Calvin, John (1509–64)

JOHN CALVIN CRITICIZED the French CatholicChurch’s interpretation of the Bible. He turned toProtestantism for fresh ideas, even though quite a num-ber of so-called heretics were burned at the stake fortheir dissident ideas. Calvin moved around constantly,until he settled in Geneva, and when he died, his ver-sion of Protestantism, instead of the one propagated byMartin Luther, increased in popularity.

Even though Calvin insisted that church and stateshould be separate, he believed the state should be runaccording to Christian principles. The government hadto be theocratic. After all, God was primary, and God’sideas were the foundation for the whole of society.Calvinism contained views on all aspects of life: poli-tics, economics, and culture. Regrettably, Calvin be-lieved man was essentially sinful and nothing but God’spredestination for salvation in heaven could save a per-son. Other human beings were condemned to hell.

Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) expressed that hu-mans are alone, nasty, brutal, and aggressive in a moredirect political meaning in his book Leviathan. Even ifone led a perfect sinless life, one might still go to hell, asdecided by God, but at least one died with inner peace.

As an individual, one was to make certain decisions.You and nobody else could make the decision as towhich way to go—even though, of course, in the veryend God’s word overruled everything.

Besides the centrality of God, Calvin also empha-sized the importance of the individual rather than thatof the organized church (the pope’s followers in Rome).Max Weber, in his Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Cap-italism, encouraged the individual to work industriouslyand never wastefully on this earth, rather than seeinglife on earth as passive preparation for the afterlife ofhell, heaven, or purgatory. Rational capitalism needsongoing investment. It needs an individual’s asceticlifestyle rather than wasting money made in business onpersonal luxury or indulgences such as the building ofcastles, gambling, or fanciful clothes, or in Thorsten Ve-blen’s words, “conspicuous consumption.”

Personal wealth could be seen as a favor from God,maybe even as a sign of predestination. This, of course,meant that one would have to work as hard as possibleto receive this sign. Material prosperity was now seen aspositive, not as a sign of greed and exploitation. MaxWeber sees this ascetic lifestyle as encouraging capitalistproduction and behavior; he links the Calvinist ethic offrugality and serving God to the “spirit of capitalism,”

WORLDPOVERTY

C

109

the “accumulation of wealth” in a continuous, rationalmanner, rather than that capitalism comes aboutthrough economic changes, as Karl Marx analyzed it.According to Weber, because of Calvinism, capitalismdeveloped in northern Europe and not in China (Confu-cianism), India (Hinduism), or the Arab world (Islam).

Weber understands Calvinism as breaking throughthe feudal order and preparing the ground for the ac-ceptance of private profits and capitalism. The feudalpolitical, economic, and cultural order fell apart andCalvinism was one of the responses. However, Calvinnever advocated capitalism; he lived a God-fearing lifeon earth, but he did emphasize the importance of theindividual and his decision for leading a life as God hadintended—and the individual is also the key decision-maker in capitalism.

Calvin was no revolutionary. Until the end he advo-cated “render unto God what is due to God and to Cae-sar what is due to Caesar.” Calvin advocated obedienceto political authority, as Jesus had done earlier, but oncethe individual was set free from papal edicts, he was alsoset free economically. The unintended consequences ofCalvinism led to capitalist industrialization and break-throughs in the natural sciences. Protestantism, particu-larly in its Calvinistic form, is essentially individualisticin its outlook. Salvation is a matter between the individ-ual and his or her creator in Protestantism, even thoughthe ultimate decision may be a rather one-sided affairand every individual is to work for the greater glory ofGod. Calvinism became the ideology of the newly risenbourgeoisie.

SEE ALSO: Catholic Church; Protestant Churches; Protes-tant Ethics; Religion.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Christopher Hill, Society and Puritanism inPre-revolutionary England (St. Martin’s Press, 1997); The JohnCalvin Center, www.johncalvin.com (cited July 2005); RalphH. Tawney, Religion and the Rise of Capitalism (Murray, 1926);Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism(Allen & Unwin, 1976).

WOLFGANG DECKERS

AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

CambodiaCAMBODIA IS A country of some 11 million peoplelocated in tropical mainland southeast Asia. The major-

ity of the people are involved with subsistence rice agri-culture. Despite being home to the powerful and so-cially and technologically advanced Khmer Empire,Cambodia suffered from colonization by the French,and then monstrous misrule by Pol Pot and the KhmerRouge, the communist Cambodians who seized powerin the chaotic scenes following the defeat of Americanforces in Vietnam. The Khmer Rouge regime murderedan unknown number of Cambodians either directly orthrough overwork and starvation.

The United Nations reports that poverty in Cambo-dia is characterized by low income and consumption,poor nutritional status, low educational attainment, lit-tle access to public services including school and healthservices, little access to economic opportunities, vulner-ability to external shocks, and exclusion from eco-nomic, social, and political processes. Poverty has alsocontributed to the spread of HIV/AIDS.

Additionally, one of the legacies of Khmer Rougerule has been the destruction of the intelligentsia in thecountry and, hence, the effects of poverty are exacer-bated by the lack of medical, teaching, and scientificprofessionals, whose role in alleviating some of the ef-fects of poverty is essential. Approximately 90 percentof the poor are located in rural areas, where incomesand educational and economic opportunities are lowerthan in the small urban areas. Around 40 percent ofrural people and 36 percent of the population as awhole live below the poverty line of $1 per day.

The government of Cambodia has established apoverty monitoring and assessment mechanism and isalso working with neighbors and with donor nationsand organizations to reduce poverty. Priority policygoals include the provision of education for all andawareness of health issues. Basic minimum needs forpeople in rural locations are being established with aview to strategy formulation. The government has alsobeen working to develop some export industries to gen-erate income, although at a very low level.

However, low levels of capacity in the government,together with the threat of pervasive corruption in gov-ernment, threaten to reduce the effectiveness of govern-ment achievements. These problems are worsened bypoor resource management, the presence of unex-ploded ordnance such as mines and bombs across muchof the country, and unresolved issues relating to theprevious genocide.

Tackling poverty will require considerable strength-ening of civil society institutions to promote greatergovernment and private-sector accountability. Promo-tion of potentially valuable economic activities such as

110 Cambodia

tourism, garment manufacture, and exploitation of nat-ural resources must also continue. However, the greatlack of government resources has prevented necessaryfunding of health and education services and is alsothreatening to derail the long-running, multilateralprocess aimed at bringing to justice former members ofthe Khmer Rouge.

Human Development Index Rank: 130Human Poverty Index Rank: 81

SEE ALSO: Communism; Corruption; Rural Deprivation;Starvation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Henry Kamm, Cambodia: Report from aStricken Land (Arcade Publishing, 1998); “Kingdom of Cam-bodia, Poverty Reduction Strategy,” Paper Preparation StatusReport, www.imf.org (cited July 2005); United NationsPoverty Net, “Cambodia: Achieving Poverty Targets,”www.un.org (cited July 2005); World Bank, “Cambodia:Country Brief,” www.worldbank.org (cited July 2005).

JOHN WALSH

SHINAWATRA UNIVERSITY

CameroonIN THE LOW-INCOME western African nation ofCameroon, where 48 percent of the population livebelow the national poverty line and where almost one-third of the people are unemployed, inequality contin-ues to thrive. The lowest 10 percent of the populationshare less than two percent of national income, whilethe richest 10 percent possess 36.6 percent. Over halfof Cameroon’s population lives on less than $2 per day.Cameroon continues to be dominated by the agricul-tural economic sector, in which 70 percent of Cameroo-nians labor.

Democracy has made slow inroads in this country,but the ruling ethnic oligarchy has achieved relative sta-bility by promoting the agricultural and petroleumsectors and through improved infrastructure. In con-junction with the International Monetary Fund (IMF)and the World Bank, Cameroonian officials have insti-tuted economic reforms that include poverty reductionand increased privatization.

Cameroon’s population suffers from low life ex-pectancy, and the median age is 18.6 years. Some 41.7percent of the population are under 14 years of age. Be-

cause Cameroonians have a 40.2 percent chance of notsurviving to see their 40th birthday, only 3.3 percentlive past the age of 65. Approximately 42 percent of thepopulation have no sustainable access to an improvedwater supply, and 21 percent lack sustainable access toimproved sanitation.

The HIV/AIDS epidemic has become a majorthreat to Cameroonian health, and the 6.9 percentprevalence rate is a constant drain on the country’s re-sources. By 2003 estimates, some 560,000 Camerooni-ans were living with HIV/AIDS, and 49,000 individualshad died from this disease. Other health problems in-clude very high risks of contracting food and water-borne diseases such as bacterial diarrhea, hepatitis A,and typhoid fever. Under the guidance of the CarterCenter, health officials and local groups have waged waragainst river blindness, which has affected an estimated5.1 million Cameroonians. This debilitating disease isspread by bites of the blackflies that inhabit fast-flowingrivers.

In 1997 in conjunction with the Carter Center,Cameroon successfully eradicated Guinea worm dis-ease, which is caused by contact with infected water. Insome areas, vectorborne diseases such as malaria andyellow fever pose a serious threat, as do schistosomiasisand meningococcal meningitis. Health problems arecomplicated by the fact that Cameroon has only 0.1physician and 2.6 hospital beds for every 1,000 people.

Children in Cameroon suffer disproportionatelyfrom poverty, and some 22.1 percent of Cameroonianchildren are malnourished. Infant mortality is estimatedat 68.26 deaths per 1,000 live births. Poverty is respon-sible in great part for the mortality rate of 166 for chil-dren under the age of 5. Less than one-quarter ofCameroonian children receive oral rehydration therapywhen necessary, and almost one-third lack access to af-fordable drugs. The result is that children die from whatshould be treatable diseases. Cameroon has improvedits childhood immunization rates in recent years. In2002, the measles immunization rate for infants was 62percent, and the tuberculosis rate was 77 percent. By2003, 61 percent of all children between the ages of 12and 23 months had been immunized against measles,and 73 percent had received DPT3 immunizations.

Cameroonian women continue to suffer from thehigh fertility rate of 4.47 children per woman. Barely aquarter (26 percent) of Cameroonian females betweenthe ages of 15 and 49 use contraception, and the adoles-cent fertility rate of 123 per 1,000 live births is unac-ceptably high. Cameroon’s maternal mortality rate of730 per 100,000 live births also poses problems for

Cameroon 111

health authorities. Since the mid-1990s, the Cameroon-ian government has pledged to end sex discriminationand has instituted new policies and programs that pro-mote education and opportunities for women andwhich place increased attention on reproductive health.By the beginning of the 21st century, 60 percent of allbirths were attended by trained health workers.

While 84.7 percent of Cameroonian males are liter-ate, almost one-quarter (26.6 percent) of females lackthis necessary skill. Literacy rates have improved overthe last decades. Between 1990 and 2000, the rate of il-literacy among males and females dropped from 43.8 to20.9 percent and from 69.0 to 36.3 percent, respectively.Primary education is now free, and between 1999 and2003, Cameroon saw a rise of 17 percent in total pri-mary school enrollment and a 15 percent increase in thenumber of females completing primary school.

Human Development Index Rank: 148Human Poverty Index Rank: 67

SEE ALSO: Children and Poverty; Disease and Poverty;HIV/AIDS; International Monetary Fund.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Commission on the Status of Women,“Cameroon,” www.un.org (cited July 2005); Human Devel-opment Reports, “Cameroon,” www.undp.org (cited July2005); Social Watch, “Cameroon,” www.socwatch.org (citedJuly 2005); UNICEF, “Cameroon,” www.unicef.org (citedJuly 2005); World Bank, “Cameroon,” www.worldbank.org(cited July 2005); World Health Organization, “Cameroon,”www.who.int (cited July 2005).

ELIZABETH PURDY, PH.D.INDEPENDENT SCHOLAR

Campus CompactCAMPUS COMPACT IS a consortium of over 900university and college presidents, representing morethan five million students, across the United States,whose stated mission is to advance the public purposesof colleges and universities by deepening their ability toimprove community life and to educate students forcivic and social responsibility.

The organization was founded in 1985 by the presi-dents of three private universities (Brown, Georgetown,and Stanford) as well as by the president of the Educa-tion Commission of the States, an organization that

serves a clearinghouse function for advising educationinstitutions on helping state leaders shape educationalpolicies. At the time, the media was apt to portray col-lege students as nothing more than money-hungry andself-centered individuals who were unconcerned withthe world around them.

The four institutional presidents felt that that per-ception was incorrect and wanted to demonstrate thatcollege students could make a difference in the lives oftheir fellow Americans. Thus, they founded CampusCompact to give students the opportunity to make thatdifference through voluntary work in their communi-ties.

Through Campus Compact, students are taught theimportance of public service and helping to improvethe lives of those persons less fortunate than them-selves. To this end, Campus Compact provides servicesto its member schools, such as training for students, fac-ulty members, and administrators; research on pro-grams that work; advocacy toward volunteer communitypartnerships; and leadership development.

The success of this organization can be measured interms of organizational growth and student participa-tion in volunteer opportunities. For example, CampusCompact estimates that student volunteers at membercampuses contribute at least $4.45 billion per year inservices to their communities. Also, Campus Compacthas enjoyed a large increase in both membership and ac-tivities in the five-year period between 1998 and 2003,the last year for which statistics are available.

Membership had increased from 548 to 924, andthe percentage of students on member campuses whowere volunteering their time had increased more thanthreefold, from 10 percent to 36 percent. Faculty in-volvement had increased from 10,800 to 22,000 facultyvolunteers. Volunteers participated in a variety of pro-grams, including those dealing with widespread hunger,housing and homelessness, environmental issues, andvoting rights.

While Campus Compact is a national organizationit also has state Compacts in each of the 31 states thathave participating universities. The state Compacts areengaged in a variety of activities in support of the mis-sion of the national Compact. For example, the Califor-nia Compact has organized 40 conferences, workshops,and other events to provide training and opportunitiesto volunteers and others within their communities. InIndiana, the Compact became involved in 522 literacyprograms, 85 percent of which resulted in an improve-ment in reading skills. The ability to read and write canhave a major impact on helping people lift themselves

112 Campus Compact

out of poverty by providing them with better opportu-nities to succeed.

SEE ALSO: Charity; Education; Deprivation; Nongovern-mental Organizations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Campus Compact, www.compact.org(cited November 2005); Jan Torres, Benchmarks for Campus-Community Compacts (Campus Compact, 2000).

LAWRENCE M. SALINGER

ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY, JONESBORO

CanadaTHROUGHOUT THE DECADE of the 1990s theUnited Nations Human Development Index regularlyranked Canada first in its quality of life survey. Whilethis ranking has slipped slightly in recent years, Canadacontinues to be presented as one of the most affluentnations in the developed world.

This image, combined with Canada’s vast natural re-sources, strong manufacturing sector, growing techno-logical industries, and history of strong social policies,suggests that Canada provides a secure “safety net” toprotect its citizens from the consequences of poverty.Despite this assumption, Canada’s poverty rate remainsinordinately high. According to a 1996 United NationsChildren’s Fund report, the poverty rate for familieswith children in Canada was the second highest of 18industrialized nations, double the poverty rate of theNetherlands and six times higher than that of Finlandor Sweden.

While these figures provide a shocking counter-point to Canada’s affluent image, conditions are worsefor Canada’s indigenous peoples, who have been iso-lated in remote communities and excluded from re-source and industrial development. Consequently,despite its legacy of social security and welfare reformfollowing World War II, the Canadian state has failed toeffectively address poverty as a social issue. Rather thanstrengthen the state’s role, policy changes since the1980s have abandoned a universal approach and haveincreasingly returned social services in Canada to a“residual” model relying on private charity, a transitionthat drew effectively on the antiwelfare backlashthroughout the 1990s and which has resurrected oldersocial attitudes separating the “deserving” from the“undeserving” poor.

Well into the 20th century in Canada, the state hadlittle direct role in providing for social welfare. The re-sistance to government involvement concerning socialwelfare reflected the socioeconomic structure ofCanada during the mid-19th century. In a predomi-nantly rural nation whose economy was driven by boththe agricultural and resources sectors, it was assumedthat anyone who was capable of working could findgainful employment and that charity would naturallyaccount for the deserving poor.

