The World Bank’s “zero tolerance” policy on corruption makes clear how thieves and embezzlers will be dealt with, if they are discovered. But what about before corruption actually occurs—how should the Bank go about preventing fraud and corruption in the first place?
The divide between prevention and enforcement shapes the World Bank’s fight against corruption in ways both subtle and profound. Enforcement is easier to conceptualize; it is tangible. Someone commits fraud or corruption, by siphoning Bank funds away from their intended purpose. When the Office of Suspension and Debarment slams a company with a sanction, we can quantify the effect.
Prevention, on the other hand, is a slippery idea. It evades definition. Quantifying how much fraud a policy prevents relies on counterfactuals, making it far more difficult to pin down. This means, for better or for worse, innovations and efforts towards the prevention perspective may lag behind enforcement.
Labor productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa has been garnering attention recently. Development economists focus on labor productivity because it tends to be strongly associated with overall well-being measures, especially for the poor, who are reliably endowed with time, but often little else in the way of productive assets.
Cross-sector gaps in labor productivity are key indicators of structural change, which is the economy-wide process by which labor shifts from low-productivity industries such as agriculture, to those that are higher-productivity, such as industry and services. This process underpins development and is premised on large cross-sector gaps in productivity. Economists expect these gaps to be quite large in the poorest countries, and to get smaller as labor shifts out of agriculture. Recent evidence suggests these forces are indeed at work in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Also available in: العربية
People often talk to themselves. This was once thought to be a hallmark of the self-absorbed. Social science research, however, suggests it may be a powerful way in which we can motivate and cheer ourselves on.
Have you ever spoken to yourself? Have you spoken to yourself in third person? Most of us have done so, but we may not have considered why we do it.
In 2013, Malala Yousafzai appeared on the Daily Show and Jon Stewart asked her when she realized the Taliban had made her a target. She begins her answer in first person but switches to third person part-way through, saying “When in 2012 I was with my father and someone came and she told us ‘have you seen on google if you search your name that the Taliban have threatened you?’ I could not believe it. I said ‘No, it’s not true.’ Even after when we saw it, I was not worried about myself that much. I was worried about my father because we thought the Taliban are not that cruel that they would kill a child because I was 14 at that time. But then later on, I started thinking about that. I used to think a Talib would come and kill me. But then I said, ‘If he comes, what would you do, Malala?’ Then I would reply to myself that, ‘Malala, just take a shoe and hit him.’ But then I said, ‘If you hit a Talib with a shoe then there would be no difference between you and the Talib.’ ”
Ethan Kross, a psychologist at the University of Michigan, studies self-talk, the introspective conversations we have with ourselves about ourselves, and believes that speaking to or about ourselves in the third person may be one way in which we help ourselves cope.
Standing by for liftoff
The concession of Galeao International Airport (official name: Rio de Janeiro/Galeão–Antonio Carlos Jobim International Airport) got off the ground in the second round of airport concessions. The first round dates back to early 2012, when the government issued tenders for three major airports: Guarulhos (São Paulo), Viracopos (Campinas) and Brasília.
In mid-2012, following the successful outcome of these three projects, the Brazilian National Development Bank (BNDES) approached IFC to assist with a second round of airport concessions, including Confins airport (Belo Horizonte) and Galeão (Rio de Janeiro). IFC teamed up with the Estruturadora Brasileira de Projetos (EBP), a project preparation company owned by some of the biggest Brazilian commercial banks and BNDES. Together, IFC and EBP were responsible for the financial, technical/economic/engineering, and environmental studies.
- Harvard University
- Harvard Kennedy School of Government
- ppi database
- Rio de Janeiro
- Olympic Games
- air transport
- partenariats public-privé
- public-private dialogue
- public-private partnership
- public-private partnerships
- Public Sector and Governance
- Private Sector Development
- Latin America & Caribbean
Impact evaluations are key to how we think about development. Pilot programs suggesting statistically significant impacts are hailed as breakthroughs and as candidates for scaling up. Programs without such clear impact tend to be looked down upon and may be terminated. This may not be warranted. A primary function of impact evaluations should be to improve existing programs, especially in fields where evidence of positive impacts remains scarce. The experience of OLE Nepal, which is part of the OLE network and aims to improve learning and teaching through technology, is instructive in this regard.
In the history of famous feuds, there are the Hatfields and the McCoys, the Montagues and the Capulets and, sometimes it seems, lawyers and economists.
As a lawyer, I often find myself in heated debates with my economist friends and colleagues. Where they use data, we use words; where they have faith in rational actors, we know that humans are, sadly, often deeply irrational; and where they want to connect different data points to illustrate a trend, we want to highlight the infinite nuance between those data points that insists against a simple narrative.
Yet, despite our seemingly fundamental differences, we do seem to be coming together around the notion that law does matter for finance. Specifically, that certain kinds of laws (those around creditor rights and insolvency) matter for certain kinds of finance (debt).
In a new paper, published by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, my colleague Antonia Menezes and I partnered with two Oxford University scholars, John Armour and Kristin van Zwieten, to show how financial infrastructure laws influence debt finance.
In the interest of full disclosure, I will tell you that all four of us are lawyers. However, John and Kristin are leading academics at the intersection of economics and law in Oxford’s Law and Finance program, and both have advanced degrees in economics. They can talk the talk and walk the walk!
It is the development conundrum of our era. Extremely poor people cannot lift themselves out of poverty without access to reliable energy. More than a billion people live without power today, denying them opportunities as wide-ranging as running a business, providing light for their children to study, or even cooking meals with ease.
Ending poverty requires confronting climate change, which affects every nation and every person. The populations least able to adapt – those that are the most poor and vulnerable – will be hardest hit, rolling back decades of development work.
How do we achieve the dual goals of expanding energy production for those without power and drastically reducing emissions from sources such as coal that produce carbon dioxide, the primary contributor to climate change?
There is no single answer and we cannot ask poor communities to forego access to energy because the developed world has already put so much carbon pollution in the air.
An array of policies and programs backed with new technology and new thinking can — if combined with political will and financial support — help poor populations get the energy they need while accelerating a worldwide transition to zero net carbon emissions.
Last week, I reviewed Volume 1 (from pre-history up to the French Revolution), but before reviewing Political Order and Political Decay, the second volume of Francis Fukuyama’s monumental history of the state, it’s probably worth asking, why bother?
Because whether providing/denying services, freedoms or functioning markets, the state is the most important institution underpinning development, and yet people in the foreign policy and development world operate with hazy and simplistic understandings of where states came from and how they evolve. Another example of historical amnesia, alas.
That blindness was epitomised by the 2003 invasion of Iraq, where the US government "seemed to think that democracy and a market economy were default conditions to which the country would automatically revert once Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship was removed." Oops.
According to Fukuyama, that is a particular problem because "If there is a single theme that underlies many of the chapters of this book, it is that there is a political deficit around the world, not of states, but of modern states that are capable, impersonal, well organized and autonomous."
The second volume picks up from the late 18th Century (French and American Revolutions) and brings us up to the present day. It feels both dryer in style and more fragmented than Volume One, hopping between discussions of the spread of democracy, geographical determinism, political Islam, the role of the Middle Classes and the experiences of various continents and countries in the developing world, before returning to Fukuyama’s two overriding interests – will China’s rise continue, and will anything arrest the US’ ‘political decay’? So instead of trying to identify a single thread, here are some highlights/insights: