As an economist trained at a public university in Colombia, I grew up surrounded by talented people determined to overcome their circumstances. Today, when many of my classmates and I have achieved goals that once seemed unattainable, I recognize that our progress cannot be explained solely by innate abilities or economic resources, but by something less measurable: mutual support, companionship, friendships, and bonds of trust that sustained us through the most uncertain times.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the midst of chaos, when we didn\u2019t know what to do or how to solve difficulties, it was those human relationships that allowed us to overcome them. This experience leads me to question how economics has defined poverty and quality of life, and to what extent its indicators have overlooked what is most essential to social life: our connections with others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For decades, academia and international organizations have focused the debate on indicators that reduce poverty to a monetary issue, as if an income threshold could fully explain human well-being. Not even the capabilities approach \u2014proposed by Amartya Sen\u2014 can capture the complexity of life if real opportunities are restricted. When access to good education, decent employment, or credit is denied, capabilities are frustrated and poverty persists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But there is something deeper that often goes unnoticed in these analyses: interpersonal relationships. As Silvia Congost pointed out in her talk The Secret of Relationships<\/em>, a person\u2019s quality of life does not depend solely on income, degrees, or achievements, but on the quality of their relationships \u2014that is what gives life meaning. Measuring poverty solely by income or material deprivation is, at its core, a way of ignoring what makes us human.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The African philosophy of ubuntu<\/em>, popularized by Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela, offers a powerful alternative to development models centered on the individual. \u201cI am because we are\u201d sums up a vision of well-being based on interdependence. From this perspective, poverty is not measured by what is missing in one\u2019s pocket, but by what has been broken in the social fabric that binds people together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This relational poverty does not refer to material deprivation but to the absence of stable social bonds, interpersonal trust, and recognition. It is a form of emotional and civic impoverishment that manifests as isolation, fear, and collective indifference. Axel Honneth expressed it clearly: the struggle for recognition is as important as the struggle for resources. A society in which people lack recognition and voice is impoverished, even if its GDP grows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Here, ubuntu<\/em> offers a moral compass: no one can fully realize themselves in isolation. Human life flourishes in community, where one person\u2019s well-being depends on that of others. When the \u201cwe\u201d disintegrates, the \u201cI\u201d is also impoverished.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Recent studies reinforce this idea. The Spirit Level<\/em>, by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, shows that more unequal societies are not only less healthy but also more distrustful. The World Happiness Report 2024<\/em> identifies social relationships as the main determinant of subjective well-being, even above income. And the OECD\u2019s Better Life Index<\/em> includes \u201csocial relationships\u201d as an essential dimension of well-being, although in Latin America they have yet to become central to public policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To this relational vision, we must add a contemporary challenge: virtuality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n No matter how useful social media and artificial intelligences may be, no technology can replace human presence<\/a>. No algorithm can replicate the experience of looking into someone\u2019s eyes, sharing silences, feeling real empathy, or offering help that is consistent with human emotion and morality. No AI can equal the connections that human neurons have built over millions of years of evolution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Latin America faces a double poverty: material and relational. The first cannot be fought only through transfers, subsidies, or social programs \u2014as is often said in many political speeches\u2014 but by creating stable, long-term income opportunities within a mandatory social security structure. The second, more invisible one, is reflected in distrust and the fragmentation of community ties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\u2018Ubuntu\u2019: \u201cI am because we are\u201d<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The challenge of the virtual<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n