By: Alex Guyver,
on 9/14/2016
Amartya Sen’s famous study of famines found that people died not because of a lack of food availability in a country, but because some people lacked entitlements to food. Can the same now be applied to the causes of global poverty?
The post The poverty paradox appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Amy Jelf,
on 7/26/2016
Marketing as a business function has swept the world. It is the fastest growing global business activity. It has infiltrated all aspects of life, not just the economic - but also the political, social and personal.
The post National marketing in a global market appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Clare Hanson,
on 5/25/2016
For some decades before the turn of the Millennium, the growth prospects for most of the developing world looked extremely bleak. Income growth was negligible and poverty rates were high and seemed stubbornly persistent. Some even suggested that the barriers against development were almost insurmountable as progress in the already rich world was argued to come about at the expense of the poor.
The post An elusive quest for a recipe for success in economic development appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Kathleen Sargeant,
on 3/29/2016
Countries grow richer as one moves away from the equator, and the same is generally true if one looks at differences among regions within countries. However, this was not always the case: research has shown that in 1500 C.E., for example, there was no such positive link between latitude and prosperity. Can these irregularities be explained? It seems likely an answer can be found in factors strongly associated with latitude.
The post Climate and the inequality of nations appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Clare Hanson,
on 7/15/2015
Leadership training has become a multi-billion dollar global industry. The reason for this growth is that organizations, faced with new technology, changing markets, fierce competition, and diverse employees, must adapt and innovate or go under. Because of this, organizations need leaders with vision and the ability to engage willing collaborators. However, according to interviews with business executives reported in the McKinsey Quarterly, leadership programs are not developing global leaders.
The post Can leadership be taught? appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Kathleen Sargeant,
on 5/27/2015
Gender is a central concept in modern societies. The promotion of gender equality and women’s empowerment is key for policymakers, and it is receiving a growing attention in business agendas. However, gender gaps are still a wide phenomenon. While gender gaps in education and health have been decreasing remarkably over time and their differences across countries have been narrowing, gender gaps in the labour market and in politics are more persistent and still vary largely across countries.
The post Ten facts about economic gender inequality appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Alice,
on 2/14/2015
There is universal acknowledgment of the fact that India needs to come back on the path of high economic growth quickly. Although GDP grew at an unprecedented annual average rate of growth of almost 7.7% during the past decade (the highest for any democracy in the world), the last two years have been disappointing. High economic growth rates fuelled by high rates of investment are essential because they generate huge revenues for the government, which can then be utilised for social welfare and infrastructure expansion programmes. Of course, it goes without saying that rapid growth alone is not enough. It must be of a nature that creates increasing productive employment opportunities and it must be inclusive as well so that more and more sections of society benefit visibly and tangibly from it.
There is a yet another dimension to economic growth, in addition to its being rapid and inclusive. And this is that economic growth has to be ecologically sustainable as well. India simply cannot afford the “grow now, pay later” model that has been adopted by most other countries, including China and Brazil. This is for at least four pressing reasons.
First, no country is going to add another 40-50 crore to its current population of about 124 crore by the middle of this century as India is destined to do. (By contrast, China will add just about 2.5 crore over the same period to its current population of about 150 crore.) We cannot compromise the prospects for our coming generations by our impatience and greed today.
Second, there is no country that faces the type of multiple vulnerabilities to climate change, both current and future as India does. This is because of its dependence on the monsoon, its very large population living in coastal areas who are vulnerable to increase in mean sea levels, its reliance on the health of the Himalayan glaciers for water security, and its preponderance of extractable natural resources like coal and iron ore in dense forest areas (more extraction means more deforestation that aggravates climate change).
Third, environment is increasingly becoming a public health concern. From unprecedented industrial and vehicular pollution to the dumping of chemical waste and municipal sewage in rivers and water-bodies, the build up to a public health catastrophe is already visible. People are already suffering in a variety of ways and environmental deterioration has emerged as a major cause of illness.
Fourth, most of what is called environmentalism in India is not middle class “lifestyle environmentalism” but actually “livelihood environmentalism” linked to daily issues of land productivity, water availability, access to non-timber forest produce, protection of water-bodies, protection of grazing lands and pastures, preservation of sacred places, etc.
Environmental concerns are, therefore, not part of some foreign plot or conspiracy by some NGOs to keep India in a state of perpetual poverty. It is an imperative we ignore at our own peril. It is not just a matter of increasing the contribution of renewables to our energy supply. Much more important are investment and technology choices in industry, agriculture, energy, transport, construction, and other sectors of the economy. In April 2014, the Planning Commission’s expert on low carbon strategies for inclusive growth submitted its final report. In the debate on the future of the Planning Commission, this report vital to our future has unfortunately been ignored. The report concludes on the basis of its detailed sectoral analysis that low carbon inclusive growth is not just desirable but is also eminently feasible even though it will require additional investments.
