A/HRC/5/3 page 10 18. Another expert believed that broadening the definition of extreme poverty could bring more interest groups into a possible coalition. This point was contested on the familiar grounds of its feasibility and the concern that vested interests for which state cooperation might be more desirable, could easily block reforms. A glaring example of such a problem in the exercise of social choice could be witnessed in the United States where there is “conflict between majoritarian public preference for policies that use unemployment to combat inflation, and the obligations of the Government to secure the right to work”.11 This clearly demonstrates the possibility of conflict between efficiency maximization policies and human rights protection as public policy goals in a market economy.12 Another major study by Peter Townsend with David Gordon for DFID entitled “The Extent and Nature of ‘Absolute’ Poverty”, (2003), that followed upon the World Summit for Social Development at Copenhagen in 1995, recognized the difference between absolute (extreme) notions of poverty and overall poverty, and developed indicators of severe deprivation of human needs e.g. food, drinking water, sanitation, health, education and information. Data from 74 countries surveyed demonstrated that it is possible to design policies that first tackle those extreme/severe deprivation problems. José Bengoa’s final report to the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights13 also emphasizes the need to give priority to those most in need in policies for extreme poverty eradication. While the independent expert’s approach by no means guarantees that disagreements will not arise between social groups as to the relevant elements of extreme poverty, most experts agreed that narrowing down the universe of the poor, to the extremely poor would most likely achieve greater political acceptance. In his second report, the independent expert drew attention to the Rawlsian principle of justice, which considers taking care of the most vulnerable segments of the society, summarizing it as “people suffering from extreme poverty would then be a small portion of the total number of people who are suffering from all forms of poverty, and the severity of conditions of poverty would be apparent to every member of society, inducing them to take action to eradicate those conditions”.14 19. In this situation, poverty reduction would receive a higher political priority not only from the national authorities but also from the international community thus increasing the possibility of expanding development aid as well as obtaining the participation of the poor in the design and implementation of anti-poverty measures. 20. The workshop addressed the issues raised by the independent expert as to whether extreme poverty, in itself, is a condition caused by a human rights violation or whether extreme poverty itself can be described as a violation of human rights. In the first view, human rights play an instrumental role in the creation of conditions of well-being for the rights-holders, which may 11 See Philip Harvey Human Rights and Economic Policy Discourse: Taking Economic and Social Rights Seriously, p. 107. 12 Idem. 13 A/HRC/Sub.1/58/16. 14 See E/CN.4/2006/43, p. 18, para. 60.