Such families may not be willing to migrate because it would put their sources of subsistence at risk.
However, there are large potential gains from migrating to a highly productive country like the U. According to a study by Clemens, Montenegro and Pritchett in 2016, the annual gain from working in a high-productivity environment is more than four times the total lifetime value of the most successful anti-poverty program.
Despite such disparities between these two countries’ prioritization of their energy and education sectors, both areas took action to build resilience to climate change, invest in human capital and improve infrastructure.
For poor households trapped by low-productivity and in oftentimes remote, rural locations, migration could be a viable solution to increasing their standard of living.
The intervention consisted of six elements: a productive asset grant, temporary cash consumption support, technical skills training, high frequency home visits, a savings program and health education and services.
On the other hand, governments also need to be careful when deciding on policies that involve low-income countries.
Along with undernourishment; however, about 1.2 billion people still live in extreme poverty and about 30% of these are children.
During the Millennium Summit in 2000, the United Nations gathered together with several other members such as UNICEF, WHO, World Bank, and UNESCO just to name a few.
In response to the incident, Oxfam recommended that food aid should be bought in local markets inside the country receiving aid.
Oxfam also said the Haitian government should decentralise services away from the capital, make sure farmers have credit access and improve their land tenure system where farmers could be cheated by judges able to transfer land into the hands of ‘whoever offers the biggest bribe.’ The same goes for humanitarian organizations in deciding what kinds of resources and assistance to provide.