Our Human Geography list tackles the big issues, from equality to population growth to sustainability, publishing in cultural and social geography, development geography, political geography, qualitative and quantitative research methods and urban geography.
The list includes internationally renowned names such as Danny Dorling, Loretta Lees and Anne Power. We publish a range of formats including research books that bridge theory and apply it to practice.
The Conclusion surveys the issues that have arisen in the book and draws together the consensus and solutions that are emerging after two years of the global pandemic. Key ideas are outlined, and the actions, both domestic and international, that are required to align pandemic mitigation to sustainable development are highlighted.
COVID-19 poses specific challenges for people living in more remote or relatively inaccessible pockets of rural and urban settlements. This chapter focuses on how the People’s Cultural Centre (PECUC), a nongovernmental organization in Odisha, India, initiated interim relief measures for families of migrant labourers, daily wage labourers, landless, child labourers, disabled, widowed and other vulnerable families in Odisha whose lives were severely affected by the pandemic. It examines and highlights success stories from the field where PECUC has laid down a substantial COVID-19 programming handprint. For over three decades, PECUC has been engaged with children’s rights, education, health, livelihoods, environment protection, women’s empowerment, care of the aged, youth empowerment and disaster management. Having built a presence in these regions, PECUC has been able to work with communities to support alternative livelihoods during the pandemic. More importantly, this chapter shows the importance of working at all levels with all sections of vulnerable communities such as children, youth, disabled and women specifically to create sustainable futures, and to be able to cope with the ongoing pandemic. It brings into focus values of empathy, respect and sharing, which are at the forefront of coping mechanisms.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a mechanism for corporate firms, large and small, to establish their credentials as responsible and conscientious entities. The protracted COVID-19 pandemic has exposed age-old socioeconomic vulnerabilities in India, manifest via indicators like rising inequalities, reduced livelihood and economic opportunities and shrinking of democratic space. The Indian government was unprepared to handle various human crises, such as that of migrant labourers, but on the other hand came up with appropriate legislation for facilitating CSR activism, in direct contrast to the negligent attitude of the colonial government when a similar pandemic had previously hit India. A survey of CSR activism in India suggests that it had positive implications: mainly the social progress accruing from such philanthropic dispositions. Yet, they are not binding or legally enforceable upon the firms. Also, CSR activities are mostly cosmetic and fail to address deep-rooted structural problems. This chapter attempts to explore how the corporate sector may be productively engaged towards addressing various social issues.
What will be the economic legacy of COVID-19? What are the likely consequences of the pandemic for the future of international development? This chapter reflects on these questions, taking as its starting point the role of the state as an agent of development. In the post-1989 period of rapid globalization, the role of many states in economic decision-making and management was minimized as the financialization of the global economy enhanced the power and wealth of corporations and the private sector. However, the pandemic has seen the return of the state to save jobs and businesses, making a mockery of the decade of austerity that followed the 2008 crash. The chapter argues that the international development sector should assume a more overtly political role post-pandemic to challenge any return to austerity and ensure that state resources are deployed to those who need them most: the poor, marginalized and voiceless in the Global North and South.
EPDF and EPUB available Open Access under CC-BY-NC-ND licence.
Though a globally shared experience, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected societies across the world in radically different ways. This book examines the unique implications of the pandemic in the Global South.
With international contributors from a variety of disciplines including health, economics and geography, the book investigates the pandemic’s effects on development, medicine, gender (in)equality and human rights among other issues. Its analysis illuminates further subsequent crises of interconnection, a pervasive health provision crisis and a resulting rise in socio-economic inequality.
The book’s assessment offers an urgent discourse on the ways in which the impact of COVID-19 can be mitigated in some of the most challenging socio-economic contexts in the world.
Access to COVID-19 vaccines, key to ending the pandemic and its devastating consequences, is characterized by vast inequalities. High-income countries pre-purchased most of the initial supply of vaccines licensed to big pharmaceutical companies and approved in Europe and the United States, vaccinating their own populations ahead of the global interest in vaccinating healthcare workers and vulnerable people everywhere. The proposed multilateral solution to vaccine supply, the World Health Organization- and GAVI-backed COVAX initiative, has suffered from ‘vaccine nationalism’. While India was projected as the key source of COVAX’s initial supply, its vaccine production has also been redirected to domestic distribution. China and Russia have instead emerged as alternative sources of supply with their domestically developed vaccines. Amid overall scarcity, enormous controversy has emerged over how to scale up vaccine production and increase vaccine accessibility. The chapter reveals layers of vaccine inequalities not just between the Global North and South, but also within the Global South – especially between middle- and low-income countries. The chapter concludes that the challenge of providing COVID-19 vaccines, and the inequalities involved, appears indicative of wider challenges related to 21st-century global development.
Monopoly patent rewards are highly effective in stimulating successful research and development but do poorly in the next two stages: rapid scale up of manufacturing and strategic distribution to optimize containment and suppression of the disease. A Health Impact Fund (HIF) approach would do better in all three phases by focusing innovator attention on the population level: giving innovators strong incentives to minimize the number of new infections and to avert the evolution of new strains. Such incentives would motivate innovators to take full account of third-party effects of their treatments and therefore to prioritize the people whose treatment would have the largest effect rather than those who can bid the most money, including even very poor people in their strategy. This method would also encourage manufacturers to reduce the cost of producing and distributing vaccines, a goal that is paramount to the HIF’s success.
In July 2021, Africa entered a third wave of COVID-19 after months of rising cases, hospitalization and deaths. In January 2022, Africa was hit by a fourth wave, after six continual weeks of surging numbers. The situation is likely to worsen given low vaccination rates. Many writers have pointed to causes like vaccine apartheid and the grabbing of health supplies by wealthy countries. Others have focused on the lack of health goods and service capacities in African countries, with terrible implications for their health and domestic economic conditions. Less has been written about how the historical patterns of financial flows have created these trends, how these flows had changed prior to COVID-19 and how the pandemic has affected debt levels and influenced the mix between aid, remittances, sovereign bond markets and other private flows and Chinese lending. A particular focus will be on how the West, through the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, is attempting to use the crisis to re-empower its presence in Africa.
The Introduction to this book aims to contribute to social science and humanities research by investigating key issues and emerging concerns pertinent to the effects of COVID-19 on the Global South. The book is transdisciplinary and draws on perspectives from health, economics, geography, development practice, political science and other academic specialisms on themes relevant to international development, public and social policy. The Introduction highlights the need for this text at this point in time and notes that this is a vital dialogue on an important topic. The scale of the pandemic and the resultant socioeconomic scarring across the Global South needs to be examined from different perspectives to give those acting in the field a better, critical knowledge base to help mitigate its consequences in highly vulnerable regions. The central need for the book is to provide a specialist discourse from a generic international development studies perspective on how the impact of COVID-19 and its variants can be mitigated in some of the most challenging socioeconomic contexts on earth.
This chapter analyses the actions taken by political stakeholders – presidents, state powers, opposition, political and social actors – in the face of the COVID-19 health crises in 18 Latin American countries. To do so, we study the actors in charge of communicating the outbreak of the pandemic and analyse the type of discourse they used. Then we explain which institutions undertook leadership in the crisis, highlighting the relevance almost always acquired by presidents and the secondary role played by the legislative and judicial powers. Thirdly, we discuss the role played by other political and social actors. Finally, we note the impact that the COVID-19 health crisis has had on the region’s democracies, emanating from the dynamics of the concentration of power in the executive and based on the results of elections held since September 2020.