Consequently poverty relief was based on a resid-ual model where destitute individuals were expected toturn to their families, church, and philanthropic orga-nizations, and only subsequently municipal or provin-cial governments, for relief. The residual system placedthe emphasis on family and the local community to de-termine the level at which the indigent would be sup-ported, and allowed for a simplistic separation at thecommunity level between the deserving and undeserv-ing poor. Essentially, outside of direct family-basedcharity, only those individuals whom the communitydeemed to deserve it would receive support. The eld-erly, widows with small children, the blind and deaf,and men crippled through work-related injuries couldexpect to receive community support.

Others, who were characterized as simply unwillingto work, could not find support. The underlying as-sumption behind this restrictive measure was the beliefthat charity inevitably produced dependency. Conse-quently, following practices that dated back to the Eliz-abethan Poor Laws, relief payments were customarilykept below the lowest level of wages that could beearned in the community and, to further discourage de-pendence, often required able-bodied recipients to per-form some community service (cutting logs, breakingrocks, or sweeping the streets). These payments wereusually made in kind (necessary goods and supplies), asit was generally assumed that individuals who were inca-pable of supporting themselves could not effectivelymanage cash relief payments.

In urban areas, this was particularly true in the caseof relief provided to temporarily unemployed workers,seasonal workers, or recent immigrants, who were seento have mismanaged their personal finances and whowere often perceived to have succumbed to vices suchas drinking or gambling.

In this manner, relief from poverty was dependenton both community attitudes (often toward the appli-cant personally) and local economic circumstances.This emphasis on community standards inevitably in-creased surveillance of relief recipients and encouraged

Canada 113

the enforcement of strict codes of personal moralityand behavior.

The initial crisis for the residual system began in thelate 19th century as rapid urbanization and industrial-ization radically altered the socioeconomic nature ofCanadian society. Canada’s urban population increaseddramatically in the late 19th and early 20th centuriesfrom only 13 percent in 1851, to 35 percent in 1901,and 47 percent by 1921. While urbanization and indus-trialization provided new opportunities for some Cana-dians, for unskilled workers and recent immigrants thelow wages, sporadic employment, and poor living con-ditions of urban tenements also heightened their vul-nerability to poverty.

Although workers in skilled trades were able to es-tablish contributory benevolent societies to providelimited security from illness, injury, or temporary un-employment, this option was beyond the reach of themajority of Canadian workers who lived at or slightlyabove the poverty line. These issues were highlighted bythe Royal Commission on the Relations of Labour andCapital (1887), which revealed the exploitative workingconditions and substandard housing experienced byCanadian workers. While rural workers had usuallybeen able to turn to family for short-term assistance, the

demographic dislocation caused by urbanization sev-ered many of these traditional family ties and forced anincreasing reliance on private, church, and state systemsof social welfare.

Consequently the late 19th century saw both an in-crease in working-class agitation for social reform, andthe expansion of a middle-class reform movement.While labor leaders focused on unionization, improvedworking conditions, and higher wages as solutions topoverty, middle-class social reformers were more con-cerned with transforming the working-class itself tomake workers both more industrious and more thrifty.

Although these middle-class reformers were deeplyconcerned with issues such as child poverty, they fre-quently blamed the structure of working class families,rather than low wages, for the poor living conditions ex-perienced by working-class children. In response to thisconcern with child poverty, which the middle class in-trinsically associated with juvenile delinquency, thestate empowered private agencies, such as J.J. Kelso’sChildren’s Aid Society (1887), to act to protect childrenby removing neglected children, and those in danger ofbecoming delinquents, from their homes.

In many instances these categorizations representedlittle more than a clash between the normative assump-tions of middle-class social reformers and the realitiesof working-class family-oriented economic strategies,which frequently required the economic contributionsof children and adolescents. Of particular concern tomiddle-class reformers was the practice of taking inpaying boarders, either by having opposite-sex childrenshare the same bedroom or by having male boardersshare a room with adolescent boys. While working-classfamilies viewed these practices as necessary economicarrangements, middle-class reformers viewed thesearrangements as potentially dangerous sources of im-morality.

Beyond its support of quasi-state agencies such asthe Children’s Aid Society and its financial support ofprivate institutions such as asylums for the insane or re-formatories for delinquents, the state’s involvementwith social welfare in the early 20th century was largelyrestricted to efforts to address the growing issue ofpoverty among the elderly. At the federal level the firstattempt to address this issue was the Government An-

114 Canada

One of the most developed nations, Canada still wrestles withissues of poverty and state support of the “deserving poor.”

Canada’s social welfare system had a directinfluence on the lives of all Canadians.

nuities Act (1908), which allowed individuals to con-tribute to government-secured pension funds.

However, as with other private pension schemes,this did little to address the needs of the average workerwho lacked the surplus income to contribute toward apension. In 1927 the federal government passed the OldAge Pensions Act, in which the federal governmentfunded 50 percent (increased to 75 percent in 1931) ofprovincial spending on old-age pensions. However, the“means-tested” qualifications continued to assume thatfamily, not the state, had the primary responsibility forthe care of the elderly.

While the need to support crippled soldiers andwar widows following the First World War served to le-gitimize the state’s role in maintaining social welfare, be-yond the establishment of various mothers’ allowanceprograms at the provincial level, little was done to re-structure the residual model of social welfare inCanada. This failure was evident in Canada’s responseto the Depression, which emphasized local responsibil-ity for relief programs with only minimal support fromprovincial or federal agencies.

While Canadian Prime Minister R.B. Bennett’s Em-ployment and Social Insurance Act (1935) attempted toestablish a national system of unemployment insur-ance, these efforts were sidetracked by constitutionalobjections. This failure contributed to Bennett’s elec-toral defeat by W.L. Mackenzie King, who turned thejurisdictional questions raised by Bennett’s policiesover to the protracted Royal Commission on Domin-ion-Provincial Relations (1937–40). Following constitu-tional alterations, which gave the federal governmentincreased powers over taxation and employment poli-cies, Mackenzie King’s Unemployment Insurance Act(1940) initiated Canada’s transformation into a modernwelfare state.

Beginning in the early 1950s and continuingthroughout the 1960s, numerous pieces of legislationwere introduced to expand and support the creation ofa universal social safety net within Canada. Key ele-ments in this legislative initiative were the Old Age Se-curity and Old Age Assistance Acts (1951), which werereplaced by the Canada Pension Plan (1965) and theGuaranteed Income Supplement (1966), the Unemploy-ment Assistance Act (1956), and the Canada AssistancePlan (1966).

Combined with a nationally funded healthcare sys-tem, by the early 1970s Canada’s social welfare systemhad a direct influence on the lives of all Canadians. Thisswitch to an institutional model of welfare reflected areversal of the earlier social attitudes that had character-

ized the residual model. Under this institutional sys-tem, Canadians qualified for government assistancesimply by virtue of their citizenship. Social assistancewas transformed from charitable acts intended to assistthe “deserving poor” to a government mandate, whichreflected the state’s obligation to protect all Canadians.This changing attitude was most evident in the CanadaAssistance Plan, which, by providing direct financial as-sistance to the working-poor, sought to break the spiralof intergenerational poverty.

However, as the costs of these institutional pro-grams increased through the 1970s and 1980s, the po-tential to achieve a fundamental restructuring ofCanadian society was not realized. Rather than elimi-nating poverty, Canada’s social safety net simply func-tioned as an ameliorative system, which sought toprovide continued social stability for capital develop-ment.

By the mid-1980s the postinstitutional decline ofCanada’s welfare system was already evident and,throughout the 1990s, the rapid reduction of federalfunding for welfare programs essentially returnedCanada to a residual model as the burden of poverty re-lief was increasingly shifted back to charitable institu-tions. This process was contributed to by a virulentbacklash against welfare programs throughout the1990s, which recharacterized poverty as a problem forthe lazy and irresponsible.

One example of this process can be seen in thetransformation of Canada’s unemployment insuranceprogram during the 1990s from an almost universal sys-tem into an increasingly restrictive and punitive pro-gram where only 40 percent of all applicants qualify forbenefits. Partially, this transition also reflects structuralchanges to Canada’s economy, which have increasinglyemphasized part-time and contract labor, changes thathave increased the financial pressure on the workingpoor while undermining the minimal security that gov-ernment programs had previously provided. For work-ing families with young children, this transition hasbeen particularly traumatic. Between 1984 and 1996government assistance for working families with chil-dren was reduced by $800 million (Canadian).

In 1996 the long-standing Canada Assistance Planwas replaced by the Canadian Health and Social Trans-

Canada 115

By the mid-1980s the decline of Canada’swelfare system was already evident.

fer, which further reduced federal funding for socialservices. A clear indication of the effect of these pro-gram changes on poor families can be seen in the expan-sion of charitable food bank programs across Canada,increasing from 75 food banks in 1984 to 625 in 1996.Consequently, despite the Canadian federal govern-ment’s commitment in 1989 to eliminate child povertyby the year 2000, poverty has continued to be a dailyissue for many Canadian families.

According to Statistics Canada’s 2003 figures, 52.5percent of children in female-headed, single-parent fam-ilies live below its “low income cutoff” line. WhileCanada’s rate of child poverty has improved since themid-1990s, dropping from 23.6 percent in 1996 to 17.6percent in 2003, this rate remains far higher than inwestern Europe. As a result, given the increased busi-ness reliance on part-time and contract work, the in-creased utilization of food banks by working familieswith children, and the reduction of real earning acrossthe three lowest economic quintiles, it seems evidentthat poverty will continue to be a major social issue forCanada.

Human Development Index Rank: 5Human Poverty Index Rank: 9 (HPI-2)

SEE ALSO: Capability Measure of Poverty; Children’s AidSociety; Deserving Poor; Rural Deprivation; Social Insurance(Universal); United States; Urbanization; Welfare Depen-dence; Welfare State.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Raymond Blake et al., The Welfare State inCanada: Past, Present and Future (Irwin Publishing, 1997);Raymond Blake and Jeff Kashen, Social Welfare Policy inCanada: Historical Readings (Copp Clark, 1995); DennisGuest, The Emergence of Social Security in Canada (UBC Press,1997); Rodney S. Haddow, Poverty Reform in Canada,1958–1978: State and Class Influences on Policy Making(McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1993); Mel Hurtig, Pay theRent of Feed the Kids: the Tragedy and Disgrace of Poverty inCanada (McClelland and Stewart, 1999); Wendy McKeen,Money in Their Own Name: The Feminist Voice in Poverty De-bate in Canada, 1970–1995 (University of Toronto Press,2004); Allan Moscovitch and Jim Albert, eds., The “Benevo-lent” State: The Growth of Welfare in Canada (GaramondPress, 1987); Mariana Valverde, The Age of Light, Soap andWater: Moral Reform in English Canada, 1885–1925 (McClel-land and Stewart, 1991).

CHRISTOPHER DAVID O’SHEA

UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH

Capability Measure of PovertyTHE CAPABILITY MEASURE of poverty (CMP) is aresponse to the growing recognition that incomepoverty is only a part of what constitutes conditions ofpoverty. The impetus for developing capability mea-sures of poverty comes from the 1996 Human Develop-ment Report (HDR), produced by the United NationsDevelopment Program (UNDP).

In that report, human development is defined in re-lation to the expansion of capabilities while deprivationis defined as the lack of basic or necessary capabilities.The 1996 HDR attempted to better understand boththe extent of poverty and experiences of poverty byconsidering factors beyond income. Addressing linksbetween poverty and human development and attempt-ing to assess the multiple needs of poor people, the re-port introduced the CMP criteria to provide amultidimensional measure of deprivation. The capabil-ity measure of poverty shifts focus from means orinput, such as income, toward ends by focusing on out-comes that reflect people’s quality of life. Emphasis isplaced on understanding how, and under what circum-stances, people are able to act toward meeting theirneeds.

The CMP focuses on the percentage of people wholack basic or essential capabilities that are necessary toallow people to escape income poverty in a manner thatcan be sustained. Of particular concern is the lack ofthree basic capabilities for which the CMP provides acomposite index. The first is the lack of nourishmentand health as reflected in the proportion of childrenunder 5 years old who are underweight. The secondconcerns the capability for healthy reproduction, asrepresented by the proportion of births unattended bypeople with proper training. The third factor is the ex-tent of female illiteracy, which expresses a lack of capa-bility to access education.

These factors are taken to speak to broader issues,such as overall health and nutrition and access to healthservices as a whole and to education. Significantly themeasures emphasize women’s deprivation because thishas such a crucial impact on the development of fami-lies and social relations.

Applying the capability measure of poverty sug-gests that almost twice as many people in developingcountries are poor than would be identified as such ifone focused only on those below the income povertyline. Looking at poverty beyond the lack of income andaddressing capability poverty reveal that the number ofpoor people in developing countries may be underesti-

116 Capability Measure of Poverty

mated by almost 700 million people where only incomepoverty is accounted for. In addition to the problem ofunderestimating the extent of actual poverty, failure toimprove people’s capabilities will contribute to the fur-ther growth of income poverty.

The Human Development Report of 1996 con-cluded that poverty cannot be eradicated simply by in-creasing income. Properly addressing poverty alsorequires a broadening of human capabilities as well asthe productive deployment of those capabilities.

More recently there have been efforts to developmore comprehensive or refined measures of people’scapabilities. Among the difficulties facing more compre-hensive approaches remains the lack of available dataacross contexts.

Perhaps the most influential contribution to a capa-bility measure of poverty is offered in the work of theeconomist and Nobel laureate Amartya Sen. Sen notesthat the relationship between income and capabilitiescan vary greatly between communities and between in-dividuals in the same community. Thus a numericalpoverty line based on means such as income does notaddress variations in personal or social characteristics.Sen’s work benefits from comparative analysis, whichshows, as in comparisons between the United Statesand Europe or China and India, that countries with asimilar Gross Domestic Product (GDP) can showwidely differing capabilities for survival and education.

SEE ALSO: Absolute-Income-Based Measures of Poverty;Income; Indicators of Poverty; Sen, Amartya; Sen Index.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. S. Alkire, Valuing Freedom: Sen’s Capabil-ity Approach and Poverty Reduction (Oxford University Press,2005); W. Kuklys, Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach: Theoret-ical Insights and Empirical Applications (Springer-Verlag NewYork, 2005); Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom (Knopf,2000).

JEFF SHANTZ

YORK UNIVERSITY

Cape VerdePOVERTY IN THE ARCHIPELAGO of Cape Verde isa result of lack of natural resources, a crowded job mar-ket, and poor agricultural conditions. Although in themid-1990s, nearly half of the population of Cape Verdelived below the national poverty line, conditions have

steadily improved and the United Nations Develop-ment Program (UNDP) has recently declared the islandsto be a medium developed country (MDC). Existing inthis developmental margin means that while some ofCape Verde’s poverty problem has been alleviated, thecountry is still a nation at risk of pervasive impoverish-ment. The persistent problems affecting poverty inCape Verde include a high unemployment rate (16 per-cent) and the fact that at best, Cape Verde can supplyfood for only 15 percent of its population, relying heav-ily on international food aid.

Emigration and migration as a result of insufficientresources and opportunities have been a consistenttheme in the history of Cape Verde. Today it is esti-mated that as many Cape Verdeans live outside thecountry as within, and the economy is greatly bolsteredby support from its diasporan community. This trendof emigration is a major factor stifling the developmentof Cape Verde, because half of the employable popula-tion works in foreign markets. Domestic migration hasoverwhelmingly been from rural to urban areas, wherewell over half the population resides, and where theservice and manufacturing industries provide 70 per-cent of the nation’s jobs.

This migration has caused a great strain on availablesocial services in city centers and the saturation of thejob market, which accounts for some of the unemploy-ment and poverty in Cape Verde. The government ofCape Verde has both implemented a welfare programand has widely instituted public works projects, whichprovide permanent and temporary employment as wellas public services in order to alleviate these pressures.However, poverty in Cape Verde is frequently believedto be a result of the structural inferiority of a young na-tion, in regard to the equitable dispersion of employ-ment, healthcare, education, and sanitation facilitiesand the improper management of the public works pro-grams. The country had only been independent for 30years in 2005.

