First of all let me thank DFID for hosting this seminar, which is both highly appropriate and timely.Appropriate, since we are not reaching the poorest effectively enough in our development efforts. And timely, since we are beginning to run out of time if we are to reach the Millennium Development Goals by 2015.

It is obvious that we will have to make faster progress in fighting poverty if we are to meet the MDGs. We will also have to adjust our approach and policies in order to reach the poorest more effectively. This means that we first need to identify the shortcomings of the past, where I would argue that the lack of an integrated human rights perspective has been a major weakness of both governments and aid agencies. Secondly, we need to adopt policies that integrate aid, human rights and the fight against poverty, not least for the poorest. Here I will say a few words about the Norwegian experience. Human rights are now one of the cornerstones of our aid policy. Finally, I will talk about how this thinking can be translated into action.

Fighting poverty remains the single most important challenge in the world today, and fighting poverty is fighting for human rights. Poverty is the major obstacle to the realisation of human rights for all.

Shortcomings of past policies

I shall start by analysing some of the shortcomings of past poverty reduction policies. Poverty reduction thinking and aid policy in the early 1990s were based on two main principles:

• labour-intensive growth, and
• investment in human resource development.

This two-pronged strategy, most clearly spelled out in the World Development Report 1990, focused on improving poor people’s opportunities , supposedly supplemented by safety nets for those who were not benefiting from the new opportunities.

Millions of poor people in poor countries did benefit from the improved income opportunities and better education and health services resulting from these policies. However, large groups of poor people, and often the poorest, did not benefit and remained excluded from the growth process and from the improved social services. Furthermore, as we all know, effective safety nets exist in only a very few countries.

This strategy had some serious shortcomings. For example, it failed to adequately address structural factors hindering poverty reduction, such as the power structures in the countries concerned, cultural factors such as caste systems, or political obstacles to poverty reduction. Issues such as marginalisation and exclusion of women, children, indigenous and ethnic groups, the disabled, etc., were not addressed either. Consequently, these policies often failed to reach the poorest, the excluded, the marginalised.

Poverty reduction policies with an integrated rights perspective

Partly owing to these shortcomings, poverty reduction thinking today has a broader and more holistic perspective, including not only the “opportunity” agenda of the 1990s, but also two other key issues, namely empowerment and security . Thanks largely to Ravi Kanbur, who will be speaking later today, the World Development Report 2000 was influential in promoting this policy change.

I see this important change in policy as bringing human rights aspects into the fight against poverty more strongly than ever before, and making them an integral and more explicit part of poverty reduction and aid strategies. In the rest of my talk today, I will focus on the interdependence between realising human rights and fighting poverty.

Interdependence between human rights and poverty reduction

Fighting poverty is promoting human rights. Fighting poverty is fulfilling people’s rights. Living in poverty is not only living without basic necessities like food and clean water, it is also living without dignity and freedom. The purpose of development is to deliver in both these areas, to provide basic necessities and dignity to the poor. We need to improve the lives of those who suffer, to protect the weak, to empower the powerless.

Thus, poverty and human rights are closely interlinked:

• We cannot successfully improve the human rights of the world’s people without considerably reducing poverty.
• We will not be able to fight poverty successfully without addressing human rights issues head on.

Consequently, we need to discard the old dichotomy between development and human rights, and the assumption that they form a hierarchy. Economic, social and cultural rights must be given their rightful place alongside civil and political rights. These two sets of rights are equally important, and they cannot and must not be separated. They are, in fact, not only indivisible, they are also mutually reinforcing. “All Human Rights for All” does not allow for any exceptions. Not for women because they are not men, not for children because they are too young. Not for the poor because they lack resources, not for the disabled because they are weak, not for the elderly because they have few years left to live. These and all other discriminatory exceptions imply a denial of the basic worth of every individual. All Human Rights for All means all human rights for all people. And I strongly believe that aid has an important role to play in promoting human rights and fighting poverty in an integrated manner, that it can help to deliver in both areas.

