In my last blog post, I showed that while governments are increasingly using the technology to demonstrate that services are improving, their efforts risk being undermined by “gaming” – in other words, fiddling the performance statistics to make things look better than they really are.
We focused on the problem in the UK. In this blog, I look at what the UK has and hasn’t done to address the problem, and what we can learn from that.
The year that is ending in two weeks has exhibited two sobering characteristics. First, it has been marked by apocalyptic violence (the massacre of school children in Peshawar, Pakistan being the latest outrage). Second, it has been marked by pressures on communication freedom, and the relentless squeezing of civic spaces. The violence we all know about; for it seems to be kicking off everywhere. But the causes are legion; the politics in each case is bewilderingly complex. So, we’ll leave these alone and hope for the best. But we might usefully reflect, as the year closes, on what is happening with national public spheres and the emerging global public sphere.
There is a narrative of hope and freedom about the global communication context. That narrative celebrates the mobile wave and the astounding spread of information and communication technologies. It talks about how wonderful all this is for voice, for enlightenment, for freedom. Look, we are told, see all those cool young kids with their fancy gadgets, social media skills, and their ability to launch collective action eruptions, even revolutions! See how admirable and hopeful all this is, we are told. And, yes, events have often backed up the fevered hopes and dreams, even this year. Yet, as the year ends, the overwhelming sense one gets is that dark and powerful forces are counterattacking. They are certainly not on the ropes. Let’s look at the particulars:
Authored by Elizabeth Frankenberg, Duncan Thomas, and Jed Friedman
Ten years after the devastating 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, Aceh provides an example of remarkable resilience and recovery that reflects the combination of individual ingenuity, family and community engagement and the impact of domestic and international aid. The tsunami devastated thousands of communities in countries bordering the Indian Ocean. Destruction was greatest in the Indonesian provinces of Aceh and North Sumatra, where an estimated 170,000 people perished and the built and natural environment was damaged along hundreds of kilometers of coastline. In response, the Indonesian government, donors, NGOs and individuals contributed roughly $7 billion in aid and the government established a high-level bureau based in Aceh to organize recovery work.
To shed light on how individuals, communities, and families were affected by and responded to the disaster in the short and medium term, we established the Study of the Tsunami Aftermath and Recovery (STAR). Beginning in 2005, STAR has followed over 30,000 people who were first enumerated in 2004 (pre-tsunami) in 487 communities (community location depicted in the figure below), as part of a population-representative household survey conducted by Statistics Indonesia. Interviews were conducted annually for 5 years after the tsunami; the ten-year follow-up is currently in the field. We ascertained survival status for 98% of the original pre-tsunami respondents and have interviewed 96% of survivors. The study is designed to provide information on the short-term costs and longer-term recovery for people in very badly damaged communities and in comparison communities where the disaster had little direct impact.
These are some of the views and reports relevant to our readers that caught our attention this week.
Illicit financial flows growing faster than global economy, reveals new report
$991.2bn was funneled out of developing and emerging economies through crime, corruption and tax evasion in 2012 alone, according to the latest report by the Washington-based group, Global Financial Integrity (GFI), published on Monday. The report finds that, despite growing awareness, developing countries lose more money through illicit financial flows (IFF) than they gain through aid and foreign direct investment. And IFFs are continuing to grow at an alarming rate – 9.4% a year. That’s twice as fast as global GDP growth over the same period. Though China tops the list of affected countries in terms of the total sum of money lost, as a percentage of the economy, sub-Saharan Africa was the worst affected region as illicit outflows there average 5.5% of GDP.
Development’s New Best Friend: the Global Security Complex
International Relations and Security Network
The United Nations’ blueprints for the upcoming Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) reveal an interesting trend. Whereas the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) focused exclusively on development initiatives, the SDGs look set to interweave security into what was once solely a development sphere with the inclusion of objectives that seek to secure supply chains, end poaching and protect infrastructure. This shift reflects lessons learned from 15 years of implementing the MDGs and, even more so, broader global trends to integrate security and development initiatives.
Women don’t know how to manage Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs).
Women can only run retail or services businesses.
Women-led businesses don’t create jobs.
Women don’t really want to grow their businesses – it’s just a hobby for them.
How many times have we heard these and similar sentiments?
There are indeed far fewer businesses led by women compared to men; female-led businesses do tend to be smaller and less profitable; and they do concentrate in the low-productivity retail and services sectors. Yet it is a vast oversimplification to underestimate the already-strong and potentially even greater economic contribution of women entrepreneurs. Even worse is the assumption that the underperformance of women-led enterprises is always something done by choice, or due to something inherently female.
A recent World Bank research report on supporting growth-oriented women entrepreneurs adds nuance to the dispiriting facts above. It focuses exclusively on growth-oriented women entrepreneurs and identifies the crucial elements needed to effectively support them. What merits the focus on growth entrepreneurs? Simply put: their ability to generate jobs, enhance national productivity, and stimulate socioeconomic transformation is greater. What merits the focus, specifically, on women growth entrepreneurs? Simply put: their immense untapped potential. There are an estimated 812 million women in the developing world (according to well-researched projections) with the potential to contribute more fully to national economies as workers and job creators, but who are unable to do so.
We find that firms led by women and men survive at the same rate, women-led firms employ more women as a share of their workforce, and far more dramatically, women and men lead equally productive firms . . . as long as the firms operate in the same sectors.
Unraveling these trends allows us to identify the underlying obstacles that result in both the underperformance of women-led enterprises and their comparable performance in specific sectors. We find that women growth entrepreneurs are held back by a complex intersection of factors – driven both by individual preferences and external constraints. These include gaps in management skills and knowledge, limited financial literacy, lack of access to finance, lack of mentoring, over-representation in low-productivity and low-growth sectors, restricted access to networks and supply chains, and legal and regulatory obstacles. While we now know more about what holds women entrepreneurs back, the support programs by the World Bank and others do not always adequately reflect this knowledge in program design and delivery.
What can we, through the World Bank, do to ensure that our programs have greater impact, are more relevant to women growth entrepreneurs, and demonstrate a replicable model for other development actors and client governments?
The answer: We should start by “gendering” our programs.
In the case of business education for example, “gendering” means more than just limiting program participation to women. Program content must explicitly speak to gender-related challenges like interacting and negotiating with buyers and suppliers in male-dominated markets, navigating team dynamics in a culture where women are not considered “leaders,” and managing intra-household dynamics and mobility constraints. In a related concern, program delivery must also be gender-sensitive: That includes offering in-class examples of successful women-led businesses, inviting successful women as guest speakers, and addressing the patriarchal attitudes of the people implementing the program.
Call for Papers: 8th International Conference on Migration and Development
World Bank, Washington D.C., June 8-9, 2015.
I really don’t like indices, particularly those that claim to measure what are termed “social issues”. And they seem to be everywhere. Ok, the Human Development Index did a lot to push countries to do more on health and education, and its rankings serve to pit countries in good competition with each other. Single measures are also intuitive and easy for monitoring purposes.
Just to stop my initial train of thought here, I have two problems with indices that measure “well-being”: first, they are often weighted and the weights assigned to individual components expose the subjectivity of their creators. If you think primary education is more important than reproductive health, and you assign weights that way, that’s what your index will pick up.
- Social Development
In observance of the International Migrants Day, Dec 18