A large portion of the poverty in Cape Verde lies inthe rural regions, where a quarter of the employed pop-ulation shares less than seven percent of the Gross Do-mestic Product. Poor agricultural conditions resultingfrom persistent drought and a nationwide scarcity offresh water yield erratic harvests from year to year. Peri-

Cape Verde 117

Poverty in Cape Verde is dependent on variables outside the citizens’ control.

odic famine as a result of crop decimation is the causeof widespread hunger and poverty on the islands.

Farmers or agriculturalists in Cape Verde maintaina tenuous existence wherein their economic security isfrequently upset by a harsh climate, which is known fordecimating entire harvests every few years. This level ofeconomic risk and uncertainly extends beyond the agri-cultural sector to be a theme for Cape Verde’s economicfragility. Relying heavily on international aid (both nu-tritional and monetary), support from the diasporancommunity and international trade, all of which are notsecure resource streams, poverty in Cape Verde is de-pendent on variables that are outside the citizens’ con-trol, and thus subject to sporadic fluctuation. WhileCape Verde is now enjoying a period of economicgrowth and prosperity, its future sustenance hangs inthe balance.

Human Development Index Rank: 105Human Poverty Index Rank: 45

SEE ALSO: Drought; Famine; Structural Dependency; Ur-banization; Welfare.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Country Profile: Cape Verde (EIU, 2005);Country Report: Cape Verde (EIU, 2005); Michel Lesourd, Etatet société aux îles du Cap-Vert (Karthala, 1995); Central Intelli-gence Agency, www.cia.gov (cited September 2005).

MATTHEW EVANS TETI

NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY

CapitalismTHE CHARACTER OF capitalism has been changingsince its inception. Great changes have taken place sincethe emergence of the capitalist mode of production,particularly in the second half of the 18th century,when the great Industrial Revolution was born, first inEngland, and then in other European countries. Laissezfaire capitalism, based on pure capitalism, or a perfectlycompetitive market model, was exercised in these coun-tries until the end of World War I (1914–18). AfterWorld War II (1939–45), capitalism transformed intomodern capitalism, which may also be called managed,welfare, guided, or regulated capitalism.

At present, the perfect market model or pure capi-talism is not exercised in any country of the world.Even the United States and the United Kingdom do not

have pure capitalism and are indeed exercising mixedeconomies. But their economies are still based on a free-market economy or capitalist mode of production,since the major role in these economies is played by theprivate sector.

DEFINITION OF CAPITALISM

Capitalism is a mode of production, based on the prin-ciples of institutional privatization, the maximization ofprofits, and a free-market economy. Under capitalism,all means of production are owned and operated by in-dividuals or firms with the sole consideration of the de-sire to earn a profit.

Sidney Webbs defines capitalism with the necessaryimplications of the system. He states that “by the term‘capitalism,’ we mean the particular stage in the devel-opment of industry and legal institutions in which thebulk of the workers find themselves divorced from theownership of the instruments of production in such away as to pass into the position of wage-earners whosesubsistence, security and personal freedom seem de-pendent on the will of a relatively small proportion ofthe nation, namely, those who own and, through theirlegal ownership, control the organization of land, themachinery and the labour forces of the community anddo so with the object of making for themselves individ-ual and private gains.”

FEATURES OF CAPITALISM

A wide study of capitalism reveals the important fea-tures or characteristics of this system with an assump-tion of laissez faire. The following are some of thecommon features of capitalism as experienced in differ-ent capitalist countries in the world.

The most important feature of capitalism, as expe-rienced in various capitalist countries, is the individualownership of private property and the existence of thesystem of inheritance. It results in the vital inequalitiesin respect to the distribution of wealth and property inthe society. Rich persons become richer and, on theother hand, the poor become poorer.

Moreover, capitalism also consists of the privateownership of the means of production, which are uti-lized exclusively by a few individuals in their own inter-est. The result is that the lion’s share of national incomegoes to a few rich people and the masses share the rest.

Economic freedom means the freedom of a pro-ducer or an individual to select his or her own enter-prise, to operate it on a contract or agreement basis, and

118 Capitalism

to utilize personal property and wealth in his or herown way. It is a very outstanding feature of capitalism.An individual has the full liberty to establish and oper-ate any firm in a capitalist society wherever he or shelikes, provided that he or she has the desired capital andability.

Another very important characteristic of capitalismis its operation on the basis of self-interest and theprofit motive. Under capitalism, the profit motive is themain inspiration of an individual to undertake any pro-ductive activity. Capitalism does not rely on the senti-ments and love of society, and all economic decisionsare made by an individual in order to get maximumprofit.

It was with this view that the classical economists,including Adam Smith and others, imagined an “Eco-nomic Man” under the capitalist mode of productionwho was merely a selfish and cruel person, and alwaysthought of his profit rather than that of the welfare ofthe society. Alfred Marshall has explained the Eco-nomic Man as a person “who was under no ethical in-fluence and who pursues pecuniary gain warily andenergetically, but mechanically and selfishly.” Thus, itwas a hypothetical man who is at least not found atpresent in the world, and who appeared after the emer-gence of the Industrial Revolution, especially in En-gland.

The other important feature of capitalism is thepresence of consumer’s sovereignty in a capitalist econ-omy. It is thought that under capitalism the “consumeris king,” which refers to the consumer’s sovereignty inthe real sense of the term. Broadly speaking, every con-sumer has a freedom of choice to get any service orcommodity from wherever he wishes to purchase it,provided he has the desire and the ability to purchasethe commodity or service. But in practice, since the in-come and the availability of goods and services are lim-ited, and there are state interventions, the consumer’ssovereignty is restricted even in the economies of theUnited States and the United Kingdom.

The open competition in the market, whether it isthe resource market or the goods and services market, isanother important feature of capitalism. All economicdecisions depend on the conditions of the market,which are made by the private owners of the firms orthe factories. Producers compete with each other to af-fect the consumer’s choice through the media of public-ity or advertising. They can depreciate the price orimprove the quality of the products and/or offer otherrebates or concessions to their customers. On the otherside, there is also competition among customers to get

the commodities who may offer a higher price for them.Similarly there is also a competition among the ownersof the various means of production, including land,labor, and capital.

Another remarkable feature of this economic sys-tem is the presence of class conflict in society. Society isdivided into two classes, the rich and the poor. Since therich people, small in number, dominate over the mil-lions who are poor and belong to the exploited class, itleads to the conflict between capital and labor in capital-istic countries. The class struggle in such economiesseems to be an inherent character, which does not haveany immediate solution.

The capitalist society is always followed by the in-equalities of income and wealth, a very important char-acteristic of such a society. A few rich people enjoy allsorts of conceivable luxuries, and, on the other hand,the masses do not find themselves in a position to geteven two square meals a day. The most painful thing isthat the gap between the rich and poor is continuouslygetting wider.

Every economic decision is governed by the pricemechanism in a free-market economy. The whole eco-nomic functioning in capitalism depends on the pricesystem, that is, the demand and supply of the com-modities and means of production determine theirprice in the market. Price is a very important factor incapitalism in order to operate the economic system andcontrol it.

The absence of central economic planning is also avery remarkable characteristic of a private-enterpriseeconomy. In such an economy producers and con-sumers, on the basis of the price mechanism, make theimportant economic decisions independently. Theeconomies of the United States and the United King-dom, characterized by the capitalist mode of produc-tion, do not have central planning. However, sucheconomies depend on microlevel planning.

ACHIEVEMENTS OF CAPITALISM

Capitalism, as experienced in various countries of theworld, has certain remarkable achievements. One of themain achievements of capitalism is its automatic func-tioning. This type of economy works out automatically

Capitalism 119

The masses do not find themselves in aposition to get even two square meals a day.

through the price system, as we have learned earlier. Itdoes not require any central and comprehensive plan-ning, but mainly depends on competition and the open-market economic system.

Under capitalism, the personal profit motive worksas the most powerful incentive. The producers in suchan economy always try to maximize their profits. Toachieve this objective, they manage and operate all eco-nomic activities in such a way that the target of maxi-mum production may be fulfilled at the lowest costwith the largest amount of profit. According to the lawof returns, it will be possible when the optimal use ofresources is ensured.

On the other hand, the functioning of capitalismalso provides incentives to the workers through higherwages, bonuses, and overtime. It improves the efficiencyof workers and all factors of production work in a co-ordinated manner and efficiently, which accelerates na-tional output and the economic growth of the country.

The incentive of profit stimulates entrepreneurs totake risks, and new avenues of production are explored,with the result that the growth of the country increasessignificantly and the standard of living of the peoplerises. In this respect, in the United States and Europeancapitalist economies, the economic system based on

personal profit motive has ensured a high level of pro-ductivity along with an increasing rate of per capita in-come and standard of living.

The economy of the United States generally sup-plies annually all sorts of goods and services abun-dantly, and even the common people of the countryenjoy them with pleasure. In this respect, Professor J.A.Schumpeter states: “The capitalist achievement doesnot typically consist in providing more silk stockingsfor queens but in bringing them within the reach of fac-tory girls in return for steadily decreasing amounts ofefforts. The capitalist process, not by coincidence butby virtue of its mechanism, progressively raises thestandard of life of the masses.”

Another very important achievement of the capital-ist economy, as observed in several capitalist countrieslike the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, andother European countries, has been the good chancesfor individuals. All factors of production, includingland, labor, capital, management, and entrepreneurs, getgood opportunities for progress in these countries.Moreover, the special features of a capitalist economy,such as the right of private property and inheritance,private profit motive, and personal freedom, have en-couraged productive forces to mobilize and direct all re-

120 Capitalism

For critics of capitalism, the entire society is assumed to be divided into two major classes—the rich and the poor, that is, the “haves” and the“have-nots.” The exploitation of the latter by the former gives rise to the class struggles in the society.

sources into productive works. Besides the fast develop-ments in different spheres of life, capitalist countrieshave attained remarkable progress in respect to techno-logical developments. Individual freedom in the U.S.economy, followed by the personal profit instinct, hasexplored new avenues.

The production of high-quality goods follows thelatest inventions, new processes, and technological de-velopments. U.S. technological developments are ad-vanced compared to the progress of technology in thecountries of other economic systems. In this respect,the United States has attained remarkable progress inthe development of space technology and cost-reducingtechnology.

In the capitalist economy, where people enjoy notonly economic freedom (that is, the freedom of con-sumption, freedom of production, and freedom of sav-ings and investments) but also political freedom,democracy is regarded as essential for the sound andregular progress of individuals in the country. It is withthis view that during the 20th century, the monarchy ofcapitalist countries was replaced by democracy. Even inEngland, the monarchy is merely formal and ornamen-tal; the real power is in the hands of the governmentelected by the people.

CRITICISM OR FAILURES OF CAPITALISM

Though there have been many remarkable achievementsof capitalism, it has also been criticized from all direc-tions. A capitalist economy, or a free-market economy,gives birth to useless and wasteful cutthroat competi-tion. It sometimes leads to sheer waste of money, time,and property on a large scale. Some economists may saya huge amount of money is wasted on publicity or ad-vertising. Moreover, the person who has employed alarge degree of resources in production and has beendefeated in the race may suffer from a big loss. Cut-throat competition does not ensure any correspondingsocial benefit to the public in general, though it may bein the interest of the firm concerned.

Capitalism has been criticized for the recurrence ofeconomic instability, particularly in Western capitalisteconomies. In such an economy, economic decisions aremade in the absence of planning on the basis of the de-mand of the customers.

The overestimation of effective demand by produc-ers in the prosperity period leads to the position ofoverproduction, and that further leads to the economicinstability in the economy. The Great Depression of the1930s is the best example for explaining economic insta-

bility, when capitalist countries were seriously underthe cloud of depression and were the victims of unem-ployment.

In the boom period, there may be a danger of infla-tion, which may cause large-scale suffering to the poorand create political instability in the country.

Under capitalism the entire society is assumed to bedivided into two major classes—the rich and the poor,that is, the “haves” and the “have-nots.” The exploita-tion of the latter by the former gives rise to the classstruggles in the society. The class struggle sometimescauses the replacement of capitalism by a socialistic pat-tern of society.

The economies of industrial countries or capitalistcountries assume that such an economy is supposed tobe stabilized at the level of full employment. Unfortu-nately, the assumption of full employment in the open-market economies failed. Many economists state thatthe capitalist economy may stabilize somewhere abovethe level of full employment because of various rigidi-ties and distortions in the economy.

It is a very serious charge against an economy basedon a price system that the capitalist economy promotesthe economic disparities in society. The general obser-vations of capitalist economies, particularly in the con-text of the U.S. economy, reveals that the distributionof income and wealth is quite uneven, and there is awide gap between the rich and the poor. Despite stateintervention, the gap between the two is improving. AsG.D.H. Cole observed, “there is a world of difference interms of happiness between the high priest and theslaves in the temple of industry.”

Free competition in a free-market economy leads tothe emergence of monopolies and the concentration ofeconomic power in the hands of a few people. It thusbecomes difficult for an ordinary producer to competewith them in the market. These big businesses, throughtheir command and control over the means of produc-tion, defeat small producers in the open-market compe-tition and establish monopolies in the market. Themonopolists, once holding control over the market, al-ways try to exploit consumers on a large scale by charg-ing high prices for their products.

Sometimes the capitalist is blamed for the misallo-cation and misuse of the means of production. Under

Capitalism 121

The monopolists, once in control, try toexploit consumers on a large scale.

capitalism, production is not undertaken merely to ful-fill the basic requirements of the poor people. Re-sources are generally used to produce luxury goods forthe rich, and the interests of the poor are crushed sig-nificantly.

The alignments of big industrial countries like theUnited States, Great Britain, France, Germany, Japan,and Russia, which are mostly capitalist, enforce theterms of trade against backward countries. Moreover,the policy of big industrial countries consists of apply-ing several restrictions against the under-developedcountries so as to bring down their growth and henceenhance their dependence on them. Ultimately, poorcountries have to depend largely on rich and powerfulcountries for undertaking their development programs,as we know that poor countries get their requirementsfulfilled through foreign aid exclusively extended by therich.

Their alignments also lead to several socioeconomicdistortions. Some historians have pointed out that thebig powerful countries may indeed take interest in pro-voking wars between two or more countries so thattheir leadership and supremacy may exist on the onehand, and their armament factories may be able toachieve success in selling arms to these countries, on theother.

ECONOMIC CRISIS UNDER CAPITALISM

The first stage of the economic crisis of capitalismstarted with World War I and the Russian Revolution.In this stage, the Soviet Union was fully under the influ-ence of the capitalist world. But the economic benefitsof the socialist system as compared to the capitalisteconomy were clearly visible. In due course, the SovietUnion by the end of 1930 appeared to be a powerfulstate, as it had been transformed from a backward agrar-ian country into a highly developed industrial country.The proportion of industrial output of socialist coun-tries in the world rose from 3 percent in 1937 to 10 per-cent in 1977.

The crisis of the capitalist economies began withthe struggle of independence, which spread over the im-perial colonies and semicolonies. The proletariat, themost consistent fighter against colonialism, stronglyprotested against imperialism and forced all the work-ing classes, including the peasantry, to join the struggleagainst the capitalist mode of production.

The most important feature of the national libera-tion movement in that period was the spontaneous at-tack of the oppressed and exploited masses against

colonialism. Such class struggles started not only in So-viet Russia but also in Indochina, the Philippines, andChina.

The economic crisis of capitalism was thus charac-terized by the gradual intensification of all contradic-tions of capitalism. The bourgeoisie was unable to useproductive forces, the unemployed army of youths pro-vided instability in the capitalist pattern of the society,and the movement of establishing socialism carried onwith success.

The second stage of the economic crisis of capital-ism developed during World War II with socialist revo-lutions in various European and Asian countries. Therevolutionary transformation of capitalism to social-ism, which began with the great Russian October revo-lution, continued, registering the victories of socialistrevolutions in various European and Asian countries.

The victory of the Soviet people in World War IIstimulated national liberation movements in variouscountries and strengthened the liquidation of colonialregimes. It also encouraged the breakup of the colonialsystem of imperialism. China, North Vietnam, andNorth Korea undertook socialist movements and estab-lished communalism in their countries, replacing theold capitalist system. American imperialism, convertinginto a new form of colonialism, spread its capitalist in-fluence.

