The problem of reducing poverty is on the agenda of almost all governrnents in the world, and the discussion as to how to do this occupies the attention of public debate. It is not only a state to be questioned, it is an unacceptable state in question. What confounds the common citizen is that scientific and technological advances have not been accompanied at a similar rate by increases in social welfare. In Peru levels of poverty (around 50%) have remained the same over the last 30 years. What's more, social policy in the 1990s has been regressive and inefficient. The lack of an adequate institutional framework, the perception that the workings of the market will alone solve the problem, and the lack of impact evaluation for social programs have been at the heart of the problem. It's not a matter of spending or investing more, it's a matter of doing it better, and this is directly related to the lack of adequate social management. This does not mean that we cannot reduce poverty without sustained economic growth, but the type of growth is influential for two reasons. In the first place, capital intensive growth does not increase employment, and for this reason does not reduce poverty. In the second place, economic growth generates resources through a greater tax revenue, which can be invested in social sectors. But how to do this is a political decision, tainted many times by personal interests and not as a response to the social reality of a country. As is demonstrated in this article, between intentions and actions, there is a wide gap, and if we do not touch on this theme adequately, poverty will be a perpetual problem.
Bibliographical noteAño asignado al volumen y número: setiembre-diciembre 2001.
Bibliografía: página 388.