模的工程涉及到一系列道德和倫理問題。

For example, who should be given money first?

And do we need to prevent people becoming dependent on aid?

我們是否需要防止人們依賴援助？

Additionally, poverty does not exist in isolation from the world's other major issues, such as food security, human rights, and climate change.

此外，貧困問題與世界其他重大問題（如糧食安全、人權和氣候變化）並不是孤立存在的。

Those questions won't be the main focus of this video.

Instead, we're going to focus on what can be achieved with cash transfers.

相反，我們將重點關注現金轉移所能實現的目標。

Let's start with some basic facts about how we define global extreme poverty.

讓我們從一些基本事實開始，瞭解我們是如何定義全球極端貧困的。

As defined by the World Bank in September 2022, the international poverty line is $2.15 per day in 2017 US dollars by purchasing power.

根據世界銀行 2022 年 9 月的定義，國際貧困線為每天 2.15 美元（按 2017 年美元購買力計算）。

This is roughly equivalent to $1 per day in US dollars in 1987.

這大致相當於 1987 年每天 1 美元。

At the end of 2022, up to 685 million people experienced poverty worldwide by this definition.

根據這一定義，到 2022 年底，全球貧困人口多達 6.85 億。

The international poverty line represents what we call extreme poverty, as opposed to poverty in general.

國際貧困線代表的是我們所說的極端貧困，而不是一般意義上的貧困。

Countries can decide to use their own poverty line, but we're going to focus on the most extreme cases of poverty.

各國可以決定使用自己的貧困線，但我們將重點關注最極端的貧困情況。

The international poverty line reflects the cost to cover basic human needs among the world's poorest people, including food, shelter, and minimal healthcare and education costs.

國際貧困線反映了世界上最貧困人口滿足人類基本需求的成本，包括食物、住房以及最低限度的醫療和教育成本。

It's set based on the average price for this rough basket of goods a person needs.

它是根據一個人所需的這一籃子商品的平均價格來確定的。

To be clear, the international poverty line represents a very low standard of living, but one that lets a person avoid an immediate risk of death from starvation, exposure to the elements, or easily treatable diseases.

說白了，國際貧困線代表的是非常低的生活水準，但它能讓人避免因飢餓、暴露在自然環境中或容易治療的疾病而立即面臨死亡的風險。

In terms of food, for example, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that in 2017, just 83 cents a day could buy enough food to avoid starvation, but a fully nutritious diet would require more than four times that, at $3.54 per day.

以食品為例，據聯合國糧食及農業組織估計，2017年，每天只需83美分就能買到足夠的食物以避免捱餓，但完全營養的飲食則需要4倍以上，即每天3.54美元。

While many organizations consider more than just household income in defining poverty, including the World Bank's own multidimensional poverty measure, the international poverty line remains a popular and useful tool for understanding the world's poorest people as a population.

雖然許多組織在界定貧困時考慮的不僅僅是家庭收入，包括世界銀行自己的多元貧困衡量標準，但國際貧困線仍然是瞭解世界上最貧困人口的一個流行而有用的工具。

In particular, the international poverty line is the target used for the 2015 UN goal of ending extreme poverty by 2030, as part of the Sustainable Development Goals.

特別是，作為可持續發展目標的一部分，國際貧困線是 2015 年聯合國關於到 2030 年消除極端貧困的目標所採用的指標。

As GiveDirectly puts it, getting everyone above the international poverty line is not a high bar, it's the lowest, and it's one we should be able to clear.

正如《GiveDirectly》所言，讓每個人都超過國際貧困線並不是一個很高的門檻，而是最低的門檻，我們應該能夠跨越這個門檻。

And reaching this bar can change lives and entire communities.

達到這一標準可以改變生活和整個社區。

Our team spoke by video call with one Rwandan woman, Valentina Ramahoro, in a village that had received cash from GiveDirectly several months prior.

我們的團隊通過視頻電話與一位名叫瓦倫蒂娜-拉馬霍羅（Valentina Ramahoro）的盧旺達婦女進行了交談。

She spoke about how she was able to invest in her store by moving to a new building, with floors made of cement instead of uncovered ground.

她談到了自己是如何通過搬遷到一棟新樓來投資自己的商店的，新樓的地面是用水泥鋪設的，而不是沒有覆蓋的地面。

She also bought a tea kettle and made new kinds of merchandise, like soft drinks, available to her community.

她還買了茶壺，向社區提供軟飲料等新商品。

She mentioned that the proceeds from her store doubled from about $3 to about $6 per day, both thanks to her improvements to the store and from people in her community having money to spend after meeting their basic needs.

