Editor's Note: Oleg Petrov coordinates the e-Development Thematic Group, a knowledge sharing initiative and community of practice hosted by the Global ICT Department of the World Bank Group.
"Research on political participation has identified a number of deep-seated norms and values that are positively associated with the amount and quality of democratic engagement. One of the most central of these is political efficacy, or the sense that one's participation can actually make a difference (internal efficacy) and that the political system would be responsive to this participation (external efficacy)... Although political efficacy is affected by a number of demographic, contextual, and cultural factors, the media plays an important role in its formation and expression."
Michael X. Delli Carpini (2004)*
Photo credit: Jim Roese photography
*Delli Carpini, M. X. (2004). Mediating Democratic Engagement: The Impact of Communications on Citizens' Involvement in Political and Civic Life. In L. L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of Political Communication Research (pp. 395-434). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Participants from the length of the agribusiness value chain are gathered at the Bank this week for the World Bank Institute’s new Executive Program on Inclusive Agribusiness: Fighting Poverty, Hunger and Malnutrition. Chris Delgado and John Lamb from the Bank’s Agriculture and Rural Development team set the scene on Tuesday morning by laying out the scale and complexity of the challenge facing the food sector. It was not a pretty picture.
Peter Schiff, the now well-known author of Crash Proof, visited the IFC earlier this week to talk about the future of the dollar as the reserve currency. Schiff has gotten famous by correctly predicting the financial crisis well before we found ourselves in our present predicament.
“Global problems require global solutions,” a newspaper editorial recently asserted in its analysis of the current economic crisis. From a communication studies perspective, stressing a particular aspect of an issue – in this case, the global nature of the crisis -- is called “framing.” To further one’s position, advocates frame an issue by emphasizing some aspects of the phenomenon and deemphasizing others. Contrasting frames on economic issues have been ubiquitous in the media for some time. Compare, for example, the ways in which The Economist and CNN’s Lou Dobbs Tonight interpret economic realities. Given the current crisis, the framing battle is even more apparent. Protectionists might prefer to focus on a country’s deteriorating local job market and claim that the most pressing need is for government to protect domestic employment or a “domestic jobs frame.” In contrast, those who believe in free markets might argue that protectionist policies will lead to contracting national economies and that the solution is greater liberalization or a “free trade frame.”
Trying to find a document through the World Bank search engine (either externally or internally)? Good luck! You might want to pencil in an afternoon...
A while ago we reported on the impact of the financial crisis on South Africa. Following the global trend, the last few months have seen the figures gradually getting grimmer, with the real economy taking the biggest toll.
We are aware of the private sector, the public sector and the non-profit sector. To state the most important criticisms of the existing sectors: the private sector is believed to be only profit driven (no social aspects), the public sector inefficient, and non-profits are mostly unsustainable when it comes to financials (this is evident from the high mortality rate of NGOs). To address all these major flaws in the existing sectors we need a Fourth sector.
Yesterday's online discussion went very well; many excellent questions were asked, but I only had time to answer a select few. I hope to answer the rest of the questions soon. The transcript is now available online.
Also, we have shared an Excel file with monthly remittance flow data for the following countries on our team website: