A/HRC/25/56 55. Analysis by the Pew Research Center of census data in the United States20 shows the wealth gap between whites and minorities continued to grow since 1984 when the census began tracking such data. White households have on average 20 times the median wealth of blacks and 18 times that of Hispanics. The recession from late 2007 to mid-2009 took a far greater toll on the wealth of minorities than whites. From 2005 to 2009, inflation-adjusted median wealth fell by 66 per cent among Hispanic households and 53 per cent among black households, compared with just 16 per cent among white households. As a result the typical black household had just $5,677 in wealth (assets minus debts) in 2009; the typical Hispanic household had $6,325 in wealth; and the typical white household had $113,149. 56. The World Bank has highlighted the “remarkable progress” of Viet Nam on poverty reduction. However, ethnic minorities — 15 per cent of the population — have not enjoyed such progress. In 1993, minorities comprised 20 per cent of all poor households. By 1998, this had risen to 29 per cent, and by 2010 to 47 per cent, and 68 per cent of the extreme poor. The gap in living standards is also large: 66.3 per cent of ethnic minorities were still poor in 2010 compared to only 12.9 per cent of the majority Kinh, and 37.4 per cent of ethnic minorities are still extremely poor, compared to just 2.9 per cent of Kinh.21 The World Bank describes six “pillars of disadvantage” that combine in a “vicious cycle” to influence ethnic minority livelihood outcomes and lead directly and indirectly to persistent poverty: lower levels of education; less mobility; less access to financial services; less productive, lower-quality land; limited market access; stereotyping and cultural barriers.22 57. One criticism that must be addressed is that a focus on any population group or minority may be perceived of as unfair affirmative action or special measures that result in a neglect of other population groups who may also have very real issues and development challenges. However, this need not be the case. An approach which addresses the longstanding issues of disadvantaged minorities as a core priority does not assume or require neglect of other groups or essential areas of concern. It requires that such targeted attention is justified, monitored and time-bound to ensure that it does not become discriminatory. Disaggregated data is also essential in this regard and allows inequalities to be statistically demonstrated, and progress towards targets to be monitored and evaluated. 58. Addressing inequality is an overarching goal that, if it is achieved, will inevitably bring with it benefits for disadvantaged minority groups across a wide range of other areas that the post-2015 development agenda consultations are addressing. The rationale behind such an inequalities-based approach is strong, however it must be driven at a global and donor level to overcome barriers of discrimination, power-dynamics, and lack of political will that are often evident at the national level. In the Synthesis Report of the Global Thematic Public Consultation on the Post-2015 Development Agenda focusing on inequalities,23 it is stated that “there is considerable evidence that inequalities in one structural domain increase the likelihood of inequalities in others. In the event of opportunity for improvements in one domain, the chances of progress are often undermined 20 21 22 23 Rakesh Kochhar, Richard Fry and Paul Taylor, “Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks, Hispanics: Executive Summary”, 26 July 2011. Available from www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/07/26/wealth-gaps-rise-to-record-highs-between-whites-blackshispanics. World Bank, Well Begun, Not Yet Done: Vietnam’s Remarkable Progress on Poverty Reduction and the Emerging Challenges (Hanoi, 2012), p. 5. Available from http://documents.worldbank.org. Ibid., p. 122. Available from www.worldwewant2015.org/file/299198/download/324584. 15