People get left behind when they lack the choices and opportunities to participate in and benefit from development progress. Various reports and studies, in general, indicate that across countries, a common trend is that vulnerable groups such as women and children, people in rural areas, indigenous peoples, ethnic and linguistic minorities, people with disabilities, migrants, and older persons are disproportionately among those who have been left behind.

In general, people are left behind when they lack the choices and capabilities that enable others to participate in or benefit from development processes. Reasons for these could be numerous, to name a few, could possibly be relative deprivation in terms of access to resources; relative disadvantage due to socio-economic exclusion or discrimination; lack of proper information regarding the opportunities available; lack of access to job markets or technologies; skill-related handicaps and may be many others.

The dimension of this problem can be better gauged from the World Inequality Report 2018, which states that the income inequality between people around the world has been rising since 1980, despite a period of unprecedented poverty reduction and growth. Moreover, during the period from 1980 to 2016, the world’s richest 1 per cent captured twice as much of the growth in income worldwide. World’s poorest countries have also become relatively poorer; while the regional growth disparities within countries have grown wider. These findings are alarming and indicate a dire need for raising awareness among all the stakeholders and devising policies for an encompassing and inclusive growth.

When people are unable to get ahead or gain influence and perceive “the system to be rigged”, their aspirations shrink, along with the space for political solutions, social trust, meritocracy and problem solving. Going by this argument, inefficiencies in the government system coupled with nepotism, favoritism, corruption, bending of rules and procedures to accommodate few favored ones and many such related factors keeps on continuously adding to this problem.

World over, it is often argued that democratic system offers a viable solution to such problems and especially when such a system is backed by statutes such as constitution. However, a broader look at these democratic societies gives an impression that socio-economic deprivation and income disparities tend to be more common in developing countries with democratic set-up as compared to the advanced countries. A large population size coupled with struggling functional literacy rate have often acted as an impediment for the developing societies with democratic set-up. Such a picture is quite common in the South Asian nations.

However, with the passage of time, a greater realization about these inequalities and disparities had played its role in the adoption of the Sustainable Development Agenda 2030, wherein UN Member States pledged to ensure “no one will be left behind”, thereby putting equity and poverty eradication at the heart of the world’s development agenda. Thus, this Agenda officially recognized that high and rising inequalities are not only an impediment to growth and human development; but also a violation of shared norms, values and people’s intrinsic sense of fairness.

The pledge to leave no one behind is a commitment to end extreme poverty in all its forms and to act explicitly to ensure that those who have been left behind can catch up to those who have experienced greater progress. Practically, the pledge means all governments must chart a new course aimed specifically at curbing inequalities between people, groups and places; correcting for legacies of discrimination and exclusion both between and within countries; and prioritizing and fast-tracking progress among the furthest behind. Implementing the pledge, thus, does not imply a separate course of action but is intrinsic to the action required to achieve the SDGs.

UNDP in one of its report identified five factors as key to understanding who is being left behind and why, these were discrimination; place of residence; socio-economic status; governance; and vulnerability to shocks. It rightly pointed out that people are left behind when they experience exclusion, bias or mistreatment in laws, policies, access to public services and social practices due to their identity.

At the global level, high-income countries tend to dominate decision-making, a trend mirrored by the reach and power of transnational companies. Their decisions shape the large-scale economic and political processes that drive globalization. With limited capacities and leverage to engage and influence global decision-making, poor countries and populations are less able to anticipate and benefit from global trends in technologies, trade and markets. They are less able to prevent and recover from global shocks, manage corrupt and illicit practices or confront transnational organized crime. Inequitable global trade, finance, investment and intellectual property regimes also prevent many countries, particularly smaller ones, from fully engaging in, or benefiting from globalization.

Those living in least developed countries face particularly steep capacity, capital and human resource barriers that often effectively lock them out of global markets and trade and investment opportunities, as well as prevent innovation and the diffusion of new technologies. Although globalization has benefited some, the gains have not necessarily been distributed equitably or inclusively. Leaps in productivity have not consistently translated into higher wages. Unskilled workers in many economies have lost jobs, particularly in the manufacturing sector, while in the formal and informal sector, many remain vulnerable to job loss, exploitation, low-pay and dangerous conditions.

The introduction of new technologies, robotics and fast-moving value chains in the production process have raised the stakes, making it harder for unskilled, “off-line” workers and businesses to compete. Many who have escaped income poverty, including particularly in middle-income countries, remain dependent on low-paying unstable jobs, often in the informal sector, without stabilizing assets or wealth, affordable essential services such as healthcare or adequate social protection. Their lingering economic insecurity thus puts them at high risk of slipping back under poverty lines.

Globally, financial inclusion is considered as a critical indicator of development and well-being of a society and is widely recognised as a policy initiative for an effective governance in many countries including India. In this regard, International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration of Philadelphia (1944) which states, “Poverty anywhere is a threat to prosperity everywhere” is worth mentioning.

Global trends have shown that in order to achieve inclusive development and growth, the expansion of financial services to all sections of society i.e. rural as well as financially backward pockets of cities is of utmost importance. Thus policymakers have endeavored to ensure that poverty is tackled in all its manifestations and that the benefits of economic growth reach the poor and excluded sections of society by connecting them with mainstream banking.

India witnessed her own history with roll out of ‘Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY)’ in August 2014, which marked a tectonic shift in the history of financial inclusion in India. As it witnessed accelerated access of excluded sections to various financial services like basic savings bank accounts, affordable, need-based credit, remittances facilities, and insurance and pension. The use of technology enabled deep penetration of banking services at affordable cost across the length and breadth of the country.

Now the larger question, that will the day come when ‘no one is left behind’ can be aptly summed up as what President of Ghana, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo and co-chair of SDG advocates once said that “This is a time of great hope for the world. If we work smartly together and stay on course, we can raise millions out of poverty and significantly expand basic social services for many more by the 2030 end date of the SDGs.”