The third stage of the economic crisis of capitalismstarted in the mid-1950s, a period of rather peaceful co-existence and competition between the two economicsystems. This proved the claim of some people that so-cialism could come only with war. According to theMarxist approach, the development and deepening ofthe crisis of capitalism are basically the output of theinternal contradictions of the capitalist mode of pro-duction.

The final stage of the economic crisis of capitalismis characterized by the development and formation ofthe state-monopoly nature of modern capitalism, con-sisting of all its economic and social contradictions.

The capitalist economy became unstable with thenew crisis of overproduction, which the capitalist worldfaced from 1957 to 1961 and from 1969 to 1971. Thenew crisis of overproduction seemed to be the worstand deepest of all crises experienced since the begin-ning of the 1930s. It affected all major capitalist coun-tries significantly.

The economic disparities among the developingcountries have led to interimperialist contradictionsand to competition among three imperialist regions—the United States, western Europe, and Japan, causing

122 Capitalism

further decay of imperialism and emergence of newmilitary powers.

Schumpeter has widely discussed the growth, devel-opment, and fall of capitalism in his book Capitalism,Socialism, and Democracy. Schumpeter understands theentrepreneur as the most important agent to be held re-sponsible for the growth and development of capital-ism, and describes him or her as a lever that plays a keyrole in a human body, whereas Karl Marx calls him orher a parasite for the failure of the capitalist system.

According to Schumpeter’s analysis, the internal in-spiration of an entrepreneur encourages him or her toinvent new methods of production and management soas to produce new products of good quality, and to putthe economy on a strong economic foothold. As an or-ganizer, the entrepreneur has to find new sources of rawmaterials, new methodology, new products, and widemarkets for every increasing output. Thus, it is the en-trepreneur who with his or her intellectual and other ca-pacities brings capitalism to its highest level of success.It is with this view that the class of capitalists or entre-preneurs may be a catalyst to improve the general stan-dard of living in a country.

SEE ALSO: Colonialism; Communism; Depression, Great;Economic Liberalization; Industrial Revolution; Privatiza-tion; Socialism; Structural Dependency.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Mari Brouwer, Schumpeter Puzzles: Techno-logical Competition and Economic Evolution (Atlantic Publish-ers, 2001); Michael Mann, States, War and Capitalism(Atlantic Publishers, 2001); Martin C. Schnitzer, ComparativeEconomic System (Atlantic Publishers, 2001); Sidney Webbs,Socialism in England (Ashgate Publishing, 1987); AdamSmith, Wealth of Nations (Bantam Books, 2003); Alfred Mar-shall, Principles of Economics (Prometheus Books, 1997); J.A.Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (Harper-Collins, 1976).

SUDHANSU SEKHAR RATH, PH.D.SAMBALPUR UNIVERSITY, INDIA

CARECARE IS AN INTERNATIONAL humanitarian orga-nization with headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. Thereare 11 separate CARE organizations serving millions ofpoor people in the poorest nations in the world. CARE,USA is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. CARE is

governed by a board of directors, elected by its mem-bers at an annual meeting. All of the board membersare uncompensated volunteers. The acronym CAREtoday stands for Cooperative for Assistance and ReliefEverywhere.

World War II witnessed enormous dislocations ofmillions of people who were suffering hunger, sickness,and starvation. Part of the suffering was due to theevents of war, but much of it was the result of policiesby the combatant nations that were designed to starvethe enemy. By the end of World War II millions of peo-ple had fled their homes, factories were destroyed, andfarms were often abandoned. The need for relief inpostwar Europe was great. To provide relief, a consor-tium of 22 American charities united to create the Co-operative for American Remittances to Europe(CARE). The consortium, CARE, has been providingrelief ever since.

CARE’s relief operations in 1946 saw the firstCARE packages arrive at Le Havre, France. During theSoviet blockade of occupied Berlin in 1948, CAREpackages arrived on the airlift to supply the city.CARE’s relief work during the Korean War (1950–53)encouraged Congress in 1954 to pass Public Law 480,which authorized the distribution of surplus Americanfood to reduce hunger in foreign countries. Contribu-tions were encouraged by celebrities like IngridBergman who made CARE package household words.CARE has been involved in providing civilian relief innumerous conflicts. Eventually over 100 million CAREpackages went to people in need.

In 1949 CARE began aiding the poor in the devel-oping world with resources for development. Its firstprogram was opened in the Philippines. When Presi-dent John F. Kennedy signed the law establishing thePeace Corps, he sought help from CARE in training thefirst volunteers in Latin America. After 1966 CARE ex-panded its mission from relief work to self-help proj-ects in developing countries, often with financing fromindigenous governments. In 1974 CARE provided reliefsupplies for drought victims in Niger and Chad. Faminerelief was greatly expanded in 1985 in Africa followingdrought in the Sahel. Expanded famine relief was un-dertaken in the politically unstable situation in Somaliain 1992.

In 1993, famine relief for people in Haiti was under-taken. In 1994 CARE was again on the front line pro-viding relief as the civil war and ethnic massacres inRwanda sent great numbers of refugees into Zaire (nowDemocratic Republic of Congo) and into Tanzania. Ashift in developmental mission was initiated in 1986

CARE 123

with CARE’s program for small-business development.A new family planning program to reduce poverty wasbegun in 1990. Family planning was expanded in 1997into a holistic program embracing all aspects of familylife in order to fight poverty systemically.

CARE’s importance in humanitarian work in thelast half of the 20th century was recognized in 1996when the Smithsonian Institute included a CARE pack-age in its permanent collection. In 2002 CARE reorga-nized and refocused its mission toward achieving lastingvictories over poverty in the years ahead. Today CAREis one of the world’s leading international humanitarianorganizations dedicated to fighting global disease andpoverty. Each year, its programs directly improve thelives of tens of millions of people in some 70 countriesaround the world as CARE helps poor communitiescreate lasting solutions to their most threatening prob-lems.

SEE ALSO: Conflict; International Nongovernmental Orga-nizations; Standard Food Basket; Starvation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Don Melvin, “Kenyan Farms Aim at Mar-kets in Europe: CARE Project Offers Way out of Poverty,”Atlanta Journal-Constitution (March 17, 2004); Rick Perera,“Letter from Haiti: The Price of Caring,” Newsweek, Interna-tional Edition (November 22, 2005); CARE, www.care.org(cited July 2005).

ANDREW J. WASKEY

DALTON STATE COLLEGE

CaritasCARITAS, AN INTERNATIONAL confederation ofmore than 150 Roman Catholic relief, development,and social service organizations, coordinates aid to thepoor in over 200 countries. Taking its name from theLatin word for charity, the organization is headquar-tered in Vatican City, providing a structure for collabo-ration between Church-sponsored charitable agencies.As one of the most significant networks in the worldsupplying humanitarian aid, Caritas has provided assis-tance to tens of millions regardless of race, gender, eth-nicity, or religion.

The first local organization of Caritas was foundedin 1897 in Freiburg, Germany. Similar organizationswere soon founded in Switzerland (1901) and theUnited States (National Conference of Catholic Chari-

ties, 1910). The confederation represented 60 organiza-tions by 1924, when delegates from 22 countries met inAmsterdam. Four years later the organization took thename Caritas Catholica, though it remained an informalcollaborative grouping. The confederation membersagreed to meet biennially to discuss how they might col-laborate to address the needs of the poor, migrants, anddisplaced persons. World War II interrupted theirmeetings, but they resumed in 1947 to organize war-re-lated relief. That same year the Vatican secretary ofstate authorized Caritas to represent Catholic charitableorganizations at the United Nations.

In 1950 a weeklong International Congress ofCatholic Charities was summoned in Rome at the sug-gestion of Giovanni Battista Montini, then an official ofthe Vatican secretary of state and the future Pope PaulVI. At that meeting, it was decided to found an officialinternational confederation of Catholic charities. Afterthe Vatican approved the organization, the first officialmeeting of Caritas was held in December 1951. The of-ficial founding organizations represented 13 countriesincluding Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France,Germany, Holland, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain,Switzerland, and the United States. In the UnitedStates, the affiliated entities include Catholic Relief Ser-vices and Catholic Charities USA.

Under the leadership of Karl Bayer (1915–77), aGerman priest and first secretary-general of Caritas, theorganization evolved into a major aid network. In 1957the confederation changed its name to Caritas Interna-tionalis to reflect its increasingly multinational member-ship. The Caritas-affiliated organizations focus theirefforts on economic development, emergency relief,supporting human rights, and care for the environment.Significant emergency relief efforts have included air-lifts of food and medical supplies to Nigeria during theBiafran civil war (1969–70), airlifts during the lengthycivil war in Angola, aid to refugees of the war inRwanda (1994), and Asian earthquake and tsunami re-lief (2004–05).

Caritas roots its work in the teachings of JesusChrist in the Gospels, literally following Christ’s injunc-tion to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and give shel-ter to the homeless. Influenced by the social teachings ofthe Catholic Church that have developed since the late19th century, Caritas’ work stems from its belief in thedignity of every human person by emphasizing socialjustice, solidarity with the poor, and advocacy.

SEE ALSO: Catholic Church; Charity; Religion; Social As-sistance.

124 Caritas

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Caritas, www.caritas.org (cited July 2005);Christian Heidrich, Carlo Bayer, ein Römer aus Schlesien undPionier der Caritas Internationalis (Jan Thorbecke Verlag,1992).

DAVID J. ENDRES

CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA

Carnegie, Andrew (1835–1919)ANDREW CARNEGIE ROSE from poverty to be-come an industrial magnate as well as a prolific and in-fluential writer. His writings celebrated individualism,democracy, competition, and economic growth, whilechallenging the wealthy to practice a philanthropy thatwould elevate humankind.

When Carnegie immigrated to the United Statesfrom Scotland at age 13, poverty compelled him towork as a bobbin boy in a cotton factory. Making op-portunities for himself, working hard, and learningquickly, he rose to become superintendent of the Penn-sylvania Railroad’s western division by age 24. Desiringgreater autonomy, Carnegie left the railroad in 1865 torun his own enterprises. By the end of his career, thevertically integrated Carnegie Steel Company was theworld’s largest steel producer

Carnegie owed his incredible business success to astrategy of relentlessly cutting costs, reinvesting profits,constantly rationalizing production via scientific re-search, and buying out financially strapped competitorsduring business downturns. He was a master at organi-zation and at finding, rewarding, and keeping the besttalent as his business partners. In 1901 he sold his inter-ests to J.P. Morgan’s syndicate for $300 million, makinghimself one of the world’s richest men. Thereafter heturned his attention to distributing his wealth and pro-moting international peace.

The voluble and eloquent Carnegie became the pe-riod’s self-appointed spokesman for capitalism anddemocracy. Although he had only four years of formaleducation, between 1882 and 1916 he wrote 63 articlesand eight books, and had 10 of his major public ad-dresses published as pamphlets. Carnegie stood for ameritocracy in which, with integrity, thrift, self-reliance,and hard work, any man and his family could ascendthe economic ladder—an optimistic creed that manyAmericans eagerly accepted.

His general thesis was that America’s democratic in-stitutions and the economic and social freedoms they

encouraged were responsible for its ascendance overmonarchical Europe and its progress in reducingpoverty.

Citing statistical evidence (with which modern eco-nomic historians concur), Carnegie dismissed com-plaints by populists and socialists that the Americaneconomy had made the rich richer and the poor poorer.Although he admitted that income inequality had in-creased, he concluded, “much better this great irregu-larity than universal squalor,” admonishing that the“poor enjoy what the rich could not before afford.What were the luxuries have become the necessaries oflife.”

To cure poverty, he championed the era’s relativelylaissez-faire economic policies and the ameliorativepower of competition, to which “we owe our wonder-ful material development.” He acknowledged that thegrowing economic and social distance between richbusiness owners and poor workers was breeding mutualdistrust, but argued that the interests of capital andlabor were not in conflict. In his most influential essay,“The Gospel of Wealth” (1889), he warned the wealthy

Carnegie, Andrew 125

Andrew Carnegie dismissed complaints that the American economyhad made the rich richer and the poor poorer.

against spoiling their heirs with large inheritances—“Iwould as soon leave to my son a curse as the almightydollar”—and supported an inheritance tax as a goad toforce the wealthy to give away their riches during theirlifetimes, because “the man who dies rich dies dis-graced.” He identified the “duty of the man of wealth:to set an example of modest, unostentatious living,shunning display or extravagance; to provide moder-ately for the legitimate wants of those dependent uponhim; and after doing so, to consider all surplus revenueswhich come to him simply as trust funds, which he iscalled upon to administer, and strictly bound as a mat-ter of duty to administer in the manner which, in hisjudgment, is best calculated to produce the most bene-ficial results for the community—the man of wealththus becoming the trustee and agent for his poorerbrethren, bringing to their service his superior wisdom,experience, and ability to administer, doing for thembetter than they would or could do for themselves.”

The ideal philanthropist gave away wealth for largeprojects, which could be a “more potent force for the el-evation of our race than if distributed in small sums tothe people themselves.” Traditional charity and alms-giving were destructive: “It were better for mankindthat the millions of the rich were thrown into the seathan so spent as to encourage the slothful, the drunken,the unworthy. Of every thousand dollars spent in so-called charity to-day, it is probable that nine hundredand fifty dollars is unwisely spent—so spent, indeed, asto produce the very evils which it hopes to mitigate orcure.” Instead, “in bestowing charity, the main consid-eration should be to help those who will help them-selves. … The best means of benefiting the communityis to place within its reach the ladders upon which theaspiring can rise”—especially libraries, colleges, re-search laboratories, museums, concert halls, and parks.

Carnegie practiced what he preached, giving awayover $350 million before he died. Among the projectshe funded were 3,000 libraries, the Carnegie Institute ofTechnology in Pittsburgh, and pensions for college pro-fessors. Atypical for his era, his donations went tomany African-American organizations and he champi-oned equal rights for blacks.

Critics attacked Carnegie on both the right and left.Many on the left found him hypocritical—celebratingthe radical egalitarianism of his Chartist father andgrandfather and making pronouncements about thesacred right of workingmen to combine—while livingin a restored Scottish castle and trying to wash hishands of the use of force and strikebreakers in hard-nosed labor relations practices that included the infa-

mous strike at his Homestead steel mill in 1892. Someon the right saw his call for giving away surplus wealthas dangerous and decried his turn toward trust-bustingand government regulation—which, conveniently, oc-curred after he had sold his own company to help createa powerful trust.

SEE ALSO: Capitalism; Distribution; Industrialization;United States; Wealth Inequality.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Andrew Carnegie, The Gospel of Wealthand Other Timely Essays (Doubleday, Doran and Company,1933); Andrew Carnegie, Autobiography of Andrew Carnegie(Houghton Mifflin, 1920); Joseph Frazier Wall, ed., The An-drew Carnegie Reader (University of Pittsburgh Press, 1992).

ROBERT WHAPLES

WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY

Carter CenterU.S. PRESIDENT JIMMY Carter and his spouse, Ros-alynn Carter, founded the Carter Center as a nonprofitand nonpartisan organization in 1982 in partnershipwith Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. The CarterCenter and Emory University appoint the members ofthe Carter Center Board of Trustees.

The mission of the center is to “advance humanrights and to alleviate human suffering.” To this end, ithas launched a variety of domestic and internationalprograms on human rights; disease control, prevention,and eradication; agricultural development and hungeralleviation; peace and conflict resolution; and interna-tional sustainable development. In this regard it hasbeen an effective domestic and international anti-poverty agent.

The center’s Human Rights Program works withother human rights organizations to promote legal andinstitutional changes in developing countries—espe-cially in the newly emerging democracies in Africa—toestablish and protect universal human rights. The centerhas been active in advising governments and policymak-ers on a wide range of human rights issues, such as theirincorporation into the constitution and other civil andmilitary laws, and their enforcement if human rights areviolated.