The link between human rights and development is now generally accepted and recognised internationally. The adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development in 1986 and the Vienna Programme of Action in 1993 placed these issues firmly at the top of the international agenda. We have come to realise that if development strategies and policies for implementing human rights standards are combined, they reinforce one another, resulting in synergy and improving peoples’ lives.

This integration of human rights thinking into our efforts to combat poverty has some important implications. First of all, we need to study and gain insight into the human rights situation, the processes and dynamics of poverty, and the mechanisms behind exclusion, marginalisation, discrimination, etc. We must then make sure that the findings of such studies are translated into action, into improving the lives of the poorest, the oppressed and the excluded. This goes for governments and other donors alike.

Human rights a cornerstone of Norwegian aid policy

Norwegian development policy has been heavily influenced by this evolution in thinking in the last few years – an evolution that I have very much encouraged in my time as minister.

In fact, the link between development and human rights was already a key factor in the Norwegian Plan of Action for Human Rights that was launched in 1999, when I was Minister of International Development and Human Rights.

Two years ago the Norwegian government reinforced this emphasis on human rights in its Action Plan for Combating Poverty in the South towards 2015. This action plan clearly states that “fighting poverty is about promoting human rights” and outlined how Norway will contribute to achieving the Millennium Development Goals. The plan reflects the new paradigm in development co-operation, which is characterised by coherence and co-ordination. It also advocates a comprehensive and coherent rights-based approach.

Then two weeks ago I presented a white paper on the new Norwegian development policy to the Norwegian parliament, “Fighting Poverty Together”, in which human rights is a cornerstone. The white paper opens with the words “Dignity for all!”

I would like to share with you some of the main features of this new Norwegian development policy. In order to reach the MDGs, we must first of all work on four fronts at once:

• globally , to improve international framework conditions for poverty reduction and to ensure policy coherence
• among ourselves , to improve the way we give aid, i.e. more, and better, aid
• in the countries concerned , to improve governance, and
• with non-state actors , to mobilise the private sector and civil society.

We need reform in all these areas.

Secondly, our efforts will be guided by the following principles:

• We are following a rights-based approach.
• We are adopting a holistic country focus.
• We are asking developing countries to shoulder the main responsibility for their own development.
• We are committing ourselves to reform in terms of joint responsibility for harmonisation, quality assurance and a stronger focus on results.

The concepts of accountability, empowerment, participation, equality and non-discrimination lie at the heart of the Norwegian government’s development policy and practice. We have steadily increased our support for good governance, democracy and human rights programmes. These are also issues that cut across all sectors in our dialogue with partner countries, and that are always on the table in our discussions – at sector level and country level, in Poverty Reduction Strategy processes and in debt negotiations. However, combating poverty is in itself a means of promoting human rights, of ensuring the social and economic rights of the poor. Our support to Norwegian NGOs and civil society also has a rights-based approach and is guided by these principles.

Our development policy is about contributing to the realisation of human rights for all as an integral part and key component of our efforts to combat world poverty. But how can we do this?

How can we do this?

Human rights mean that states have obligations towards their citizens. We are often faced with the argument, especially with regard to economic and social rights, that this is a domestic responsibility, and therefore has to be dealt with internally in the countries concerned. Is this right? Or can rich countries actually be made responsible for addressing the social and economic rights of people in poor countries? In legal terms the answer is clearly no. However, there is a reference to this in Article 2 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which says that every country is to take steps to the maximum of its available resources to achieve progressively the full realisation of these rights. The poor counties are to undertake such measures to the best of their ability.

However, the rich countries of the world do have a responsibility. In Article 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is underlined that everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which their rights and freedoms can be fully realised. We have a joint responsibility to create this social and international order. Consequently, and this is my own interpretation, it is important to address structural conditions that impede poverty reduction, both at the international and at the national level, from a human rights perspective. This also makes it legitimate for external actors to take on such a responsibility, whether in terms of trade, debt relief, policy coherence or aid.