她提到，由於她對商店的改進，以及社區居民在滿足基本需求後有錢消費，她的商店每天的收入翻了一番，從大約 3 美元增加到大約 6 美元。

With the money they received, her neighbours could afford food every day, get cement for their floors, buy new livestock and farm tools, and more.

有了這些錢，她的鄰居們每天都能吃得起飯，能用水泥鋪地面，能買到新的牲畜和農具等等。

A 2016 review of the scientific literature by Francesca Bastai and her colleagues at As expected, household income and spending both increase for people receiving cash transfers.

Francesca Bastai 和她的同事在 2016 年對科學文獻進行了回顧，結果不出所料，接受現金轉移的人的家庭收入和支出都會增加。

Most studies also found that cash transfers improve a wide variety of other outcomes, including improving dietary diversity, increasing the number of medical check-ups, and increasing the number of businesses and the productivity of farms.

大多數研究還發現，現金轉移能改善其他各種結果，包括改善飲食多樣性、增加體檢次數、增加企業數量和提高農場生產率。

Adults receiving cash in most of the studied programmes spent about the same amount of time working, while children receiving cash spent fewer hours working for pay and more time in school.

在所研究的大多數計劃中，領取現金的成年人的工作時間大致相同，而領取現金的兒童的有償工作時間減少，上學時間增加。

Studies of a 2008 lump-sum cash transfer of $380 in Uganda showed positive economic effects on recipients four years later, though a follow-up at nine years did not find a significant effect on incomes.

2008 年在烏干達進行的 380 美元一次性現金轉移研究表明，四年後對接受者產生了積極的經濟影響，但九年後的跟蹤調查並未發現對收入產生顯著影響。

In another study at 12 years during the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors found that people who received cash transfers were able to better withstand the economic effects of the pandemic due to their type of occupation.

在 COVID-19 大流行期間進行的另一項為期 12 年的研究中，作者發現，由於職業類型的原因，接受現金轉移的人能夠更好地抵禦大流行帶來的經濟影響。

The benefits to people receiving cash transfers are clear.

現金轉移對人們的好處顯而易見。

So how much money would we need to bring everyone above the international poverty line?

那麼，我們需要多少錢才能讓每個人都超過國際貧困線呢？

As a rough guideline, suppose we found every person in extreme poverty and added up the amount they'd each need to get just above the poverty line.

作為一個粗略的指導原則，假設我們找到每一個極端貧困的人，並把他們每個人剛剛超過貧困線所需的金額加起來。

The Brookings Institution estimates this quantity, called the poverty gap, to be around $100 billion each year.

布魯金斯學會（Brookings Institution）估計，這個被稱為 "貧困差距 "的數字每年約為 1,000 億美元。

The real amount we'd need will be different, and we'll discuss the reasons why in a moment, but we shouldn't expect it to be many times higher or lower. $100 billion is certainly a large amount of money, but given the scale of the problem, it's actually quite manageable.

我們需要的實際金額會有所不同，稍後我們將討論其中的原因，但我們不應該期望它高出或低出許多倍。1,000 億美元無疑是一筆鉅款，但考慮到問題的嚴重性，這筆錢其實是可以承受的。

According to the OECD, governments worldwide gave over $201 billion of official development assistance in 2022.

根據經合組織（OECD）的數據，2022 年世界各國政府提供的官方發展援助超過 2 010 億美元。

The OECD defines this type of assistance as resources sent from governments to developing countries with promotion of economic development and welfare as the main objective.

經濟合作與發展組織（OECD）將此類援助定義為各國政府向開發中國家提供的資源，其主要目的是促進經濟發展和福利。

GiveDirectly estimates less than 5% of this is being given directly as cash to individuals.

據 GiveDirectly 估計，其中只有不到 5%是以現金形式直接捐贈給個人的。

The exact amount is not being tracked by the governments giving this aid.

提供援助的各國政府並未跟蹤確切的援助金額。

Of humanitarian aid, which aims to provide short-term relief from specific disasters rather than long-term development, around $5.6 billion of cash aid was given in 2019, out of a total of roughly $30 billion.

人道主義援助旨在提供特定災害的短期救濟，而非長期發展，在總額約 300 億美元的人道主義援助中，2019 年提供了約 56 億美元的現金援助。

Governments also don't need to be the only source of funds.

政府也不必是唯一的資金來源。

Existing cash aid is dwarfed by the $1.5 trillion held by charitable foundations in 2018, and total charitable donations from wealthy individuals, companies, and the general public surpassed the $100 billion total many times over each year.

與慈善基金會在 2018 年持有的 1.5 萬億美元相比，現有的現金援助相形見絀，來自富裕個人、公司和普通公眾的慈善捐款總額每年多次超過 1000 億美元。

So while the increase in total aid would be comparatively small, the increase in cash aid would be very substantial.