The center’s Health Programs focus on mentalhealth and infectious diseases, especially the eradicationof Guinea worm (Medina worm) disease and onchocer-

126 Carter Center

ciasis (river blindness), and the control and preventionof trachoma and schistosomiasis (Bilharziasis or fluke).The center has been remarkably successful in control-ling these diseases in Africa and Latin America. In addi-tion, the center holds regular conferences on mentalhealth, blindness, and other handicaps to increaseglobal awareness and to fight the stigma and discrimina-tion associated with them.

The center has several peacemaking initiatives, mostnotably observing elections globally to guarantee anhonest and fraud-free election. In the early 2000s, forexample, it has been an observer in the presidential elec-tions in the Palestinian Authority, Mozambique, In-donesia, Guatemala, Nigeria, Kenya, Jamaica, SierraLeone, Nicaragua, and other nations. Another peace ini-tiative of the center is the Conflict Resolution Program,which mediates conflicts to avert crises.

In 2004, for example, President Hugo Chavez ofVenezuela requested that Jimmy Carter mediate be-tween him and the opposition group. The result of thedeliberations and negotiations led by Carter was a dem-ocratic recall vote on Chavez, monitored together bythe Carter Center and the Organization of AmericanStates (OAS), which Chavez won overwhelmingly. Themediation most likely averted an armed confrontationbetween the two factions in Venezuela.

International development initiatives by the centerfocus on the domestic ownership of developmentstrategies in developing countries, and an internationalcooperation among donor countries. The center pro-motes and mediates increased participation at the poli-cymaking stage by civil society organizations and otherstakeholders, such as the business community, laborgroups, and governments, to facilitate wider ownershipof the long-term social, political, and economic devel-opment strategies. In addition to these national devel-opment strategies, the center has been successful inpromoting agricultural training and new techniques toenhance crop yields and sustainable development in de-veloping countries.

SEE ALSO: Agriculture; Carter, James (Administration);Disease and Poverty; Human Rights.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: “Carter Center,” www.cartercenter.org(cited January 2006), “Carter Center,” www.charitynavigator.org (cited January 2006); Jimmy Carter, Our Endangered Val-ues (Simon & Schuster, 2005).

M. ODEKON

GENERAL EDITOR

Carter, James (Administration)

THE CARTER ADMINISTRATION will be remem-bered for its promise to discontinue “immoral realpoli-tik,” Watergate-type secrecy, and destabilizing CIAinterventions by reducing military budgets, bringingsome of America’s overseas forces home, cutting armssales abroad, slowing nuclear proliferation, and discon-tinuing the U.S. support of dictatorial regimes.

James “Jimmy” Earl Carter, Jr. (1924– ) was elected39th president of the United States on January 21,1977, on the slogan “A Leader, for a Change.” Duringthe campaign he depicted himself as an outsider whocould “clean up the mess in Washington” and restorecredibility to the presidency. He portrayed himself asan embodiment of a revived national consensus andclaimed that U.S. politics should reflect basic Americanvalues. Carter argued that the common people were hisconstituency and that it was their common sense thatguided him instead of relying on the recommendationsof power brokers or the calculations of the Washing-ton, D.C., establishment.

Carter, a devout Baptist who became a “born again”Christian, was a profoundly and unequivocally reli-gious person who endeavored to construct administra-tion policies on moral principles, and committed thecountry to supporting human rights more than anypresident in the past. He ran the country with unassum-ing austerity to distinguish his administration fromthose of Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. Carter’s inau-guration festivities were low-key and he wore a businesssuit instead of formal wear. To fortify his image of sim-plicity he walked to the White House instead of beingdriven in the limousine, to the horror of the Secret Ser-vice.

DOMESTIC POLICY

Carter’s first act as president was to extend full pardonin January 1977 to the resisters of the Vietnam War,draft dodgers, military deserters, and all others who vi-olated the Selective Service Act from 1964 until 1973,expanding the partial pardon Ford granted in 1974.Carter’s pardon generated renewed controversy amongthe general public, who had been deeply divided on theissue.

The opponents in all branches of government wereacutely frustrated with this decision because there wasno constitutional mechanism to challenge the presi-dent’s apparent unilateral decision. The pardon signifi-cantly contributed to the further alienation of the

Carter, James (Administration) 127

executive branch of the federal government. It alsodemonstrated that Carter had a dislike for the back-room dealing that tends to be pervasive in Washington,D.C. A pattern of mutual distrust and contempt be-tween the new president and Congress was strength-ened when the consumer-protection bill and the laborreform package were shot down, to which Carter re-sponded by vetoing a public works package in 1978.Carter never managed to bridge the chasm that contin-ued to grow throughout the presidency and preventedhim from establishing good working relations withCongress. Carter’s only successes with Congress werewhen he backed existing Democratic programs like rais-ing the minimum wage; deregulating the airline, rail-road, and trucking industries to lower transportationcosts; and establishing a fund to clean up toxic wastesites.

The Gerald Ford administration passed on a deeplytormented economy that has been ravaged by high infla-tion, unemployment, and a federal fiscal deficit. One ofCarter’s election pledges was to stabilize the economyand to end the period of stagflation (galloping inflationand a recession), but despite frequently changing thepolicy course, he was unable to inspire public confi-dence and fulfill his promises. Notwithstanding several

anti-inflationary measures that were put in place, the an-nual rate of inflation rose from 5.8 percent in 1976 to13.5 percent in 1980, the federal budget deficit for 1980grew to a staggering $59 billion, while the unemploy-ment rate remained around seven percent, amountingto about eight million people out of work by the end ofCarter’s term in the White House.

The program to solve the energy crisis, sparked inthe early 1970s by the OPEC (Organization of Petro-leum Exporting Countries) embargo, was among themore successful domestic legislative propositions. Thepresident made public appeals for conservation of en-ergy, which he stimulated by tax reductions for in-stalling energy-saving devices and using a range ofalternative energy sources.

The Carter administration also proposed energytaxes, limits on imported oil, and greater reliance on do-mestic sources of energy. Additional legislative accom-plishments include successful deregulation of thenation’s airline industry, the passing of major environ-mental legislation to protect the environment and insti-gate cleanup of hazardous waste sites, the revamping ofthe civil service, and the creation of the Department ofEducation.

Carter was given little credit for the administra-tion’s accomplishments, but gained a reputation for po-litical ineptitude. He did not like to bargain and wasportrayed by the media as both sanctimonious and ar-rogant, or as utterly incompetent. Carter was imper-sonal with reporters who mocked his moralisticattitudes and portrayed him as a cynical and manipula-tive politician. Though Carter was not physicallyclumsy like Ford, his media appearances frequentlyeroded his public image and added to his inability tocontrol the Democratic majority in Congress and torally the support of the general public.

One of the most far-reaching blunders was Carter’s“malaise speech,” which he delivered on July 15, 1979.He castigated American citizens for their extravaganceas consumers and evoked the image of a nation plungedinto crisis by the excesses of affluence, even thoughmost of the nation had grown anxious about their pur-chasing power in the wake of the second major energycrisis of the 1970s.

FOREIGN POLICY

Carter believed in the rule of law in international affairsand in the principle of self-determination for all people.He also believed that American power should be exer-cised sparingly and he hoped that relations with the So-

128 Carter, James (Administration)

Jimmy Carter is much more highly regarded today than when helost his reelection bid in 1980 against Ronald Reagan.

viet Union would continue to improve and relax ColdWar tensions. Human rights were the main tenet of theadministration’s foreign policy, demonstrating the fullextent of Carter’s idealism. He frequently criticized for-eign nations for violating human rights and attemptedto link economic and military cooperation with thecountry’s commitment to the American ideals of free-dom and equality.

The Middle East policy and the ratification of thePanama Canal Treaty were two success stories ofCarter’s diplomacy. Carter invited Egyptian presidentAnwar el-Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister MenachemBegin to Camp David in September 1978, where, aftertwo weeks of intense negotiations, the deal was bro-kered for a peace treaty between Israel and Egypt thatwas eventually signed in March 26, 1979. Though theCamp David Accords were never fully executed, theagreements provided a framework for settling the prob-lem of the occupied territories and helped to temporar-ily reverse the president’s downward spiral inpopularity.

The Iranian hostage crisis was the most difficultproblem of the Carter presidency and sealed the presi-dent’s reelection hopes. In the wake of the overthrow ofU.S.-supported Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi by theAyatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in November 1979, themilitants seized the U.S. embassy in Teheran, taking 60American hostages. The failed attempt of April 1980 torescue the hostages, and an inability to resolve thehostage crisis through negotiations for over a year, par-alyzed Jimmy Carter as a leader and tainted his presi-dency. Ironically, the Iranians released the hostages inJanuary 20, 1981, once Ronald Reagan was sworn in,and after Reagan promised to unfreeze the Iranian as-sets in the United States.

AFTER THE PRESIDENCY

Though challenged from within his party by SenatorEdward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Carter won thenomination of the Democratic Party for president in1980. He subsequently lost the election to RepublicanReagan by nearly 10 percent of the popular vote and by440 electoral college votes.

Carter continued actively promoting human rightsin the years after he left office, and in 2002 he wasawarded the Nobel Peace Price for “his decades of un-tiring effort to find peaceful solutions to internationalconflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, andto promote economic and social development.” Carteris much more highly regarded today than when he lost

the reelection. His exemplary postpresidency includesmediation in disputes between nations, untiring leader-ship in the protection of human rights and democracyaround the world, and seeking to eradicate hunger, mal-nutrition, and homelessness through the work of theCarter Center and Habitat for Humanity.

SEE ALSO: Carter Center; Democratic Party; Ford, Gerald(Administration); Human Rights and Poverty; Inflation; Min-imum Wage; Moral Poverty; Reagan, Ronald (Administra-tion); United States.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Douglas Brinkley, The Unfinished Presi-dency: Jimmy Carter’s Journey Beyond the White House (VikingPenguin, 1998); Jimmy Carter, Keeping Faith: Memoirs of aPresident (Bantam Books, 1983); John Dumbrell, The CarterPresidency: A Re-evaluation (Manchester University Press,1995); Gaddis Smith, Morality, Reason, and Power: AmericanDiplomacy in the Carter Years (Hill and Wang, 1986); GarlandA. Haas, Jimmy Carter and the Politics of Frustration (McFar-land, 1992); Erwin C. Hargrove, Jimmy Carter as President:Leadership and the Politics of the Public Good (Louisiana StateUniversity Press, 1988); Daniel Horowitz, Jimmy Carter andthe Energy Crisis of the 1970s: The “Crisis of Confidence”Speech of July 15, 1979 (Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005); Hamil-ton Jordan, Crisis: The Last Year of the Carter Presidency (Put-nam, 1982); Burton I. Kaufman, The Presidency of James EarlCarter, Jr. (University Press of Kansas, 1993); Joshua Mu-ravchik, The Uncertain Crusade: Jimmy Carter and the Dilem-mas of Human Rights (Hamilton Press, 1986); Robert A.Strong, Jimmy Carter and the Making of American Foreign Pol-icy (Louisiana State University Press, 2000).

JOSIP MOCNIK

MOUNT ALOYSIUS COLLEGE

Catholic Campaign for Human Development

THE CATHOLIC CAMPAIGN for Human Develop-ment (CCHD), a program administered by the UnitedStates Conference of Catholic Bishops, attempts to ad-dress the root causes of poverty among Americans. It isamong the largest privately funded, self-help initiativesaiding the poor in the United States. Founded in 1970,the Campaign for Human Development has attemptedto move beyond traditional forms of charity by pro-moting and supporting community organizations that

Catholic Campaign for Human Development 129

offer opportunities for men, women, and families tobreak free from poverty. In the wake of a heightened in-terest in humanitarianism brought on by President Lyn-don B. Johnson’s Great Society initiatives, the U.S.Catholic bishops began their own social justice pro-gram to aid minority groups and the poor in gainingeconomic strength and political power while educatingCatholics about the need to be in solidarity with thepoor.

The campaign is funded primarily from the contri-butions of Catholics in the United States, obtainedthrough a special collection at churches throughout theUnited States each November before Thanksgiving. Inthe 30-plus years of the campaign, American Catholicshave donated hundreds of millions of dollars. Of themoney collected, 25 percent is retained by individualdioceses to be used at the local level. The remainingfunds are allocated for individual projects in communi-ties throughout the country. A committee of 15 that in-cludes eight Catholic bishops and seven other membersdetermines the policies and funding decisions of thecampaign.

Though the funds allocated by the initiative are de-rived from private sources, the campaign’s work hasbeen scrutinized. Some detractors have argued that thecharity practiced by the campaign is politically moti-vated. The CCHD has been criticized for siding with theaims of the Democratic Party in the U.S., while otherscharge that organizations supported by the campaignare frequently apathetic, if not hostile, to the CatholicChurch, advancing contrary positions on abortion andeuthanasia. In 1998, at the request of the United Statesbishops, the word Catholic was added to the organiza-tion’s name and guidelines for funding were enacted tomore closely adhere to the Catholic Church’s teachingon social issues.

Some 4,000 local projects have received financialsupport from the Catholic Campaign for Human Devel-opment during its history. While direct aid to the pooris not provided from CCHD funds, local initiatives in-clude job creation and vocational training, neighbor-hood improvement, and programs for students andyoung children.

To be eligible for funding from the campaign, initia-tives must aim to attack the root causes of poverty; thebeneficiaries of the initiative must be from low-incomecommunities; and those who plan and implement theinitiative must be poor themselves. A secondary aim ofthe campaign is to offer initiatives that educate Ameri-cans about poverty and its causes. A recent educationalinitiative, Poverty USA, raises awareness of the extent

of poverty in the United States and what citizens can doto curb its impact.

SEE ALSO: Catholic Church; Islam and Poverty; Johnson,Lyndon (Administration); Protestant Churches; Religion;United States.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. John P. Hogan, Credible Signs of ChristAlive: Case Studies from the Catholic Campaign for Human De-velopment (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2003); WilliamT. Poole and Thomas W. Pauken, The Campaign for HumanDevelopment: Christian Charity or Political Activism? (CapitalResearch Center Publishing, 1988); United States CatholicConference, The Cries of the Poor Are Still with Us: 25 Yearsof Working to Empower the Poor (United States Catholic Con-ference, 1995).

DAVID J. ENDRES

CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA

Catholic ChurchTHE CATHOLIC CHURCH’S teachings and activitiesabout poverty reflect the church’s own view of itself asan institution with a dual nature: an institution that is“in the world, but not of the world.” This dual view ofitself and its mission leads the Catholic Church to holdtwo views of poverty that, if not actually in conflict, arein tension with each other.

On one hand, the church teaches that this world isour preparation for the next, and that material povertyis a less serious problem than spiritual poverty: “Beforeall else, man must be concerned about his soul; gainingthe whole world is not the purpose of this life,” asstated by the Pontifical Council in 2005. In this, thechurch affirms Jesus’ Gospel admonition throughMatthew: “Lay not up treasures for yourself on earth,where moth and rust doth corrupt and where thievesbreak through and steal; But lay up for yourselves trea-sures in Heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth cor-rupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal;For where your treasure is, there will your heart be,also.”

On the other hand, the church teaches that allhuman beings have a duty to help those who are in ma-terial poverty. According to St. Gregory the Great, whoserved as pope from 590 to 604, “When we attend tothe needs of those in want, we give them what is theirs,not ours. More than performing works of mercy, we are

130 Catholic Church

paying a debt of justice.” The Catechism of the CatholicChurch (a document used to teach the church’s doc-trines to its lay members) affirms that “giving alms tothe poor is one of the chief witnesses to fraternal char-ity; it is also a work of justice pleasing to God.” TheCatechism goes on to admit that the church and itsmembers have not always carried out these duties per-fectly: “The church, since her origin and in spite of thefailings of many of her members, has not ceased tolabor for [the poor’s] relief, defence, and liberationthrough numerous works of charity which remain in-dispensable always and everywhere.”

CHURCH ACTIVITIES AGAINST POVERTY

Because of the church’s dual mission, its antipovertyactivities have been both material and hortatory. On thematerial side, the church has founded and managedmany charitable programs around the world, often serv-ing as an intermediary for donations from its parish-ioners to the poor. Many orders (organizations) ofpriests and nuns throughout history have devotedthemselves to aiding the poor by providing them withfood, shelter, money, and spiritual guidance.

