The poverty consensus: Some limitations of the 'popular agenda'

Poverty has arguably become the leading development agenda of the past decade and a poverty ‘consensus’ is said to have emerged in recent years, at least among key donors. On the surface, there appears to be agreement about what poverty is and how it might be measured, despite some lack of clarity over detail. But while the concern for poverty may have clarified the raison d’etre of aid it has done little to significantly change the practice of development or usher in fundamental institutional change. Neither does the so-called ‘poverty consensus’ signify a break from orthodox neo-liberal agendas which have exacerbated inequality. In part, this is because the apparent shift in priorities looks back as much as heralds a break with the past – the focus on poverty is conservative as it is radical. Finally, we argue that consensus is not necessarily a beneficial state of being, and urge that there be vigorous and robust debate among those involved in development studies and practice over questions of poverty. Still, can one really argue against a focus on poverty – and still have friends? These issues and questions are examined with an appreciation of the challenges facing a credible and independent New Zealand (NZAID) approach to poverty.