是以，雖然援助總額的增幅相對較小，但現金援助的增幅將非常可觀。

If we as a civilization decide to go through with this plan, how would we get the money to the people who need it, and how much additional funding would that require?

如果我們作為一個文明國家決定實施這一計劃，我們將如何把錢送到需要的人手中，這需要多少額外資金？

For starters, communications technology will be a big help.

首先，通信技術將是一大助力。

GiveDirectly in particular spends money through mobile payments, with their field workers giving SIM cards and phones to recipients.

其中，GiveDirectly 通過移動支付來花錢，他們的現場工作人員向受助人發放 SIM 卡和手機。

This helps recipients keep their money secure, simplifies the payment process, and gives the recipients an additional tool to help improve their lives.

這有助於收款人確保資金安全，簡化付款流程，併為收款人提供額外的工具，幫助他們改善生活。

GiveDirectly has even helped set up cell phone towers to make these payments work.

GiveDirectly 甚至還幫助建立了手機信號塔，以實現這些支付。

The organizations that are in charge of the cash transfer program will also have some maintenance and delivery costs.

負責現金轉移計劃的組織還將承擔一定的維護和交付成本。

GiveDirectly's financial releases show that around 90% of the money they raise actually reaches recipients.

GiveDirectly 發佈的財務報告顯示，他們募集的資金中約有 90% 實際到了受助人手中。

A similar style of program designed to reach everyone in extreme poverty would have some new challenges, such as reaching refugees or very remote communities, but would also benefit from economies of scale.

旨在惠及所有極端貧困人口的類似計劃將面臨一些新的挑戰，如惠及難民或非常偏遠的社區，但也將受益於規模經濟。

We'll also have to determine who should get the money, and how much.

我們還必須確定誰應該得到這筆錢，以及得到多少。

Any system for targeting will necessarily introduce inefficiencies.

任何定向系統都必然會帶來效率低下的問題。

Money we spend on finding who's eligible is money that we don't give out.

我們花在尋找符合條件的人上的錢，就是我們不發放的錢。

Since our goal is to end global extreme poverty, we should be more focused on making sure that no one below the poverty line is excluded, rather than avoiding including people who are just above the poverty line.

既然我們的目標是消除全球極端貧困，我們就應該更加註重確保不把貧困線以下的人排除在外，而不是避免把貧困線以上的人包括在內。

One popular method for targeting aid is proxy means testing.

確定援助對象的一種常用方法是代理經濟情況調查。

That is, using information about people's living conditions to estimate their income.

即利用人們的生活條件資訊來估算他們的收入。

A statistical analysis by researchers at the World Bank found that in places with a high poverty rate, giving based on proxy means testing can actually cost more and be less effective than paying the same amount to everyone, or nearly everyone.

世界銀行的研究人員進行的一項統計分析發現，在貧困率較高的地方，基於代理經濟情況調查的捐贈實際上可能比向每個人或幾乎每個人支付相同的金額花費更多，效果更差。

For these reasons and others, it would likely be easier to spend our effort raising more money to give to those on the margin of poverty in poor communities, rather than on meticulous targeting and means testing.

出於這些原因和其他原因，我們更應該努力籌集更多的資金，用於資助貧困社區的貧困邊緣人群，而不是進行細緻的目標定位和經濟情況調查。

Corrupt actors, both local and foreign, are already skimming off at least tens of billions of dollars from the economies of Africa's poorest nations.

當地和外國的腐敗分子已經從非洲最貧窮國家的經濟中攫取了至少數百億美元。

If we want to transfer money to hundreds of millions of people in these nations, the region's governments will have to be important partners.

如果我們要向這些國家的數億人轉移資金，該地區的政府就必須成為重要的合作伙伴。

Giving money via mobile payments directly to recipients reduces the chance for funds to be lost to corruption, but we will still inevitably lose some, and we'll have to spend some resources stopping corrupt actors within the project, given its large scale.

通過移動支付直接向受助人發放資金可以減少資金因腐敗而流失的機會，但我們仍不可避免地會損失一些資金，而且由於項目規模龐大，我們還必須花費一些資源來阻止項目內部的腐敗行為。

Of course, this is a problem with any aid program.

當然，這是任何援助計劃都會遇到的問題。

Cash is no riskier than other forms of aid in this respect.

在這方面，現金並不比其他形式的援助風險更大。

Overall, other than the $100 billion estimated to close the annual poverty gap, most of the additional costs come from inefficiencies in the targeting method, with the other factors such as corruption and delivery costs accounting for smaller portions.