Usually members of these orders take vows of per-sonal poverty, renouncing worldly goods for themselvesso that they can focus their resources on helping theneedy. If such vows have at times been followed imper-fectly, the church would say it was a foreseeable result ofimperfections in human nature: imperfections sharedno less by the clergy than by the lay population. Thatwe cannot perform these tasks flawlessly does not re-lease us from the obligation of doing what we can.

On the hortatory side, the church has preachedabout the importance of helping the poor. It haspreached not only to its own members, but also to peo-ple of all faiths around the world, as well as to govern-ments, international organizations, local businesses, andglobal corporations. The impact of these efforts cannotbe measured, but in the long run it is probably signifi-cant. As the economist John Maynard Keynes remarkedin a different context, ideas “are more powerful than iscommonly understood. Indeed, the world is ruled bylittle else…. The power of vested interests is greatly ex-aggerated compared with the gradual encroachment ofideas.”

SOCIAL AND PERSONAL DUTIES TO THE POOR

One of the earliest sources of the church’s view of so-cial and personal duties to the poor is in the Hebrew

Bible, which Christianity shares with Judaism andIslam, but sometimes interprets in different ways. In theBook of Deuteronomy (derived from the book’s Greektitle and meaning “second law,” though the book’s He-brew title is Devarim, meaning “words,” and is derivedfrom the first sentence in the book), Moses told the Is-raelites, “If there is among you a poor man, one of yourbrethren … you shall not harden your heart or shutyour hand against your poor brother, but you shallopen your hand to him, and lend him sufficient for hisneed.”

The Catholic Catechism expresses the same vieweven more strongly: “It is by what they have done forthe poor that Jesus Christ will recognize his chosenones.” In the European Middle Ages—from the fall ofRome in 410 to the Renaissance in the 15th century—this view spurred wealthy people to give alms to thepoor in hope that the prayers of the poor would secureforgiveness of their sins and admittance into heaven.

At the same time, the church harbors no illusionsthat poverty can be eliminated once and for all. First,beyond the most abject inability to secure food andshelter, poverty is relative: in any society, those peoplewho have the least are poor. Most poor people in devel-oped Western countries of the 21st century are betteroff than most wealthy people in medieval Europe.

Second, poverty—real, not relative poverty—stillseems to be an intractable feature of a world in whichwealth naturally flows most easily to those who alreadyhave it, as described in the Catechism: “Christian real-ism, while appreciating on one hand the praiseworthyefforts being made to defeat poverty, is cautious [about]the illusion that it is possible to eliminate the problemof poverty completely from this world. This will hap-pen only on Christ’s return…. In the meantime, thepoor remain entrusted to us and it is this responsibilityupon which we shall be judged at the end of time.”

The church applies its thinking not merely to rela-tions within society but to international relations aswell. It opposes protectionist policies that further im-poverish poorer countries by restricting trade in theirgoods. Paul VI espouses this idea in Populorum Progres-sio, published in 1967; as does John Paul II, in his En-cyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, published in 1988.The Catholic Church holds that trade should promote

Catholic Church 131

The church harbors no illusions that povertycan be eliminated once and for all.

the common good, combined with “attention to therights and needs of the poor in policies concerningtrade and international cooperation.”

HISTORY OF CHURCH WORK

From early in its history, and even earlier, Christianityand the teachings of Jesus appealed to the poor andpowerless in society. In the Roman Empire, Christianswere persecuted until the emperor Constantine madeChristianity the state religion. In 360, Constantine’ssuccessor Julian (“the Apostate”) tried to restore theempire’s pagan religion and stamp out Christianity. Hisattempt failed, at least in part because of the church’suntiring efforts to help the poor, which are described byT. Bokenkotter: “One of the most potent reasons forthe appeal of the church to the masses was its magnifi-cent system of charity, which aroused the admirationeven of Julian the Apostate. Eventually, it broadenedout to include a whole organism of institutions, includ-ing orphanages, hospitals, inns for travelers, foundlinghomes, and old-age homes—so much so that as the statebecame increasingly unable to cope with the immenseburden of social distress brought about by the barbar-ian invasions of the fourth and fifth centuries, it reliedmore and more on the church.”

Julian’s successors gave official authority over poorrelief and social welfare to the bishop of Rome (thepope), who ate his meals with the poor every day.Church law also required bishops to spend a portion oftheir region’s revenues on help for the poor. Usually,they did this by founding a hospitium, which means ahome for the poor.

In the Middle Ages, the collapse of the Roman Em-pire left a void of public services (and of the educatedbureaucracy that was needed to deliver them). Thechurch stepped into the breach. It continued and ex-panded its historic programs of poor relief, all centeredon its hospitals (descendants of the hospitia of Romantimes), which both cared for the sick and sheltered thepoor. In England in the 14th century, for example, therewere 17 hospitals in London and 18 in York.

One of the important aspects of the church’s workwas the formation of clerical orders dedicated to help-ing the poor. One of these orders, the Franciscans, wasfounded by St. Francis of Assisi (1181–1226), an Italianpriest. St. Francis also founded a similar order forwomen, the Order of St. Clare. St. Francis and his fol-lowers took personal vows of poverty and devoted alltheir possessions to helping the poor with food, hous-ing, and, of course, religious instruction.

The seriousness with which members of Catholicorders took their commitment to the poor is shown bya vignette from the life of St. Francis as told byBonaventure, a 13th-century theologian. Even if thestory is apocryphal, it shows how the priestly orders as-pired to behave: “Once it happened that one of the fri-ars responded gruffly to a beggar who had asked for analms at an inconvenient time. When [St. Francis] heardthis, he ordered the friar to strip himself, cast himself atthe beggar’s feet, confess his guilt, and beg for hisprayers and forgiveness. When he had done thishumbly, [St. Francis] added sweetly: ‘When you see apoor man, my brother, an image of the Lord and hispoor mother is being placed before you.’”

At the time of the Industrial Revolution in the late18th and early 19th centuries, the church was uncertainwhat position it should take about factory working con-ditions, slum overcrowding, and the subsistence wagesreceived by workers. Several leaders of the churchurged that it take an active role in trying to make thesystem more humane, such as through legislation tolimit work hours, permit rest days, inspect factories forsafety, and discourage labor by women and children.However, as related by Bokenkotter, “Catholics had totake cognizance of the exceptional gravity of the socialproblems and the need to talk no longer of the poorbut of poverty and to undertake collective action for re-form rather than trusting to individual charity. Sec-ondly, there had to be a sufficiently optimistic attitudetoward the future.”

The church vacillated on the issue until finally tak-ing a strong stand in the 1870s, led by the EnglishBishop Henry Manning. Manning was an advocate ofworkers’ rights who in 1874 gave a lecture on “the rightsand dignity of labor” wherein he denounced childlabor, defended the right of workers to form unions,and suggested legal limits on working hours. He workedwith the British government on those issues as well ason a commission to make better housing available tothe poor.

From the 19th through the 21st centuries, theCatholic Church continued its help for the poor via ma-terial and spiritual ministry. In the 20th century, thechurch became more involved in campaigns for eco-nomic justice in both Western societies and poor coun-

132 Catholic Church

The church continues its help for the poor via material and spiritual ministry.

tries of the world. The church worked through the reli-gious orders, such as the Franciscans; through nationalCatholic charities in each country of the world; and ad-ministered some aid directly from the Vatican.

In the United States, the national organization forpoor relief is called Catholic Charities USA, and isfairly similar to its corresponding organizations in othercountries. It manages a network of local Catholic chari-table groups across the United States. These localgroups administer relief for the long-term poor andhomeless by the distribution of food, money, housing,and spiritual advice. They also help victims of personalmisfortune and natural disasters, such as hurricanes.About two-thirds of Catholic Charities USA’s 2005budget of $2.69 billion came from grants and contractswith local, state, and federal government agencies toprovide poor relief, daycare, welfare-to-work programs,and other services. Another 14 percent came from thechurch and from individual donors. In 2005, the orga-nization employed 51,000 paid staff members and had175,000 volunteers for its relief programs.

SEE ALSO: Catholic Campaign for Human Development;Christian Antipoverty Campaigns; Francis of Assisi; Mendi-cant Orders; Missionaries; Religion; Western Monasticism.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. T. Bokenkotter, A Concise History of theCatholic Church (Doubleday Publishing, 1977); Bonaventure,The Life of St. Francis (HarperCollins Publishers, 2005[1260]); Rev. Peter M.J. Stravinskas, ed., Catholic Encyclopedia(CD-ROM, Our Sunday Visitor, 1998); J.M. Keynes, The Gen-eral Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (Harcourt,Brace & World, 1936); W.G. Plaut et al., The Torah: A Mod-ern Commentary (Union of American Hebrew Congregations,1981); Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendiumof the Social Doctrine of the Church (U.S. Conference ofCatholic Bishops Publishing, 2005).

SCOTT PALMER, PH.D.RGMS ECONOMICS

CDF Black Community Crusade for Children

THE BLACK COMMUNITY Crusade for Children(BCCC) is an initiative of the Children’s Defense Fund(CDF), which is a nonpartisan, not-for-profit organiza-tion aimed at providing a head start for all American

children and the creation of generations of young peo-ple able to achieve political and personal freedom.

As part of the CDF, the BCCC was created to“weave and reweave the rich fabric of community thathistorically has been the cornerstone of the healthy de-velopment of black children. Tap into and strengthenthe strong black community tradition of self-help. Re-build the bridges between generations and between theblack middle class and poor. Assist and galvanize cur-rent black leadership around specific goals for children.Identify, train, nurture, link, and empower a new gener-ation of effective black servant-leaders younger than30.” There has been concern that breakdown of rela-tions between generations and classes in the African-American community has contributed to increased in-equality and social problems.

BCCC programs include the Student LeadershipNetwork for Children, the Ella Barker Child PolicyTraining Institute, and the CDF Freedom Schools. Oneof these schools is the CDF Haley Farm program,which features community building; spiritual, character,and leadership development; intergenerational mentor-ing; interracial and interethnic communication; inter-disciplinary networking, and training.

The activities held to further BCCC objectives in-clude community building; spiritual, character, andleadership development; intergenerational mentoring;interracial and interethnic communication; interdisci-plinary networking; and training. The Social LeadershipNetwork for Children is a partnership of college in-terns and faculties that helps operate the CDF’s EllaBaker Child Policy Training Institute and the CDF’sFreedom Schools.

These are aimed at producing generations of youngpeople willing and able to celebrate academic and socie-tal achievements and to work toward the continuedneed for the emancipation of black people frompoverty and discrimination. It is connected on severallevels with faith-based organizations, more especially asmany preachers articulate the link between faith and theneed for social justice and equality.

One of the focal points of this collaboration is theAnnual Samuel DeWitt Proctor Training Institute forChild Advocacy Ministry, which is due to meet for the12th year in July 2006. Morning devotions and periodsof meditation and prayer will be mixed with more prac-tical workshops, training sessions, and information ex-change aimed at revivifying advocates and activists whomay have found their enthusiasm waning as a result ofconstant opposition and the relentless stream of evi-dence of increasing inequality in American society. The

CDF Black Community Crusade for Children 133

BCCC offices are located in Washington, D.C., and alsoin Jackson, Mississippi.

SEE ALSO: African Americans and Poverty; Children’s De-fense Fund; Children and Poverty; Racial Discrimination.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. CDF Black Community Crusade for Chil-dren, www.childrensdefense.org (cited October 2005); M.W.Edelman, Hold My Hand: Prayers for Building a Movement toLeave No Child Behind (Children’s Defense Fund, 2001);M.W. Edelman, I Can Make a Difference: A Treasury to InspireOur Children (HarperCollins, 2005).

JOHN WALSH

SHINAWATRA UNIVERSITY

Center for Community ChangeTHE CENTER FOR COMMUNITY Change (CCC) isan organization that was established in 1968 as a resultof ideas prevalent in the 1960s, which featured socialchange led by community involvement in the UnitedStates. The CCC works, therefore, to establish and de-velop community organizations nationwide that canraise awareness of all issues related to poverty and af-fecting community affairs to national attention and gov-ernment action. Original partners influential in itsformation include the Robert F. Kennedy MemorialFund, the Ford Foundation, and the leaders of theUnited Auto Workers.

The CCC has provided expert advice and organiza-tional capability on a wide range of issues, such as in-come support and job creation, affordable publichousing, economic development, transportation,hunger and malnutrition, and immigrant rights. It hasendeavored to be active in both rural and urban areas,as well as in all areas, and takes special care to representas many different ethnic groups as possible. Its actionshave been instrumental in creating initiatives such as thefood stamps program, the Community ReinvestmentAct, and the incubation of organizations such as theCoalition on Human Needs, the Workforce Alliance,the Environmental Support Center, and the NationalCampaign for Jobs and Income Support.

The National Campaign for Jobs and Income Sup-port was an initiative of the CCC that, from 1999 to2002, united organizations from more than 40 Ameri-can states in the hope of achieving a refundable childtax credit and the restoration of food stamp eligibility

for many immigrant households. More than 1,000grassroots organizations were involved, including low-income, women’s, immigrant, and faith-based groups.They were united in the wish to bring poverty and eco-nomic inequality back onto the national agenda andforging a powerful alliance that, working together, couldachieve far more than individual voices could manage.The work has been succeeded by the California Partner-ship, which unites more than 70 community-based or-ganizations in that state and aims at stimulating decentjob creation.

Other areas in which the CCC is active currently in-clude community voting, education, the federal budget,welfare reform, immigration, and transportation. TheNative American Project recognizes a group of peopleoften left out of social development and aims at devel-oping at the grassroots level leadership, organizationalcapability, and ability to effect social change amongcommunities. It works with established groups such asthe Affiliated Tribes of the Northwest, the AmericanIndian Housing and Community Development Corpo-ration, the Southern Californian Indian Center, and theTeton Coalition. The Voices for Change Project is a list-enhancement program that uses modern informationtechnology to help link together like-minded commu-nity organizations so that their voices increase instrength.

A wide range of institutional donors supports theCCC. Executive Director Deepak Bhargava calls uponseveral dozen specialists and community organizers.The CCC is an example of the communitarian aspect ofAmerican society, which encourages individuals to joinsocieties and associations at the local level, and en-hances the power of these to cause desirable socialchange regionally and nationally through enhancingtheir effectiveness by networking, partnership, and or-ganizational development.

SEE ALSO: Antipoverty Organizations; Community-BasedAntipoverty Programs; Nongovernmental Organizations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. M. Abramovitz, “Everyone Is Still onWelfare: The Role of Redistribution in Social Policy,” SocialWork (v.46/4, 2001); Community Center for Change, www.communitychange.org (cited October 2005); California Part-nership, www.california-partnership.org (cited October2005); Voices for Change Project, www.cccvoicesforchange.org (cited October 2005).

JOHN WALSH

SHINAWATRA UNIVERSITY

134 Center for Community Change

Center for Democratic Renewal

THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRATIC Renewal (CDR)is a multiracial organization that is intended to advancea vision of a democratic, diverse, and just society that isfree from racism and bigotry. It was established in 1979as the Anti-Klan Network, which united more than 60smaller organizations in the struggle against resurgentracist violence in the United States. Its founders werethe Reverend C.T. Vivian and southern rights activistAnne Braden. The CDR works closely with a widerange of civil and religious organizations in collectingdata and publishing and promoting reports aimed atcombating racism, bigotry, and white supremacy. Cen-tral to this effort has been When Hate Groups Come toTown: A Manual of Effective Community Responses,which documents practical steps that can be taken to re-sist racists. The CDR is based in Atlanta, Georgia.

Recent projects pursued by the CDR include an ini-tiative to enable released felons to be eligible to vote andcontinued efforts to combat the burning of African-American churches. Inevitably, people with varioustypes of political motivation have sought to besmirchthe reputation of the CDR, claiming that its researchhas been falsified, is itself politically motivated, and iseven a hoax. Nevertheless, the arson attacks on African-American churches continue and so too do attempts bywhite supremacists to instigate racial hatred. The debateas to where acceptable political beliefs shade into unac-ceptable bigotry is still being contested.