The Modi government, like its predecessors, has stressed its resolve to integrate environmental concerns into the mainstream of the process of economic growth. This is admirable but we must recognise that at times there will be trade-offs between growth and environment, occasions when tough choices will necessarily have to be made — choices that may well involve saying “no”. It is when you work the integration in practice, that you confront contradictions, complexities, and conflicts that cannot be brushed aside. They have to be recognised and managed sensitively as part of the democratic process.
The debate is really not one of environment versus development but really be one of adhering to rules, regulations, and laws versus taking the rules, regulations ,and laws for granted? When public hearings means having hearings without the public and having the public without hearings, it is not a environment versus development issue at all. When an alumina refinery starts construction to expand its capacity from one million tons per year to six million tons per year without bothering to seek any environmental clearance as mandated by law, it is not a “environment versus development” question, but simply one of whether laws enacted by Parliament will be respected or not. When closure notices are issued to distilleries or paper mills or sugar factories illegally discharging toxic wastes into India’s most holy Ganga river, it is not a question of “environment versus development” but again one of whether standards mandated by law are to be enforced effectively or not. When a power plant wants to draw water from a protected area or when a coal mine wants to undertake mining in the buffer zone of a tiger sanctuary, both in contravention of existing laws, it is not a “environment versus development” question but simply one of whether laws will be adhered to or not.
By all means we must make laws pragmatic. By all means we must have market-friendly means of implementing regulations. By all means, we must accelerate the rate of investment in labour-intensive manufacturing especially. But mockery should not be made of regulations and laws. Indian civilisation has always shown the highest respect for biodiversity. Therefore, it should not be difficult for us to become world leaders in green growth. This is an area of strategic leadership where India can show the way to the world. Both the champions of “growth at all costs” and the crusaders for ecological causes must work together to enable India to attain this position.
Headline image credit: Between Sissu and Keylong, Manali-Leh Highway, Himachal Pradesh, Indian Himalayas. Photo by Henrik Johansson. CC BY-NC 2.0 via henrikj Flickr.
The post Why green growth? appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Alice,
on 12/16/2014
It is common that the pendulum of economic development scholarship and practice swings back and forth from one set of (faddish) ideas to another. But beneath this back-and-forth cycling is another, longer cycle the tension between a search for grand, seemingly scientifically-grounded solutions, and an approach to problem-solving which self-consciously is more pragmatic and incremental. In recent decades, this long-cycle pendulum has swung powerfully in the direction of scientism. There are, though, some striking signs that it may be swinging back.
Back in the 1950s, Albert Hirschman, perhaps the most eminent development economist of the post-WWII generation, challenged scholars to look beyond a narrow vision of social science and adopt a more problem-oriented approach. In the introductory essay of A Bias for Hope, his volume of collected essays on Latin America, Hirschman suggested that:
“most social scientists conceive it as their exclusive task to discover and stress regularities, stable relationships, and uniform sequences. This is obviously an essential search… But in the social sciences there is special room for the opposite type of endeavor: to perceive an entirely new way of turning a historical corner…to widen the limits of what is or is perceived to be possible…”
In time this bold, but open-minded quest for insight congealed into something very different: the sequential embrace of one ‘magic bullet’ after another as the solution to development’s challenges – each advocated enthusiastically by its champions, only to be superseded by a new generation of very different and ever-more-ambitious certainties. First came a pre-occupation with increasing capital investment (the focus of development efforts into the latter 1970s). Limited results led to a turn to economics, and an insistence that results depended on ‘getting incentives right’ via structural adjustment policies. The 1990s witnessed the emergence of an even more ambitious agenda, with an insistence that far-reaching institutional reform—get ‘good governance’ right—was necessary for development. The past decade has been characterized by a pre-occupation with quantitative, results-based approaches—most vividly evident in the enthusiastic embrace of randomized control trials as a way of identifying what works, and by Jim Kim’s assertion, within months of becoming World Bank president, that the organization needed not just to support what works, but to embrace “the science of delivery”.
Emerging scholarship and innovation by practitioners suggest that this long-cycle pre-occupation with grand solutions may be turning. While the protagonists of new approaches vary in many specifics, most share the following:
As a next step in crafting a way forward, a rapidly growing group of eminent scholars and practitioners have signed on to a “Doing Development Differently” manifesto. As the manifesto puts it:
“genuine development progress is complex: solutions are not simple or obvious, those who would benefit most lack power, those who can make a difference are disengaged and political barriers are too often overlooked. Many development initiatives fail to address this complexity, promoting irrelevant interventions that will have little impact. Some development initiatives, however, have real results. Some are driven domestically while others receive external support. They usually involve many players – governments, civil society, international agencies and the private sector – working together to deliver real progress in complex situations and despite strong resistance.”
