Syndicate content

August 2013

Is the human capital 'gender gap' a matter of experience, education or both?

Mohammad Amin's picture

After a long job search, you are rewarded by the phone call all job seekers wait patiently for, the interview invitation. You prep and spend as much time on the outfit you plan to wear as you do practicing mock interviews with your friends. You get to the interview all prepared to discuss your semester abroad as a graduate student, your thesis that took you to Congo and extensive work experience that landed you coveted past jobs. Your prospective employer will be as interested in your past work experience as in your formal education or schooling. The quality and the quantity (number of years) of relevant experience could drop you out of the race all together or…land you the job, determine your pay bracket and impact your future career growth.


Is a solid education enough to level the gender gap in human capital? (Credit: World Bank)

Do Elected Councils Improve Governance? - Experimental Evidence from Afghanistan

Andrew Beath's picture

In the past decade, economists such as Daron Acemoglu, Abhijit Banerjee, Nathan Nunn, and James Robinson have empirically validated the primacy of ‘good’ institutions in driving beneficial political and economic outcomes. While this has been a great leap for academic economics, the applicability to policy is debatable. Specifically, as the empirical techniques employed generally exclude components of institutional variation that change over the short- to medium-run (see Rohini Pande and Christopher Udry), the respective findings potentially don't have much to say about what can be expected from deliberate attempts to generate 'good' institutions.

Serious empirical investigation of the effects of institutional reform remains scant, and for good reason. Rigorously identifying the effects of democratization – or any other specific reform – is extremely difficult, particularly at the national-level. When and where societies enact democratic reforms (such as in Eastern Europe in 1989), such reforms go part in parcel with sweeping changes in economic policy, institutional frameworks, and political actors (in the technical lexicon, such reforms are ‘endogenous’). This makes it almost impossible to isolate the effects of the reform itself from the effects of the multitude of other contemporaneous changes.

Campaigning on Hot v Cold Issues – What’s the Difference?

Duncan Green's picture

I recently began an interesting conversation with our new campaigns and policy czar, Ben Phillips, who then asked me to pick the FP2P collective brain-hive for further ideas. Here goes.

The issue is ‘cold’ v ‘hot’ campaigning. Over the next couple of years, we will be doing a lot of campaigning on climate change and inequality. Inequality is flavour of the month, with an avalanche of policy papers, shifting institutional positions at the IMF etc highlighting its negative impacts on growth, wellbeing, poverty reduction, and just about everything else. That makes for a ‘hot campaign’, pushing on (slightly more) open doors on tax, social protection etc.

In contrast, climate change is (paradoxically) a pretty cold campaign. Emissions continue to rise, as do global temperatures and the unpredictability of the weather, but you wouldn’t think so in terms of political agendas or press coverage (see graph). The UN process, focus of huge attention over the last 15 years, is becalmed. Politicians make occasional reference to ‘green growth’, but that is becoming as vacuous as its predecessor ‘sustainable development.’

The distinction is not so clear cut, of course. Hot campaigns can suddenly go cold and vice versa (politicians and officials are able to go from saying ‘no, don’t be ridiculous’ to ‘we’ve always supported this’ with bewildering ease, when the moment is right). You could argue that the Arms Trade Treaty campaign was one of those. But a campaign needs to get seriously hot if it involves a major redistribution of power and influence (like taxation/inequality or climate change, but not, I would argue, the Arms Trade Treaty).

So the essay question is: do you campaign differently on hot v cold campaigns, and if so, how? Here are some initial thoughts:

Are impact evaluations useful for justice reforms in developing countries?

Nicholas Menzies's picture

I have been somewhat skeptical about the application of impact evaluations to justice reform activities but I’m coming around to their utility for a limited – yet important – set of questions. The basic method behind impact evaluations – establishing a counterfactual in order to attribute net impact – is fairly new to justice so I thought I’d set out some ideas that might be worth considering in developing this nascent field.

What Drags Poverty Reduction in South Asia?

Zahid Hussain's picture

Poverty has been a concern in societies even before the beginning of recorded history. In the past three decades extreme poverty in the world has decreased significantly. More than half of population in the developing world lived on less than $1.25 a day in 1981. This has dropped to 21% in 2010. More impressively, notwithstanding a 59% increase in population in developing countries, there were 1.2 people living on less than $1.25 a day in 2010, compared with 1.9 billion decades ago. However, the challenge of poverty reduction ahead remains daunting with 1.2 billion still living in extreme poverty. Freeing the world from poverty is perhaps the most important economic goal for the world today. More than a hundred countries are still not able to move away from high poverty traps.

Friday roundup: US jobs, Arctic methane, Stiglitz on free trade, Summers-Yellen contest, politics in Zimbabwe and Telangana

LTD Editors's picture

The US administration hails a new jobs report, saying it provides further confirmation that economic recovery continues.

An alarming new report in Nature magazine on the costs of Arctic methane warns that the price tag for such emissions could approach the value of the global economy.

Unpivoting Data with Excel, Open Refine and Python

Tariq Khokhar's picture

"How can I unpivot or transpose my tabular data so that there's only one record per row?"

I see this question a lot and I thought it was worth a quick Friday blog post.

Data often aren’t quite in the format that you want. We usually provide CSV / XLS access to our data in “pivoted” or “normalized” form so they look like this:

Pivoted Data

But for a lot analyses and applications, particularly data visualisation tools like D3, ggplot2, Tableau, it’s more convenient to have your data “unpivoted” or “denormalized” so it looks like this:

Unpivoted Data

Although this is less space efficient, space is cheap, and it means there’s always only one record per row, so you can use simple functions to access and filter data.

Here are three ways to “unpivot” or “denormalize” your data - in effect, to transpose columns to rows and have one complete record per row.