The fact that Article 2 of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights states that countries should ensure people’s economic and social rights to the best of their ability, helped by international assistance and co-operation, makes the assumption of such a responsibility even more appropriate. We all know that the ability to ensure people’s rights is limited in poor countries. It is our responsibility, as members of the international community and from an ethical and moral point of view, to help these countries in their efforts to reduce poverty. Therefore, development co-operation can – and should – play a key role in assisting countries to enhance their ability to realise the social and economic rights of their populations.

From rights to action

How does this translate into today’s poverty reduction agenda? Firstly, a human rights perspective puts the countries themselves in the driver’s seat. They have the main responsibility. This is in line with current development thinking. Secondly, human rights are not only rights for marginalised, particularly vulnerable groups, but for every poor person. In the poorest countries, the Least Developed Countries, this perspective is very relevant. Everybody has the right to education, to basic health services, to nutrition. In the poorest countries this means national programmes for the whole population.

Thirdly, with the adoption of the MDGs, we have an important tool for realising human rights for all. Sector programmes and other broad-based development plans play a key role in delivering on individual rights at the country level, combined with the national Poverty Reduction Strategies, and should be the framework for our assistance. It is crucial that the human rights agenda in individual poor countries is focused on delivering services and poverty reduction for all the poor, not only a few individuals or particular groups through targeted projects and programmes.

Fourthly, a rights-based approach is not only about protecting the rights of particular groups. It is also about realising the rights of the majority. By adopting a holistic approach, we can prevent developments that could lead to a reversal of the current progress in harmonisation and donor reform.

However, promoting human rights is also about protecting minorities against the tyranny or indifference of the majority. This means that in most countries we will find marginalised and excluded people and groups who deserve particular attention, even though their rights are enshrined in the human rights instruments. Thus in our development efforts we need to focus on their rights, both in our political dialogue and in our development co-operation. Some people, such as the disabled and indigenous peoples, do not even have adequate protection in legal terms. In Norwegian development co-operation both these groups are given special attention. In the case of many minorities, supplementary, targeted measures will still be necessary.

In the poorest countries, of course, human rights standards need to be implemented for all, not only to these particular groups. In middle-income countries and transition economies, a more targeted approach will still be very relevant. Here the levels of inequality indicate that we are dealing to a larger extent with exclusion and marginalisation.

A concrete example: education

What does a rights-based approach in the poorest countries mean in practice? Our task is basically to ensure respect and fulfilment of individual rights in the context of collective national measures. This has implications for the delivery of development assistance. In health: basic health services for all. In education: education for all. How can we assist countries in improving their ability to deliver here? Take education:

• The right to education must be ensured by the government. This is a national responsibility. The government is in the driver’s seat, the government must develop a sectoral education plan. Donors must provide sufficient assistance, and in a way that makes the government’s job easier, using joint, harmonised measures.

• The right to educationmeans education for all – free of charge, in other words, without school fees.

• The right to education means no discrimination, giving equal rights to girls and boys, vulnerable groups, the disabled, all ethnic groups, people of lower castes, etc.

• The right to education means an equal right to knowledge, in terms of quality and content, not just quantity.
• The right to education in real terms is the right to completion, not just access and enrolment. This involves addressing the drop-out rates for girls.

Including all these aspects of rights helps the government concerned to design its education programmes in a way that reaches out to everyone and prevents the exclusion of marginalised groups, in compliance with the human rights conventions. In some countries it can be difficult to gain the government’s acceptance for all these measures. For instance the integration of vulnerable groups may be particularly difficult. In such cases some targeted interventions may still be necessary, for example for the disabled and indigenous peoples.

Governance and human rights

A very important factor for success in reducing poverty is good governance. Past experience has taught us that development efforts, however rights-based, will not deliver without better governance in the countries concerned. We may create “islands” with better living conditions for the few, but improving the lives of the many, and doing so sustainably, is another matter. This is why governance reforms and institutional capacity building are so important. The governance agenda is about building democracy and the rule of law, but also about building capacity to deliver, accountability and control.

