Comments for Development Drums

Comment on Episode 27: Tony Blair by william reid

william reid — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 08:58:53 +0000

Tony Blair is inspirational in what he is currently doing in Africa delivering practical support to governments which are determined to work for their people. But is it any co-incidence that the three governments – Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Liberia – currently being supported have probably moved forward more than any other nations in Africa in the last 10 years in laying foundations for economic and social development . That means Tony Blair and AGI are also helping to accentuate the positive which will hopefully rub-off on others in the near future.

Comment on Episode 21: Randomized Evaluation by April Harding

April Harding — Sun, 19 Jun 2011 23:49:53 +0000

I enjoyed the first part on the interview – RG’s comments on RCTs and evaluations all seemed quite measured and reasonable. However, a bit past half way through, once you started to discuss some of the criticisms of RCTs, she started going too far in her claims for what questions RCTs have answered and can answer.
Does she really think that RCT methodology based studies can answer most of the pressing questions about how to improve health services delivery in developing countries? If she does, as she says, then she must be un familiar with the health systems and pressing policy questions in developing countries, and also with the health services research that sheds the most light on the questions (Hint: mostly not RCTs). She subsequently states that the RCT studies documenting a kink in the demand curve around the zero price for preventative health products (e.g. demand drops significantly with smally increases in price from zero) provide sufficient grounds to recommend that no health services or products should have any positive price. This statement is dumbfounding. First off, can she not distinguish preventative from curative products? (NB: they have different demand curves). And, it is widely understood that you need to analyze them, and set their prices, taking the differences into account.
When you ask her about supply issues, she says yes, well, of course supply must be dealt with somehow. Uh huh. But she’s perfectly comfortable recommending zero prices for all the services even though there are no RCT studies that examine the supply effect (statically or over time) – cause they assume the problem away for their nice little studies. In developing country health systems, the problems with ensuring supply are just as profound as the problems with ensuring demand. And, policies can only be informed by analyzing the effect of a policy choice on BOTH at the same time.
In addition, she is assuming away one of the most pressing questions: given limited resources policy makers in developing countries have to decide which services to keep prices low or free on, and which services to allow charging for, to put their budgets on a sustainable footing. This is a question which RCT studies showing the slope of the demand curve don’t answer – they require study in a general equilibrium framework, and require dynamic analysis.
Perhaps this is why most social policy questions in developed countries rely extensively on non-RCT method studies, and a bit on RCT studies.

Oh, and about that de-worming result which she claims is “very generalizable”, I think she may have forgotten the other JPAL study which found the deworming intervention to be one quarter as effective (in increasing school attendence) in India as it was in Kenya. See this link to the graph http://www.denniswhittle.com/2011/06/randomized-trials-not-silver-bullet.html.
The external validity problem (e.g. failure of RCTs to shed light on the key context variables which influence the level of impact observed) is more serious than RG’s comments would lead a listener to believe.

Though RG acknowledges that other methods have their place and are needed to answer “some” questions, the evaluation training course JPAL runs only trains people on RCTs. (see course description http://www.povertyactionlab.org/course)
So how would their students be able to select the best methodology to suit the research question?
My guess? They won’t. They will just take their hammer, and soon find that every thing looks like a nail.

Owen, I would be super appreciative if you could find a non-randomista to interview.

Comment on Episode 27: Tony Blair by Brian Barder

Brian Barder — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 20:51:00 +0000

A fascinating episode — and special thanks for putting to Tony Blair a question that I had suggested (and which prompted a very interesting and fairly provocative reply). The sound quality, by the way, is outstanding.

Comment on Episode 27: Tony Blair by Matt

Matt — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 01:06:01 +0000

Driving back from Sydney and tuned in for this cracking episode of Development Drums. Owen asks some supperb questions and gets some fascinating insights into how Tony Blair thinks about international development.

Comment on Episode 24: The New Bottom Billion by Shupiwe

Shupiwe — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 03:16:24 +0000

Great discussion.

Can’t we just put in place a policy focused on education (at all four levels and to include technical training) and measure it’s progress according to the quality of it and not the quantity? Wouldn’t that solve the aid effectiveness problem? If only there was one solution.

Comment on Episode 24: The New Bottom Billion by Dr. Lal Suresh

Dr. Lal Suresh — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 13:02:39 +0000

Dear Andy & Claire,
The wonderful contribution on about poverty. I too agree your contribution. It gives eye opining to the policy makers in Low Income Countries.

