People-Centered Economic Development

*NOTE: I'm posting this to open a dialogue on people-centered economic development/community economic development, and to provide some resources on a very general discussion on alleviating poverty. I left it broad on purpose.
___________________

What an idea.

I heard about this concept of a People-Centered Economic Development theory from interactions with Twitter. During a discussion on social finance, someone suggested I check out an article (mainly due to my dissatisfaction with how far the Canadians were ahead when it comes to something like social finance--and "bacon"). The article, with a great title in "You, me, we, ethics and people-centered economics," intrigued me, and I started doing a little reading.

To me, this bottom-up approach to economics makes sense--the most vulnerable (and largest) population in an economy are the low-income. The wealth gap is sadly growing, and that disparity, as anyone that has taken Intro Economics can tell you, creates all kinds of problems for the economy at-large. Inclusive capitalism is another excellent way of putting this focus on solutions to alleviate poverty.

Well, all of this talk about a "poverty-focused" development reminded me of a few of my favorite community economic development (CED) organizations. These are the Indiana Association of Community Economic Development (IACED) and the Indianapolis Neighborhood Resource Center (INRC), who practices asset-based community development (ABCD). Both prioritize the development of neighborhoods/the community as a means to improving individuals situations. And both, in my opinion, deliver a higher-quality and more inclusive picture of what it really means to "develop" an economy.

So why does this matter? When it comes to gigantic macroeconomies, why do the poor, who in purely financial terms seem to be insignificant, matter?

If we look at our government programs, they are addressing needs that arise out of market imbalances. Some of those 'externalities' deal with pollution (though the EPA has been made rather toothless), and some deal with an unequal balance of wealth. Those programs get called "welfare" as if its a bad thing, but it's important to see them as meeting needs that the market doesn't.

So to everyone that says "oh, our taxes are being given to lazy, corrupt, unproductive people who are just drains on society" (first off--yikes--not all that much of an accurate picture of most people that qualify for government service), I would expect a round of applause. Poverty-focused economic development is not just about empowering people in poverty to get out, but also to, at the same time, reduce dependence on government services. That's something that, I would hope, we can all, FINALLY, agree on as a good thing.

Fact is, society benefits from the econommy being "flattened," to borrow a term from Tom Friedman.

These are why I intend to focus my future studies and career on how to get both legal and financial services to the poor (among other things, of course!). This is also why sustainability--environmental, fiscal, social, etc.--is so essential. There ISN'T enough to go around of much of anything, and making our prosperity well-dispersed and able to thrive is an important goal that we can all embrace.

We can certainly disagree on HOW to do it, but we cannot disagree that something MUST be done.