The demand and expectation for concrete policy learning from impact evaluation are high. Quite often we don’t want to know only the basic question that IE addresses: “what is the impact of intervention X on outcome Y in setting Z”. We also want to know the why and the how behind these observed impacts. But these why and how questions, for various reasons often not explicitly incorporated in the IE design, can be particularly challenging.
We are pleased that the Bank has installed new spam-filtering software and so comments are now working again on the blog.
One of those stories going the rounds about a month ago concerns a blogger in San Francisco, who worried he was wasting too much time on Facebook and Reddit. As he writes on his blog, he used a software app which tracked what he was doing with his time and found almost 19 hours a week went to these activities.
I am currently in Malawi rolling out a firm survey with my colleagues Francisco Campos and Manuela Bucciarelli. As we’ve gone through the enumerator selection and training this week and a pre-test of the survey, a number of observations have come up – some related to firm surveys in particular, some more general. In no particular order:
In his latest Letter from America in the Royal Economic Society’s newsletter, Angus Deaton says “your wolf is interfering with my t-value” (the title refers in part to regulations on hunting wolves in the American West) and talks about excessive regulation with NIH grants, and his concerns with the move towards trial registries:
· Reminder: submissions for the BREAD conference on Development in Africa to be held at the World Bank in Match are due November 15th. Details are here.
Well I’m writing this on Election Day evening here in the U.S., and am rather consumed by the events at hand.