Comment on Episode 23: Famine and Foreigners by Scott

Scott — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 07:11:19 +0000

Another good episode. Great to have you back!

Comment on Episode 15: Peter Singer by Børnebyerne

Børnebyerne — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:58:07 +0000

Singer writes really well and his point comes across really well in the book. I can recommend anyone interested in development aid to read it.

Comment on Episode 12: The Hague by Bruce

Bruce — Wed, 19 May 2010 18:06:10 +0000

[...] Owen Barder interviewed the Wronging Rights ladies. Does Sudanese President Bashir really need to give his permission to be [...]

Comment on Episode 21: Randomized Evaluation by Joseph Opio-Odongo

Joseph Opio-Odongo — Sat, 01 May 2010 20:33:20 +0000

This is an interesting episode episode! I liked the illustrative examples provided by Rachel. But, in what situations would randomized evaluation not be advisable to conduct randomized evaluation? I agree with Rachel that the ethical concerns may not be that serious in countries where factors such as sectarianism and corruption have already heightened the probability of certain individuals not being reached by externally designed development interventions. Given that mindsets tend to either facilitate or impair progress towards desired development change, how do you handle it in randomization since the trait may not be randomly distributed in a given community?

Comment on Episode 20: Corruption by Jim Harries

Jim Harries — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 17:06:25 +0000

While conceding not to have heard all of the recording, I have heard enough to arouse interest.

I have ‘found my way’ to these forums through my interest in the Millennium project, and through that to interest in FBOs, of particular relevance to me as I am a missionary in – what transpires from this recording to be one of the most corrupt of the world’s countries.

One omission of the commentators in reference to this issue seems to be to linguistics. It is apparent to me that a major causative factor in certain African corruption is language. That is, the West brings its proposals as to what to do that are shrouded in the ‘mysteries’ of Western languages. The economic equation is such that the African-poor countries have no option but to say ‘yes’. They then go about implementing what they do not, and cannot understand, so inevitably implement in a ‘corrupt’ way. I strongly suspect that a scale of countries on 1. level of use of a non-indigenous language and 2. degree of dependence on outside aid (amount of control from outside) would correlate strongly with levels of corruption.

I am certainly not the only one to advocate the use of indigenous languages as a pre-requisite for ‘development’ (for example see BROCK-UTNE, BIRGIT, and HOLMARSDOTTIR, HALLA B., 2003, ‘Language Policies and Practices – some preliminary results from a research project in Tanzania and South Africa.’ 80-101 In: Brock-Utne, Birgit and Desai, Zubeida and Qorro, Martha, 2003, Language of Instruction in Tanzania and South Africa (LOITASA). Dar-es-Salaam: E and D Limited) – but have been surprised how little this is taken up elsewhere.

One commentator suggested that it is only the rich in the poor countries who are corrupt. This has not been my experience. A linguistic difficulty in say Anglophone Africa is of course that the population spends the prime years of their educational lives learning how to ‘speak right’ even in a context that is ‘not right’. Because overseas researchers these days often rely on material written by nationals in English, this removes them a further step from what is actually happening on the ground.

Comment on Episode 20: Corruption by Abdulazeez Yusuf

Abdulazeez Yusuf — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 10:32:02 +0000

I have just stumbled over this interesting site. Having gone through few submissions made by development strategists, like Danny, Mushtaq and Owen on this subject, I am convinced about the place of the ideas, which dominated this web publication in my life course, as a student of Sociology of Comparative Development Strategies. To say the least, I hailed from Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa; very irritating, one of the richest in both material and human resources in the continent, but one of the most corrupt and poorest countries on earth. However, the 2007 UNDP’s Human Development Index (HDI), which was released in 2009, recently favours Nigeria as a Medium Human Development and 158th of the 182 countries with the required data. This new ranking of Nigeria is incredible, seeing that for the past 20 years she has been vegetating on Low Income/Medium Low Income countries. Back to the theme of discourse, it is true that some slices of corruption are not only inevitable, constructive and functional to rapid qualitative and quantitative development in places like USA, UK, Canada, Australia et cetera, but it is also certain that most corrupt practices in Afro-Asiatic region (with exception of Japan, Singapore, Brunei Darussalam), especially sub-Saharan Africa have been the mainstay and goalkeepers of sustainable poverty in the region after the collapse of naked colonial exploitation of the region’s resources. The substantial level of corruption in Nigeria coupled with the holistic damages, which colonialism emitted and the reigning imperialists and neocolonialists’ influences on the country are just tips of icebergs of the banes behind the growing poverty and invariably low ebb of development in Nigeria. For example, why are the developed countries accepting Nigerians, who cooked public treasuries to be lodging the booties (stolen public monies) in their (foreign) banks, let alone to allow them to invest the monies in foreign businesses? The foreign business warlords and their governments are themselves beneficiaries of corrupt practices of Nigerians. Beyond doubt, there is a great deal of global conspiracy between the internationally known Nigerian leaders, whose lives are soiled in all versions of corruption and the foreign beneficiaries of their ill-gotten and blood-oriented wealth on the issue of sustainable poverty in Nigeria! Most of these corrupt Nigerian guys have accounts in developed and some developing countries, but how many times has the United Nations, Commonwealth of Nations, African Union or any development partner, including the demi-god of development USA repatriate the colossal wealth, which these corrupt leaders harboured in foreign lands or their regions? Until these are strictly enforced, correlation will continue to exist between corruption and poverty. To be candid, any developmental success, which is recorded in Nigeria is purely an accident, hence its sustainability will forever be in limbo.