Because development co-operation also involves political dialogue. This responsibility must be taken seriously. In our dealings with developing countries, we need to maintain an active human rights dialogue with a strong focus on issues such as the rights of women and children and non-discrimination. In this respect those countries that have ratified human rights conventions should be held accountable. This is the case with the more classical human rights agenda, but also with issues such as female genital mutilation, child labour, protection of minorities, measures against trafficking in women and children, etc. When countries have ratified the conventions, such a dialogue is not Western imperialism, it is based on a joint commitment to human rights for all. This is about political priorities and legislative measures, but also about development co-operation.

Building the capacity to deliver, helping countries to reach out to the many through social services that fulfil their basic human rights, is one important measure. Helping countries to protect minorities in legal and practical terms is another. Empowering the poor by providing microcredits and other forms of collateral, by registration and, for those operating in the informal sector, by formalisation of their assets, are also important measures. Here, the de Soto agenda is a useful tool. Unleashing the potential for entrepreneurship of the poor is also a means of fulfilling people’s social and economic rights. This is a governance issue.

But to deliver in these various areas, and do so efficiently, every government also needs instruments of accountability and control. Internal state control functions need strengthening in most poor countries. This includes the judiciary and the rule of law, the state auditor function, parliamentary institutions, ombudsman institutions, etc. At the same time, watchdogs outside government also have very important roles to play. Civil society, free media, academic institutions are all crucial for ensuring respect for all human rights. This is also a participation issue. People need to be included in political processes that affect them. Strengthening local communities and civil society, ensuring participation and a voice at the local and national level are therefore also important from a human rights perspective. These factors are closely related to civil and political rights, and the obligations involved in respecting these rights.

“Rights-based” monitoring

In other words, the basis for almost all governance interventions should be the human rights agenda. This should also be the basis for our development dialogues and co-operation. We will never succeed in combating poverty, in improving the lives of the poor and the marginalised, without taking both their social and economic rights and their civil and political rights seriously. A rights-based approach should be based on these two pillars. They are indivisible, interrelated, interdependent and – not least – mutually reinforcing. There is ample evidence that delivery on one pillar strengthens the realisation of rights related to the other, and the other way around. This is really what empowerment is all about, empowerment of the poor and the marginalised. And this fits very well with the current development agenda.

This holistic approach is the perspective taken in our new white paper, which I referred to earlier. The white paper also focuses on results, on outcomes, and on monitoring progress in poverty reduction. Here, too, human rights have something to tell us. We can never be satisfied with reports confirming that projects or programmes have proceeded and been completed according to plan. We need to ask what the outcomes are, what has the programme achieved? Unless we focus on delivery for the individual, on ensuring that the efforts made actually reach him or her, we will not succeed. In a few developing countries we are getting there, conducting performance assessments and tracking the results of our combined efforts, our own and those of the country concerned. In this way we can assess whether the lives of the poor have actually changed for the better, whether they have actually been empowered. The beauty of the human rights perspective in development is that it focuses on the individual and human dignity – for all. Unless we see results at the individual level, we are not delivering.

In conclusion

As we proceed, we must never forget to listen to the poor. The World Bank study “Voices of the Poor”, based on interviews with more than 60 000 poor people on all continents, provides valuable insights. The report lets the poor speak for themselves.

Let us listen to the voice of one of them, Krasna Poliana from Bolivia. She says,

“No one cares about us. We have no rights whatsoever.”

Krasna is wrong. She has as many rights as you and me. But she is being denied her rights. The ultimate test of a rights-based approach to development is that we – together – succeed in proving her wrong. That we are able – through our joint efforts – to facilitate change in her life, to help her realise her rights. So that next time she will be able to say, “Someone really did care!” This is our moral obligation.