A/HRC/27/51 proclaiming the entire region a “zone of peace”61 (see annex III). The Declaration, which constitutes a strong and positive example for the entire world, is based on the desire of the inhabitants of the zone to preserve and consolidate peace through the promotion of friendly relations between States and the commitment of United Nations Member States to resolve differences through dialogue and peaceful means, in conformity with international law. It recalls the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which established a nuclear-free zone in Latin America and the Caribbean 45 years ago. The Declaration commits all members of the organization to strengthen regional integration with a vision to establish an international order based on the human right to peace.62 That vision excludes the use of force and illegitimate means of defence, including weapons of mass destruction. This implies the need to negotiate in order to reach complete nuclear disarmament and arrive at a significant reduction in the production and stockpiling of conventional weapons and trade thereon. The establishment of zones of peace and cooperation in an increasing number of regions of the world is to be welcomed, as it would carry the commitment of the governments concerned towards a significant decrease in military budgets and spending. E. Recent studies on the negative impact on economic growth of inequality in wealth distribution 45. In March 2013, the South Centre in Geneva issued a working paper illustrating that the fiscal contraction strategy in many countries, as well as specific austerity measures are not conducive to socioeconomic recovery or the achievement of development and employment goals. Austerity with regard to social services is counterproductive. Austerity should instead begin by reducing military spending.63 46. In April 2014, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) published its World Economic Outlook,64 followed by a paper concerning the negative consequences of wealth inequality for national and international economic growth.65 The paper argues that, not consistently with the Fund’s traditional position, income inequality can actually lead to slower or less sustainable economic growth, while redistribution of income, when measured, does not hurt, and may help, the economy. This constitutes a welcome sign of a shift in IMF thinking about income disparity. “It would still be a mistake to focus on growth and let inequality take care of itself, not only because inequality may be ethically undesirable but also because the resulting growth may be low and unsustainable,” according to the study.66 47. In June 2014, the International Labour Organization published the World Social Protection Report 2014–15,67 providing a global overview of the organization of social protection systems, their coverage, benefits and public expenditures; analysing recent 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 16 See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=14215&. Carlos Villán-Durán, The Emerging Right to Peace: Its Legal Foundations (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Intersentia, 2014). David Cortright, Peace: A History of Movements and Ideas (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Cambridge University Press, 2008). Isabel Ortiz and Matthew Commins, “The age of austerity: a review of public expenditures and adjustment measures in 181 countries” (Geneva, South Centre, March 2013). See www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2014/01/pdf/text.pdf. “Redistribution, inequality, and growth”, prepared by Jonathan D. Ostry, Andrew Berg, Charalambos G. Tsangarides (Washington D.C., IMF Research Department, April 2014). See Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century (Cambridge, Massachusetts, Belknap Press, 2014). See also Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium. See www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/26/income-inequality-economic-growtheconomy_n_4860228.html. See www.ilo.org/gimi/gess/ShowTheme.do?tid=3985.