In the wake of the 2001 terrorist attacks, new con-trols have been introduced to regulate movement ofpeople into and within the United States. This includesthe National Security Entry-Exit Registration System.The CDR has opposed this scheme and argued, “Thisprogram is another in a series of moves to criminalizeimmigrants, particularly those from Muslim countries,and to promote a climate of fear, division, and repres-sion during the United States’ perpetual ‘war on terror.’This system, used in conjunction with a soon to bebroadened USA-Patriot Act, is leading to what manyare calling a ‘new totalitarianism.’”

In the political climate on the United States underthe George W. Bush administration, this form of cam-paigning is maligned as unpatriotic and unacceptable.As the locus of acceptable political debate has beenmoved to the right, therefore, social campaigners suchas the CDR have found itself recategorized in much ofthe mainstream media as extremists. Nevertheless theCDR continues to promote research and advocacy con-cerned with such issues as anti-immigrant vigilantism

and the need to broaden and strengthen antihate crimelegislation, and monitors far right white supremacistand neoconfederate activity.

SEE ALSO: African Americans and Poverty; Antidiscrimina-tion; Crime; Immigration; Racial Discrimination.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Center for Democratic Renewal, www.thecdr.org (cited July 2005); Michael Fumento, “A ChurchArson Epidemic? It’s All Smoke and Mirrors,” Wall StreetJournal (July 8, 1996); Center for Democratic Renewal, WhenHate Groups Come to Town: A Manual of Effective CommunityResponses (CDR, 1992).

JOHN WALSH

SHINAWATRA UNIVERSITY

Center for Education PolicyTHE CENTER FOR EDUCATION Policy (CEP) wasfounded in 1995 by John F. (Jack) Jennings; it is a na-tional nonprofit independent organization, an advocatefor public education and improving public schools. It isa division of the SRI (Stanford Research Institute) andhas offices in California and Washington, D.C. CEP re-ceives its funds predominantly from charitable founda-tions.

SRI’s Center for Education Policy works on severalprojects: standards-based school reform that aims to in-crease student achievement through creating a set ofstable expectations for what students need to know andbe able to do, combined with professional developmentand curriculum initiatives to help the students to reachthe standards; teacher development, which involvespreparation, induction, and continuing support ofteachers, with an emphasis on which policies lead to aguarantee of good teachers; math, science, and technol-ogy, which involves evaluations and studies on mathe-matics and science education since the 1980s; as well asstudies on technology integration in the classrooms.

Other projects include school choice, which reflectsthe national debate on public versus charter schools,and literacy and lifelong learning, which stresses thatthe technology and the new information age create in-centives for further education for all ages to acquirehigh-level language and literacy skills. Within that issueSRI’s Center for Education Policy also explores issuesof adult literacy and English for speakers of other lan-guages.

Center for Education Policy 135

To achieve its objective of improving public learn-ing institutions, the center engages in research and eval-uations on the design, implementation, and impact of avariety of educational programs. SRI’s Center for Edu-cation Policy works closely with SRI’s Center for Edu-cation and Human Services on programs that affectchildren and youth, as well as SRI’s Center for Technol-ogy in Learning on issues related to the use of educa-tional technology to improve educational practice.

Most of the work involves multiple methods, suchas surveys, case studies, expert panel reviews, and focusgroups. SRI’s Center for Education Policy conductswork for federal agencies, state departments of educa-tion, local school districts, private foundations, andnonprofit groups. It serves as a link with educators andthe public on the pertinent issues in education improve-ment, as a discussion forum for educators and policy-makers, and as a think tank for policy initiatives. SRI’sCenter for Education Policy organizes meetings andpresentations; conducts studies through surveys, panelreviews, and focus groups; and publishes reports andnewsletters on a variety of topics, such as democracyand public schools, education and jobs, No Child LeftBehind Act, testing, and improving public schools.

SEE ALSO: Education; Nongovernmental Organizations;Technology; United States.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Center for Education Policy, www.ctredpol.org (cited July 2005); D.C. Humphrey et al., “Sharing theWealth: National Board Certified Teachers and the StudentsWho Need Them Most,” Education Policy Analysis (v.13/18,2005); John Sabatini et al., Teacher Perspectives on the Adult Ed-ucation Profession: National Survey Findings About an EmergingProfession (National Center on Adult Literacy, 2000); StanfordResearch Institute, www.sri.com (cited July 2005).

PAUL AND TANYA SLOAN

INDEPENDENT SCHOLARS

Center for Law and Social PolicyTHE CENTER FOR Law and Social Policy (CLASP) isa Washington, D.C.-based organization that advocatesfor the poor and less fortunate of American society.CLASP was founded in 1968 as a public-interest lawfirm by a group of attorneys with the support of thelate U.S. Supreme Court Justice Arthur J. Goldberg.For its first 14 years, CLASP concentrated on a variety

of legal issues affecting such areas as the rights ofwomen, mental health, human rights, healthcare for thedisadvantaged, and the environment. CLASP alsoserved as an incubator for organizations such as the Na-tional Women’s Law Center, whose stated mission is“to protect and advance the progress of women andgirls at work, in school, and in virtually every aspect oftheir lives,” and the Bazelon Center on Mental HealthLaw, whose stated mission is “to protect and advancethe rights of adults and children who have mental dis-abilities.” In 1981, CLASP’s board of trustees decidedto focus the mission of the organization on those issuesparticularly pertinent to the poor and less advantaged.

CLASP is involved in public policy research on ap-proximately 10 issues directly related to poverty andthe disadvantaged. CLASP analyzes proposed legisla-tion and regulations that may directly impact the poor,children, and others and provides testimony, legal ser-vices, and policy on these issues. For example, CLASPis one of very few organizations that deal with the issueof prisoner reentry into society. A disproportionatepercentage of prison inmates are people of color, whooften go to prison poor and leave prison poor, with fewpositive opportunities.

As a result, poverty, homelessness, and recidivismrates for ex-convicts are extremely high. CLASP, inpartnership with Community Legal Services, Inc., ofPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania, provides information onthis important issue, as well as making suggestions forpolicies and solutions to assist decision-makers in find-ing positive ways to reintegrate ex-convicts into com-munities and families, while providing positiveopportunities to reduce poverty and recidivism.

CLASP has taken an advocacy role in proposingthat state and federal laws be changed such that gar-nished payments are passed directly to the custodialparent for the care of the children, rather than to statecoffers. Related to this is CLASP advocacy against fed-eral budget cuts to foster-care programs, which wouldmake it harder to place abused and neglected children inthe care of relatives such as grandparents, aunts, and un-cles. While the authors of such legislation may be well-meaning in their intent, removing children from thefamilial sphere may under some circumstances havelong-term consequences.

SEE ALSO: Nongovernmental Organizations; Poverty Laws;Poverty Lawyers.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Center for Law and Social Policy, www.clasp.org (cited December 2005); National Women’s Law

136 Center for Law and Social Policy

Center, www.nwlc.org (cited December 2005); Bazelon Centerfor Mental Health Law, www.bazelon.org (cited December2005).

LAWRENCE M. SALINGER, PH.D.ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY, JONESBORO

Center for the Studyof Urban Poverty

PROFESSORS MELVIN OLIVER and Jim Johnson es-tablished the Center for the Study of Urban Poverty(CSUP) at the University of California in 1989. It existsto conduct research into issues relating to urbanpoverty and to strengthen capacity for future researchand understanding by training undergraduate and grad-uate students, while supporting junior faculty members.Research has given rise to reports and publications andhas fostered policy formulation and advocacy. TheCSUP has established a reputation for creating and nur-turing relationships with government agencies andother partners to create better researchers and socialservice providers.

The CSUP’s research agenda focuses on three broadareas: poverty in Los Angeles, the working poor andtransition to work, and disadvantaged low-skill workers.The location of the CSUP, in Los Angeles, means that itis placed in an environment in which large numbers ofLatin American, Asian, and African immigrants firstcome to the United States, and the city offers numerouslow-wage, low-skill jobs in both the formal and informalservice sectors. As a result, Los Angeles offers an un-usually interesting opportunity to study the dynamicsof transitions into a large, complex, and flexible labormarket. The lessons learned have wide applicationthroughout the United States.

Research projects have included the Immigrants Or-ganization Survey, which united the research efforts offour universities to study the creation and operation offormal and informal migrant organizations. These or-ganizations can help new arrivals to integrate into soci-ety and, in particular, the labor market, as well as tomaintain transnational links with their origin countriesto provide information and resources to possible futurearrivals.

The Geographic Skills Mismatch and Racial Differ-ences in Search and Employment project consideredthe implications of racial housing segregation and job

decentralization in many large North American cities.These factors often lead to areas of high unemploymentin low-skilled ethnically alike areas as, for example,those of African Americans whose search strategies forwork may be improved.

Other projects have considered barriers, potentialbarriers, and perceived barriers to entry into employ-ment. Employer Demand for Ex-Offenders in Los An-geles and Perceived Criminality, Criminal BackgroundChecks and the Racial Hiring and Practices of Employ-ers were both projects investigating the attitudes of em-ployers toward various groups of people who haveexperienced difficulty in obtaining employment.

Publications include working papers, research re-ports, poverty report cards, and policy briefs. AbelValenzuela, Jr., has headed the CSUP since July 2001.Its importance lies not just in its research and policyformulation but also in helping to educate the publicabout the importance and role of migrant and low-skilled workers to the economy as a whole, and theproblems that these people face.

SEE ALSO: Crime; Employment; Immigration; Racial Dis-crimination.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Center for the Study of Urban Poverty,www.sscnet.ucla.edu/issr/csup (cited July 2005); Mary BethSheridan, “Pay Abuses Common for Day Laborers, StudyFinds,” Washington Post (June 23, 2005); Abel Valenzuela, Jr.,et al., In Pursuit of the American Dream: Day Labor in theGreater Washington, D.C., Region (CSUP, 2005).

JOHN WALSH

SHINAWATRA UNIVERSITY

Center on Budget and Policies Priorities

THE CENTER ON BUDGET and Policies Priorities(CBPP) is a nonpartisan research organization in theUnited States that was established in 1981 to identifyfederal budget priorities, particularly with respect tolower-income American families. The CBPP’s brief hasexpanded considerably since that time, and its membersnow conduct research into a wide range of areas, at stateand federal levels, as well as the interactions between thetwo levels of government. Research areas include pen-sion reform, Social Security reform, Medicaid, food

Center on Budget and Policies Priorities 137

stamps, low-income housing programs, and low-incometax credits. The CBPP has attracted many plaudits forthe quality of its research and its preference for honestand open analysis rather than political posturing. TheCBPP’s board of directors and researchers are drawnfrom academic and nongovernmental organizations(NGOs) or research institution backgrounds and areunited by their research interests. The CBPP is regis-tered as a nonprofit-making, nonpartisan organizationand is constituted as a charitable foundation.

Additional activities that the CBPP pursues includeoutreach programs and information dissemination. Forexample, more than 6,000 NGOs and governmentalagencies participate in the center’s Earned-Income TaxCredit (EITC) campaign, while the Start Healthy, StayHealthy campaign links numerous health serviceproviders, users, and advocacy groups in the hope ofidentifying more eligible recipients of free or low-costhealth insurance programs. Working at both the stateand the federal level, the CBPP focuses on accurate andtimely analysis of specific budgeting policies and theirlikely outcomes. This is intended to strengthen states’abilities to create and transact prudent fiscal policies.Clearly, extensive tax cuts and excessive budget deficitsare not viewed as being prudent.

Inevitably, given the polarized nature of Americanpolitics in the 21st century, all institutions are subject tocriticism when their analysis challenges or contests gov-ernmental policy, especially in areas that are divisiveand controversial, such as tax cuts, as well as correctinginaccuracies in analysis or reporting by other bodies.Since the center is concerned with the impact of policychanges on the poor and on issues of equity, it is widelyportrayed as being a leftward-leaning organization, al-though the same can be (and is) also said of religious in-stitutions that also have very conservative socialagendas.

Recent CBPP policy briefs have featured, amongmany other issues, the failures of President George W.Bush’s long-term Social Security plan, the economicproblems inherent in substantial long-term budgetdeficits, consideration of medical insurance programs,and the need for supplementary social welfare for peo-ple in vulnerable groups. This has led its political oppo-nents to criticize its research output and characterize the

group as a partisan lobbying organization. The centerhas described itself as fiscally conservative and with aninterest in promoting policies to support low-incomeworkers.

SEE ALSO: Bush, George W. (Administration); Earned In-come Tax Credit; Healthcare; Nongovernmental Organiza-tions; Social Security.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Center on Budget and Policies Priorities,www.cbpp.org (cited July 2005); Paul Krugman, The GreatUnravelling (Penguin Books, 2004); Shawn Zeller, “Advocacy,by the Numbers,” National Journal (v.33/12, 2001).

JOHN WALSH

SHINAWATRA UNIVERSITY

Center on Hunger and PovertyTHE CENTER ON HUNGER and Poverty (CHP) ispart of the Institute on Assets and Social Policy (IASP)at the Heller School for Social Policy and Managementat Brandeis University, located in Waltham, Massachu-setts. The CHP developed from the Physician TaskForce on Hunger in America, which, based at HarvardUniversity under Dr. Larry J. Brown, was responsiblefor field trips and reporting across the country concern-ing the issue of hunger, which was of growing impor-tance during the 1980s. The reports concerned not justhunger but its root causes, poverty, and economic in-equality. It moved from Tufts University to its currenthome at Brandeis University in 2000.

The CHP has graduated from working through theAsset Development Institute and the Food Security In-stitute through a variety of special products. As an in-dependent entity, it is able to employ greater focus andawareness of its aims, enabling it to compete better forresearch grants and attracting top-level research staff.

As part of the IASP, the CHP has focused on re-search in the following areas: “domestic hunger, includ-ing its dimensions, health, and nutritional consequences,and policy responses over time; hunger and food inse-curity prevalence at the national, state, and local levels;promotion and expansion of the child nutrition andfood stamp programs; development of nutrition educa-tion materials, specifically designed for low-incomefamilies with children; and program design and evalua-tion for innovative community initiatives in thehunger/nutrition field.”

138 Center on Hunger and Poverty

Institutions are subject to criticism when theiranalysis challenges governmental policy.

These objectives include a wide range of areas, fromresearch and publication to policy formulation and ad-vocacy, outreach, training, and development of educa-tional materials. These activities require a wide range ofskills and resources to complete satisfactorily.

Successes achieved by the CHP to date include initi-ating and drafting the Hunger Relief Act, preparing theNational Food Security Scale and the Welfare Develop-ment Scale, being part of a network initiating and spon-soring the Mickey Leland Childhood Hunger ReliefAct, conducting the “1993 Congressional Analysis: 30Million Hungry Americans and Two Americas: ChildPoverty in the U.S.,” creating the Nutrition-CognitionInitiative, and being part of an initiative entitled theMedford Declaration to End Hunger in the U.S., whichmobilized the leaders of more than 3,000 organizationsthat represent in excess of approximately 100 millionmembers.

Special projects include Feeding Children Better,which provides resources and technical expertise tofood banks across the country to improve the nutri-tional quality of supplies. An educational program en-titled Know Hunger is designed to help studentsunderstand hunger and nutrition issues directly affect-ing their neighborhoods and is organized in associationwith the Gerda and Kurt Klein Foundation, which is apublic, nonprofit organization aimed at helping youngpeople to develop social awareness and then translatethis into community service.

As one of the National Anti-Hunger Organizations,the CHP subscribes to the Blueprint to End Hunger,which recognizes that large-scale social change is neces-sary to end hunger in society, notwithstanding the char-itable nature of many members of American society.This commitment includes the belief that “the rootcause of hunger is a lack of adequate purchasing powerin millions of households. When individuals and fami-lies do not have the resources to buy enough food,hunger results. As a nation we must encourage workand also assure all who work that the results of theirlabor will be sufficient to provide for the basic needs oftheir families.”

In other words, the most effective method of end-ing hunger is to take a holistic understanding of society,which connects poverty with the responsibility of soci-ety and government to provide work for all, and workwith a level of remuneration sufficient to sustainhealthy and functional households.