The “Doing Development Differently” manifesto is thus a profound departure from recent practice. But many of its protagonists (myself included) also take inspiration from the earlier generation of scholars. Indeed, against the backdrop of the current discourse, the sly irony with which Yale Professor Charles Lindblom entitled his classic 1959 article, “The Science of ‘Muddling Through’,” takes on an especially contemporary flavor.
Lindblom contrasts “the attention given to, and successes enjoyed by operations research, statistical decision theory and systems analysis…[and…] wherever possible quantification of values for mathematical analysis” with the reality that:
“making policy is at best a very rough process. Neither social scientists, nor politicians, nor public administrators yet know enough about the social world to avoid repeated error in predicting the consequences of policy moves. A wise policy-maker consequently expects that his policies will achieve only part of what he hopes…[and]… proceeds through a succession of incremental changes….”
Let us hope that in the coming long-cycle, the spirit implicit in the words of both Hirschman and Lindblom can prevail—determined step-by-step exploration, infused by a bias for hope, but with no facile guarantees of success. As I put it in the concluding sentences of Working with the Grain, “our task is to bring our best effort to the search for ways forward. We can do no more than that, and should strive to do no less.”
The post Doing development differently appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Alice,
on 5/21/2014
Technology is changing. The climate is changing. Economic inequality is growing. These issues dominate much public debate and shape policy discussions from local city council meetings to the United Nations. Can we tackle them, or are the issues divisive enough that they’ll eventually get the better of us? In terms of global poverty, economist Marcelo Giugale believes that human beings have the resources and will to overcome the dire state of circumstances under which many people live. In this excerpt from his latest book, Economic Development: What Everyone Needs to Know, Giugale asserts that humans have the means to quash abject poverty on a global scale and make it a thing of the past.
Define poverty as living with two dollars a day or less. Now imagine that governments could put those two dollars and one cent in every poor person’s pocket with little effort and minimal waste. Poverty is finished. Of course, things are more complicated than that. But you get a sense of where modern social policy is going—and what will soon be possible.
Nancy Lindborg trip to South Sudan. USAID U.S. Agency for International Development. CC BY-NC 2.0 via USAID Flickr.
So, where will poverty fighters focus next? First, on better jobs. What matters to reduce poverty is not just jobs, but how productive that employment is. This highlights the need for a broad agenda of reforms to make an economy more competitive. It also points toward something much closer to the individual: skills, both cognitive (e.g., critical thinking or communication ability) and non-cognitive (e.g., attitude toward newness or sense of responsibility).
Second, poverty fighters will target projects that augment human opportunity. As will be explained next, it is now possible to measure how important personal circumstances—like skin color, birthplace, or gender—are in a child’s probability of accessing the services—like education, clean water, or the Internet—necessary to succeed in life. That measure, called the Human Opportunity Index, has opened the door for policymakers to focus not just on giving everybody the same rewards but also the same chances, not just on equality but on equity. A few countries, mostly in Latin America, now evaluate existing social programs, and design new ones, with equality of opportunity in mind. Others will follow.
And third, greater focus will be put on lowering social risk and enhancing social protection. A few quarters of recession, a sudden inflationary spike, or a natural disaster, and poverty counts skyrocket—and stay sky-high for years. The technology to protect the middle class from slipping into poverty, and the poor from sinking even deeper, is still rudimentary in the developing world. Just think of the scant coverage of unemployment insurance.
But the real breakthrough is that, to raise productivity, expand opportunity, or reduce risk, you now have a power tool: direct cash transfers. Most developing countries (thirty-five of them in Africa) have, over the last ten years, set up logistical mechanisms to send money directly to the poor—mainly through debit cards and cell phones. Initially, the emphasis was on the conditions attached to the transfer, such as keeping your child in school or visiting a clinic if you were pregnant. It soon became clear that the value of these programs was to be found less in their conditions than in the fact that they forced government agencies to know the poor by name. Now we know where they live, how much they earn, and how many kids they have.
That kind of state–citizen relationship is transforming social policy. Think of the massive amount of information it is generating in real time—how much things actually cost, what people really prefer, what impact government is having, what remains to be done. This is helping improve the quality of expenditures, that is, better targeting, design, efficiency, fairness, and, ultimately, results. It also helps deal with shocks like the global crisis (have you ever wondered why there was no social explosion in Mexico when the US economy nose-dived in early 2009?). Sure, giving away taxpayers’ money was bound to cause debate (how do you know you are not financing bums?). But so far, direct transfers have survived political transitions, from left to right (Chile) and from right to left (El Salvador). The debate has been about doing transfers well, not about abandoning them.
