ONE of the huge global challenges today is the growing wealth gap between developed and developing countries which has worsened since the emergence of free trade and globalisation.
The emergence of advanced capitalism has seen rich countries continuing to become wealthier and the poor countries getting poorer.
There have been a few exceptions with some developing countries demonstrating the ability to become industrialised and economically powerful.
However, the overall global situation is that the overwhelming number of developing countries still remains mired in poverty and under-development.
During the period of the world socialist system there was some hope that the gap would have been narrowed as socialism offered an alternative ideological/economic development model.
But with the collapse of the socialist system, there is only one economic development path which is available.
Historically, the problem has always been more the equitable distribution of wealth rather than the volume of wealth.
Capitalism has been regarded as a more effective and efficient producer of wealth but has a poor system of distribution of wealth and, therefore, it creates a situation where a few have too much wealth and many very little or no wealth.
On the other hand, socialism is regarded as being more effective in ensuring a more equitable distribution of wealth but not an efficient and effective producer of wealth.
Some therefore argue that a somewhat hybrid system of socialism and capitalism be developed as an alternative socio-economic developmental model.
The logic of this argument is sound but what is logical is not always practically feasible, even though China could be cited as an example of this hybrid system and, to a larger extent, it has been successful. So the debate on this issue will go on because the reality is the world cannot continue to exist under the system of too many “have nots” and a few with too much.
According to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), in 1998, the world’s 225 richest people had a combined wealth of US$1 trillion.
That was equal to the combined annual income of the world’s 2.5 billion poorest people.  While global GNP grew 40 percent between 1970 and 1985 (suggesting widening prosperity), the number of poor grew by 17 percent.
Although 200 million people saw their incomes fall between 1965 and 1980, more than one billion people experienced a drop from 1980 to 1993.
UNDP reported in 1996 that 100 countries were worse off than 15 years ago, while three decades ago, the people in well-to-do countries were 30 times better off than those in countries where the poorest 20 percent of the world’s people live.
By 1998, this gap had widened to 82 times (up from 61 times since 1996).
In 1998, that 20 percent of the world’s people living in the highest-income countries accounted for 86 percent of total private consumption expenditures while the poorest 20 percent accounted for only 1.3 percent.
These facts illustrate the stark realities of the inequitable distribution of wealth globally and the detrimental socio-economic consequence it is having on the poor.
And that is why the late President Dr. Cheddi Jagan, in and out of government, persistently advocated that there should be development with a human face because while there has been tremendous scientific and technological advancement and a huge increase in production, the lives of the majority of ordinary people have not improved proportionally.
Dr. Jagan eventually developed and expanded the concept of a New Global Human Order (NGHO) which advocates an international system that would require, for instance, changing policies of foreign aid and trade; reducing the debt burden; and giving a much more meaningful voice to, and collaboration with, small, poor and disadvantaged nations.
This document was adopted by the UN but since then, little has been done.
Therefore, much more needs to be done to bring back the issue on the front burner because it is a burning global issue which needs urgent attention.