SEE ALSO: Food for the Hungry; Food Stamps; Hunger;Nutrition.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. “A Blueprint to End Hunger” (NationalAnti-Hunger Organizations, 2004); Center on Hunger andPoverty, www.centeronhunger.org (cited October 2005); C.L.Connell et al., “Children’s Experiences of Food InsecurityCan Assist in Understanding Its Effect on Their Well-Being,”Journal of Nutrition (v.137/7, 2005).

JOHN WALSH

SHINAWATRA UNIVERSITY

Center on Urban Povertyand Social Change

THE CENTER ON URBAN Poverty and SocialChange (CUPSC) is part of the Mandel School of Ap-plied Social Change at Case Western Reserve Univer-sity in Cleveland, Ohio. It “seeks to address theproblems of persistent and concentrated urban povertyand is dedicated to understanding how social and eco-nomic changes affect low-income communities andtheir residents.” Founded in 1988, its home city ofCleveland acts as a site for both conducting researchand formulating policy, and is also a location in whichcommunity building can take place. The CUPSC fo-cuses, that is, on action research that is designed to alterthe environment it is studying.

As of 2005, two codirectors, Claudia Coulton andSharon E. Milligan, lead a team of more than 20 staffmembers. Numerous partners and funding supportershave joined the CUPSC, including the Cleveland Hous-ing Network, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the U.S.Department of Education. Activities include researchand publications, education and outreach, and theCAN DO network. Funded research projects are clus-tered into four main areas: welfare, neighborhoodchange, community safety, and child and family.

Research activities focus on those in the most vul-nerable categories and their experiences in the contextof radical reform in the mid-1990s, as well as lookingfor opportunities for positive community development.Publications naturally concentrate on the CUPSC’sareas of interest and are provided in a wide range ofstyles and formats to permit maximum appeal to a widerange of audiences. These include reports and workingpapers that are published to bring timely results of re-search findings. Methodologies and tools provide theactual survey instruments and research design plansthat enable other researchers to conduct work of a sim-

Center on Urban Poverty and Social Change 139

ilarly high quality that may be comparative in nature.Reports specially designed to be broadly accessible tothe general public include presentations and the BrieflyStated series.

Education and outreach activities include fellow-ships and assistantships, continuing education andtraining, and providing public speakers. Educationalgoals are to “prepare students for the roles as policy an-alysts and researchers; provide an opportunity to workdirectly with neighborhood residents/groups, commu-nity and political organizations in social welfare policy;have available to the center a corps of students who canundertake much of the actual data collection and dataanalysis (under faculty supervision); integrate the infor-mation resources and research experience of the centerand its faculty into the Mandel School’s curriculumwhenever possible.” Again, the educational functioncombines research with policy formulations and advo-cacy and action research.

CAN DO is the Cleveland Area Network on Dataand Organizing. This involves the creation and mainte-nance of an online database of community and neigh-borhood statistics, including population and housingcensus data, economic data, crime and child maltreat-ment statistics, and other indicators. Neighborhoodprofiles are available for 36 neighborhoods in the city ofCleveland and 58 municipalities in Cuyahoga County.Researchers can use these data in their own work, andpeople generally can obtain up-to-date informationabout their home environment.

Cleveland has a high incidence of urban poverty,and this is felt particularly by women and female-headed families. More than one-quarter of all womenin Cleveland live in poverty, and more than half are un-married or have never been married, while the propor-tion of children born to unmarried mothers is twice thenational average. Women’s wages continue to lag be-hind men’s. These factors are all interrelated in complexfashion, as researched by the CUPSC.

SEE ALSO: Community-Based Antipoverty Programs; Edu-cation; Feminization of Poverty; Poverty Research.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Center on Urban Poverty and SocialChange, http://povertycenter.cwru.edu (cited July 2005); G.Duncan et al., Neighborhood Poverty (Russell Sage, 1997); K.Fulbright-Anderson et al., eds., New Approaches to EvaluatingCommunity Initiatives (Aspen Institute, 1995).

JOHN WALSH

SHINAWATRA UNIVERSITY

Central African Republic

IN THE LOW-INCOME, SEVERELY indebted CentralAfrican Republic, subsistence agriculture and forestrydominate the economy. Poverty is widespread, with 67percent of the population living below the poverty lineand 45 percent living in absolute poverty. Some 84 per-cent of the population live on less than $2 a day. Al-most a quarter of children in the country suffer from alack of adequate nourishment. Decades of civil unrestand four coups have drained resources and hamperedefforts to deal with economic problems, and basichealth and education services have often been inter-rupted by paralyzing strikes.

Over 70 percent of Central Africans live in ruralareas where resources are inadequate and healthcare islimited. Inequality is a fact of life, and the lowest 10 per-cent of the population receive only 0.7 percent of totalincome, while the richest segment possesses almost halfof national income. The fragile economic situation inthe Central African Republic has led to a call for inter-national attention and aid.

The Central African Republic suffers from low lifeexpectancy (41.01 years) and a low growth rate (1.49percent). The median age is 18.12 years, and 42.5 per-cent of the population are under the age of 14. Only55.3 percent of Central Africans can expect to see their40th birthday, and only 3.4 percent of the populationhave reached 65 years of age.

Central Africans lack adequate access to potablewater, basic sanitation, physicians, and lifesaving drugs,and the HIV/AIDS prevalence rate of 13.5 has created anational health crisis. Some 260,000 Central Africansare living with the disease, and 23,000 have died fromthe disease or its complications. Very high risks of food-and waterborne diseases such as bacterial diarrhea, hep-atitis A, and typhoid fever continue to further drain thecountry’s resources, as do malaria, polio, meningococ-cal meningitis, and the so-called sleeping disease.

Central African children are at significant healthrisk, and the infant mortality rate of 115 is unaccept-ably high. Between 1995 and 2000, the mortality rate forchildren under the age of 5 rose from 158 to 194 per1,000 live births. Child immunization rates are declin-ing, with only 35 percent of children between birth and23 months receiving measles vaccinations and only 40percent receiving DPT3 immunizations. Between 1990and 2000, immunization rates for measles, DPT, and tu-berculosis declined. Only 35 percent of all children re-ceive oral rehydration therapy when necessary. Currentestimates place the number of Central African orphans

140 Central African Republic

at 110,000, in great part because of the HIV/AIDS epi-demic. Children have also frequently been takenhostage during the constant political upheaval that hasplagued the country.

Females in the Central African Republic are oftenvictimized by endemic discrimination, a significant lackof resources, and a tacit acceptance of violence.Women are more than twice as likely as men to contractHIV/AIDS. Central African women continue to pro-duce children at a rate of 4.5 children per female, andonly 28 percent of all women use any form of contra-ception. The fertility rate of 122 per 1,000 births andthe maternal mortality ratio of 1,100 per 100,000 livebirths are indications that the country needs to pay in-creased attention to reproduction health and education.Less than half (44 percent) of all Central African birthsare attended by trained medical staff, and barely one-fourth of rural women receive obstetrical attention.

Central African education is at a critical point, andthe government has begun to develop programs and al-

locate resources designed to improve access to and thequality of education. While literacy rates for maleshave risen to 63.3 percent, less than 40 percent of Cen-tral African females are literate. Between 1990 and 2002,school attendance declined from 58 percent to 49 per-cent. Less than one-third of children in rural areas at-tend school regularly. The educational crisis hasaffected girls disproportionately at the primary level,but girls are now more likely than boys to attend sec-ondary schools.

Human Development Index Rank: 171Human Poverty Index Rank: 92

SEE ALSO: Debt; Disease and Poverty; HIV/AIDS.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Central Intelligence Agency, “CentralAfrican Republic,” www.cia.gov (cited July 2005); United Na-tions, “Central African Republic,” www.un.org (cited July2005); Social Watch, “Central African Republic,” www.

Central African Republic 141

Females in many African countries are often victimized by endemic discrimination, a significant lack of resources, and a tacit acceptance of violence. Women are more than twice as likely as men to contract HIV/AIDS.

socwatch.org (cited July 2005); UNICEF, “Central AfricanRepublic,” www.unicef.org (cited July 2005), World Bank,“Central African Republic,” www.worldbank.org (cited July2005).

ELIZABETH PURDY, PH.D.INDEPENDENT SCHOLAR

ChadIN THE CENTRAL AFRICAN nation of Chad, some80 percent of the population live below the nationalpoverty line. Almost one-third of the total populationand some 28 percent of all children are malnourished.Annual per capita income in Chad is $210. The UnitedNations Human Development Report ranks Chadamong the lowest countries on quality-of-life issues, butassessment of Chadian poverty is somewhat hamperedby insufficient reporting of data.

From the 1960s to the 1990s, Chad was plagued bycivil unrest and was invaded by neighboring Libya.Even after democratic elections were held in 1996 and1997, power remained concentrated in the hands of anethnic minority. The Chadian economy is dominated byagriculture, and more than 80 percent of the populationare dependent on subsistence farming and livestock.The economy is expected to improve in the near futurebecause a consortium led by two American oil compa-nies invested $3.7 billion to develop Chad’s oil reserves,which are estimated at one billion barrels.

Chadians have a median age of 16.02 years, with ap-proximately half of the population under the age of 14,and 2.8 percent reaching the age of 65. Life expectancyis 47.94 years, and Chadians have a 42.9 percent chanceof failing to survive until their 40th birthday.

The Chadian population lacks proper access topotable water. Additional health and environmentalconcerns derive from the soil and water pollution thathas resulted from improper waste disposal in ruralareas. Lack of access to physicians, hospitals, and life-saving drugs further threatens the population. Chadfaces a 4.8 percent prevalence rate of HIV/AIDS, with200,000 people living with the disease and 18,000deaths attributed to the disease and its complicating fac-tors.

Chadians also face a very high risk of contractingfood- and waterborne diseases such as bacterial andprotozoal diarrhea, hepatitis A, and typhoid fever. Ad-ditional health concerns include schistosomiasis, a

water contact disease, and outbreaks of malaria,cholera, and meningococcal meningitis. In conjunctionwith the Carter Center, Guinea worm, which is alsospread through infected water, was eradicated in Chadin 1998. Chad’s infant mortality rate is unacceptablyhigh at 117 deaths per every 1,000 live births, as is themortality rate of 200 for children under the age of 5. In2003, 61 percent of children between the ages of 12 and36 months were immunized against measles, and 47 per-cent of that group received DPT immunizations.Among Chadian infants, 61 percent were immunizedagainst measles, and 67 percent were immunized againsttuberculosis. Only 36 percent of Chadian children re-ceived oral re-hydration therapy when necessary.

The fertility rate of 6.2 children among all femalesof childbearing age and the fertility rate for women aged15 to 19 pose unacceptable risks to Chadian women.Only eight percent of Chadian women use contracep-tives of any sort. The maternal mortality rate of 1,100deaths per 100,000 live births is indicative of Chad’swidespread poverty and its poor healthcare system. In2003, less than 20 percent of all Chadian births were at-tended by trained medical staff. Chadian girls continueto be subjected to genital mutilation despite the effortsof both government and nongovernmental organiza-tions to stop this practice.

Many parents in Chad feel that it is unnecessary toeducate their daughters, so girls lag behind boys in liter-acy, educational levels, and overall achievement. Justover half of the male population of Chad is literate (56percent), and only 39.3 percent of females possess thisskill. Most children in Chad receive no more than fiveyears of basic education.

Overall, school enrollment has increased from 30.2percent in 1993 to 55.0 percent in 2001, but girls lag be-hind boys in enrollment rates. From 1995 to 2000, pri-mary enrollment rates for boys rose from 59 to 79percent, while enrollment for girls rose from 33 to 47percent. During that same period, completion ratesrose from 21 to 29 percent for males and from eight to12 percent for females.

Human Development Index Rank: 173Human Poverty Index Rank: 100

SEE ALSO: Child Malnutrition; Child Mortality; Childrenand Poverty; Libya.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. Carter Center of Emory University,“Chad,” www.cartercenter.org (cited July 2005); Central Intel-ligence Agency, “Chad,” www.cia.gov (cited July 2005);

142 Chad

United Nations, “Chad,” www.un.org (cited July 2005); So-cial Watch, “Chad,” www.socwatch.org (cited July 2005);UNICEF, “Chad,” www.unicef.org (cited July 2005), WorldBank, “Chad,” www.worldbank.org (cited July 2005); WorldHealth Organization, “Country of Chad,” www.who.int (citedJuly 2005).

ELIZABETH PURDY, PH.D.INDEPENDENT SCHOLAR

CharityCHARITY IS LOVE FOR fellow human beings, oftenexpressed in a donation of goods and services to thosein need. It is the spirit of active goodwill toward others,demonstrated in deeds to promote their welfare. Theword charity is taken from the Latin word, caritas, or“love.” Thomas Aquinas called charity the greatest ofthe virtues.

It has been said that the family is the oldest charita-ble and social welfare organization on earth. The familyfeeds, protects, and nurtures in a variety of ways allfamily members. One could say historically that twoprocesses have been going on at once in the family, mu-tual aid and nurturance, and protection from outsideforces. In early history, aid and protection gradually ex-panded to include other extended family members andother members of the tribe. This in turn accompaniedthe growth in cooperation in such areas as agriculture,hunting and fishing, and building. In time, charity be-came more structured and formalized.

All the major world religions developed teachingson proper conduct, including charity. These teachingsbecame more structured over time. It is necessary tostate this because most of the published works by au-thors in the West give considerably more attention toJudeo-Christian charity values and philosophies. Thereis more literature appearing of late on Islamic perspec-tives on charity, but little on Eastern religions (such asBuddhism, Confucianism, and Hinduism) and theirperspective on charity.

One can find teachings on charity in the various sa-cred texts of Eastern religions, such as the various say-ings about charity in the Bhagawad Gita. The act ofgiving a gift (dana in Sanskrit or dan in Hindi) is surelyone of the more seminal characteristics of Hindu reli-giosity. It is a central component in the Law of Manu(dating from the 3rd century B.C.E.) and in the Rig Veda(dating back over 3,000 years).

Buddhism emphasizes compassion for all living en-tities (humans, animals, and plants). In Buddhist think-ing, charity that is done for no reward here or thehereafter is referred to as pure and unsullied, and isviewed as the best kind. The importance of compassion(metta) is a foundation stone of charity. Perhaps charityhas not been structured as much in Buddhism becauseBuddhism has not traditionally had as strong an organi-zational base. Buddhists have been involved in charita-ble endeavors of various kinds, some of which havebeen modeled on Christian programs.

Confucianism treats the individual as a relationalbeing. The person is not a detached and solitary entity,but is constantly involved in human relationships. In allrelationships, both parties have obligations. For exam-ple, the father should show kindness, and provide secu-rity and education, in addition to other duties. In turn,a son should be respectful and obedient, and mustshow charity toward his father in old age, caring for hisneeds.

Jainism dates back to the 6th century B.C.E. A cen-tral teaching of Jainism is ahimsa, nonviolence to all liv-ing things. This surely influenced Mohandas Gandhi,who was not a Jain but grew up among Jains. Ahimsacan certainly be looked at in the context of a broaderperspective on charity. In Jainism, charity or donation isDana, and it should be done with compassion, with nodesire for material gain, and in a spirit of self-sacrifice,and yet also should include joy in giving. Charity is offour kinds in Jainism, donation of food (Ahara-dana),donation of medicine (Ausadha-dana), donation ofbooks or of education (Jnana-dana), and giving protec-tion or freedom from fear (Abhaya-dana). In the Kun-dakunda Pancastikaya, it states that to be moved at thesight of a person in need and to offer relief to him is the“spring of virtue.” In the Sutra-keit-anga, there is a sim-ilar statement that can be found in various other reli-gious beliefs, namely, to treat all creatures in the worldas one would like to be treated.

Similar statements to the above can also be found inthe Bahai faith, Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism,Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Sikhism, Taoism, Zoroastri-anism, other religious traditions, and even in Aristotleand in Greek philosophy.

One of the strongest declarations about the impor-tance of charity can be found in Judaism. Jewishprophets like Amos, in the 8th century B.C.E., called onpeople to embrace charity, as did other Judaic prophets.Moses Maimonides (1135–1204) contributed notablyhere. The Jewish perspective on charity for ages past hasemphasized justice or righteousness. In Judaism the

Charity 143