A final point. For all the promise of new poverty-reduction techniques, just getting everybody in the developing world over the two-dollar-a-day threshold would be no moral success. To understand why, try to picture your own life on a two-dollar-a-day budget (really, do it). But it would be a very good beginning.
Marcelo M. Giugale is the Director of Economic Policy and Poverty Reduction Programs for Africa at the World Bank and the author of Economic Development: What Everyone Needs to Know. A development expert and writer, his twenty-five years of experience span Africa, Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin-America and the Middle-East. He received decorations from the governments of Bolivia and Peru, and taught at American University in Cairo, the London School of Economics, and Universidad Católica Argentina.
Subscribe to the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Subscribe to only business and economics articles on the OUPblog via email or RSS.
The post Can we end poverty? appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Jane Mack,
on 5/29/2009
Ed Propst's recent post at Marianas Pride includes this bit:
Beautiful beaches. Pristine waters (no red flags please). Friendly locals. Clean buildings. Friendly, consistent laws for investors. Promotion of eco-tourism ...Why can't our leaders understand the basic building blocks of tourism???
My stepmother once told me that sidewalks would be a waste of money because the Chinese are too stupid to know how to use them.
There may be some truth in that. When they built sidewalks in Tinian down the side of Broadway going to Dynasty.
After the installation of side walks there were more Chinese walking in the middle of the road at night time (wearing dark clothes, until today)
The amount of Filipino's walking down the middle of the road was noticeable also.(all wear dark clothes night time and light clothes day time.)
This was very good as the Mayor had turned off the few street lights and Dynasty had turned it roadside lights off prior as part of their effort to save on the power bill.
Ai adai. What kind of argument is that?! People will say anything to get out doing what's needed and right.
Assuming only the Chinese walk... no wonder we have a diabetes problem.
We need sidewalks because they will help US. We can then walk on them. Our kids can walk more and drive/ride less. We can stop and chat with our neighbors. We can heart-healthy. We can keep an eye out for crime. We can pollute less because of our decrease in gasoline-engine use.
I suppose, Angelo, you could tell your step-mother that the garment factories are gone, along with many of those Chinese workers. Without visa-free travel, perhaps we'll see fewer Chinese tourists, too. So she needs a different argument against sidewalks, now.
My stepmother once told me that Angelo was so insecure that the only way he figured he could try and boost his ego was by putting other people down.
When I was a kid, the lack of sidewalks made no sense to me. Then a few years ago when they built the "Park to Port Pathway," I didn't see what the big deal was. It was a sidewalk that should have been put in when the the road was built in the first place.
Middle Road still doesn't have sidewalks, which it should, considering that the majority of the people that live here do not own cars.
I may do a post on my blog on the things I learned from my parents and my step-parents.
if anyone else had said this
"because the Chinese are too stupid to know how to use them."
even if just as a hearsay reference i think you would have jumped all over them.
enough with the coddling. all you are doing is encouraging him to continue which int he end is not helping anyone at all.
so he furthers the above statement to say that middle road dwellers don't have cars? the guy is just plain dumb.
[start sarcasm]
Damn these Chinese. Just like that stupid Chinese guy named Jerry Tan that gives your organizations tons of money that you use to pay your rent and buy your meals?
[end sarcasm]
Nobody "jumped all over me" because I was pointing out that a lesson I was taught as a child was ridiculous and racist.
I think we were all taught lessons in our youth that have in time proven themselves not to be true.
Stop being so hypersensitive.
And the majority of the people on this island do not own cars. Most Chamorros and Americans do, but they are not the majority.
For example, when I lived in England the basketball coach got really excited when he found out I was American...because ALL Americans are excellent basketball players.
My humanities teacher that year also told my mother, "I always thought Americans were loud and stupid. Your son is shy and smart."
She didn't mean it as an insult, she just had a perception of Americans that turned out not to be true.
Interesting, anon. My first reaction was to "jump all over" the comment by Angelo and the next anon, and I had a comment half written when I was interrupted by someone else. I let off a little steam to her, and got some perspective, and then re-read Angelo's post. I figured out that he was repeating something he heard so we could discuss the difficulties we encounter when we propose things--and some of those difficulties are ridiculous stereo-typing opinions.
But hey--I like having a commenter tell me to get back onto the rant. It's something I think I do too much, but okay...someone else agrees it needs to be done.
Angelo,
You need some serious help.
Jane,
Please do what you can to correct this poor individual.
Christ,
Forgive him for he knows not what he does.
Ed, you are the one that needs prayer.
Yes, Edz does need our prayers.