總體而言，除了用於消除年度貧困差距的 1 000 億美元估算之外，大部分額外成本都來自於目標定位方法的低效，腐敗和交付成本等其他因素所佔比例較小。

The people we spoke with at GiveDirectly weren't ready to share an ultimate number, but a rough estimate is $200 to $300 billion to reach everyone in extreme poverty for the first year of our project.

我們與 GiveDirectly 的工作人員進行了交談，他們並不願意透露最終的數字，但粗略估計，在我們項目實施的第一年，需要 2,000 億至 3,000 億美元才能惠及所有極端貧困人口。

This figure is in line with estimates from other organizations based on population data.

這一數字與其他組織根據人口數據做出的估計相一致。

Once again, as big as this figure is, it's less than 1 500th of the world's economy at $160 trillion, and only about 1% of the government budgets of the world's wealthier nations at $27 trillion.

再說一遍，儘管這個數字很大，但還不到世界經濟總量 160 萬億美元的 1 500 分之一，也僅相當於世界上較富裕國家政府預算 27 萬億美元的 1%左右。

So we know the amount of money, while large, is not insurmountable for developed nations.

是以，我們知道這筆錢雖然數額巨大，但對發達國家來說並非不可逾越。

It wouldn't even be that large an increase over existing aid.

與現有援助相比，增加的數額甚至不會太大。

We also know that cash transfers improve recipients' lives immensely.

我們還知道，現金轉移極大地改善了受援者的生活。

But what would be the effects on recipients' neighbors and the economy as a whole?

但是，這對受助人的鄰居和整個經濟會產生什麼影響呢？

A 2022 study led by Dennis Egger found that every $1,000 of cash given actually had a total economic effect of $2,500 thanks to spillover effects growing the local economy, as recipients spent more money at their neighbors' businesses, and those businesses spent money, and so forth.

丹尼斯-埃格（Dennis Egger）在 2022 年上司的一項研究發現，每發放 1000 美元現金，實際上會產生 2500 美元的總經濟效應，這要歸功於當地經濟增長的溢出效應，因為受助人在鄰居的企業花了更多錢，而這些企業又花了錢，如此循環。

Not only did recipients' incomes increase, their neighbors' incomes also increased by 18 months later.

18 個月後，不僅受助人的收入增加了，他們鄰居的收入也增加了。

Even neighboring villages without any recipients saw slightly increased incomes, which could have been from a spillover effect as well.

即使是沒有任何受助人的鄰近村莊，收入也略有增加，這也可能是溢出效應造成的。

These effects mean our cash transfers will go further, and we may find that we've reached our goal of ending extreme poverty sooner and for less money than we would otherwise expect.

這些效果意味著我們的現金轉移將走得更遠，而且我們可能會發現，我們已經提前實現了消除極端貧困的目標，而且所花的錢比我們預期的要少。

The research suggests that the $200-300 billion figure we'd need to give for the first year will decrease every year thereafter as the economies of entire regions and countries grow and lift their poorest residents out of extreme poverty.

研究表明，隨著整個地區和國家的經濟增長並使其最貧困的居民擺脫極端貧困，我們在第一年需要捐出的 2,000-3,000 億美元的數字以後會逐年減少。

事實證明，這種影響微乎其微。

Average price inflation was only 0.1%, and no category of goods saw a price rise of more than 1.2%.

平均價格上漲僅為 0.1%，沒有任何一類商品的價格漲幅超過 1.2%。

GIF Directly thinks that price increases are so low because places with the most extreme poverty have a lot of economic slack, so local businesses and farms can easily grow to supply more goods to their new customers.

GIF Directly 認為，價格漲幅之所以如此之低，是因為極端貧困的地方有很多經濟空隙，是以當地企業和農場很容易發展壯大，為新客戶提供更多商品。

We know less about unconditional cash transfers at the largest scales, with millions of recipients.

我們對規模最大、受惠人數達數百萬的無條件現金轉移的瞭解較少。

The best examples of this kind of transfers so far might be economic stimulus programs run by governments, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic.

迄今為止，此類轉移的最佳範例可能是政府實施的經濟刺激計劃，如在 COVID-19 大流行期間。

Several wealthy countries spent over 15% of their GDP on stimulus, and some, such as the USA and Japan, provided direct cash payments to their residents.

一些富裕國家用於刺激經濟的資金佔其國內生產總值的 15%以上，一些國家，如美國和日本，直接向本國居民支付現金。

This, of course, has had many far-reaching effects on the economy of these countries and the world, some of which remain to be seen, and which are hard to disentangle from the effects of the pandemic itself.

當然，這對這些國家和世界的經濟產生了許多深遠的影響，其中一些影響仍有待觀察，而且很難與大流行病本身的影響區分開來。