Comment on Episode 20: Corruption by Tim Murray

Tim Murray — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:05:34 +0000

This was an excellent and fascinating discussion. For me Khan came across as having a far deeper and subtler understanding of the historical complexities of corruption and economic transition than Kaufman, who kept misunderstanding Khan’s arguments and concepts and calling him ‘lofty’ when he couldn’t counter his arguments.

While it would be a lot simpler if we could just prescribe Kaufman’s ‘good governance’ recipe (or ‘share information’ about it as he misleadingly argues) Khan is right in arguing that the history of capitalist transition does not tell us that this will work. Structural market failures embedded in the particular political settlements are more fundamental to economic development, and general conclusions from econometric analysis on the role of good governance are thus often unhelpful.

Comment on Episode 20: Corruption by Satish Chand

Satish Chand — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 23:38:20 +0000

This was a fascinating discussion – thanks to Dani, Mushtaq, and Owen. The real puzzle for me, and one that Mushtaq alluded to very briefly, is why some leaders within the developing world are more corrupt than others? Suharto, for example, is reported to having stolen more than Marcos but yet is credited with helping growth in Indonesia. And history and whatever else you want to throw as explanatory variables looks very similar in the two countries, and more so when these two leaders were in power. Corruption under Suharto may have ‘greased’ the wheels of capitalist transition in Indonesia but possibly clogged those same wheels in Philippines. Why?

Comment on Episode 20: Corruption by Bill Savedoff

Bill Savedoff — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 01:53:30 +0000

Great debate and really important issue.

The main question that I have is whether the involvement of international actors (development banks, aid agencies, UN) is actually supporting and sustaining the kind of destructive rent-seeking that Mushtaq described. A recent book by Steve Berkman (Gods of Lending) is only the most recent contribution to this literature. How long would Mobutu have lasted if the aid community hadn’t continued to pour funds into Zaire?

Comment on Episode 19: Beyond Planning by Barbara

Barbara — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 01:17:29 +0000

this was the first development drums podcast that I listened to (I’m not a big podcast fan), and I really enjoyed the discussion between roger and owen. next thing I did was buying roger’s book and reading owen’s paper. actually, i named them as required reading for my upcoming exams in political science.

just a very minor complaint about owen’s paper: the counting of the paragraphs is completely messed up.

Comment on Episode 20: Corruption by David Gray

David Gray — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:56:57 +0000

Hi Owen: thanks. Listened right through, interesting enough. Now feel inadequate

David

Comment on Episode 19: Beyond Planning by Enrique Mendizabal

Enrique Mendizabal — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:43:50 +0000

When planning the development of networks or partnerships, it is now relatively widely accepted, it is crucial to set very clear and explicit long term objectives. These objectives, however, do not describe events, numbers or specific outputs. Rather, they articulate complex relations between people, organisations and their own behaviours towards others.

This recognises that these processes are complex: there is no agreement on what the best course of action might be and there is also no agreement on their outcomes. But it also recognises that our interventions –no matter how well funded and prepared they are- can only contribute to the final outcomes. (And this is all well documented in the discussions around the usefulness of Outcome Mapping in planning)

Having clear objectives that all members of a network or partnership can aim for however, is not enough though. We know that many networking initiatives (or consortia) have failed or stumbled along the way because they failed to recognise that networking is as, if not more, expensive than ‘going at it alone’ (to put it bluntly).

Networks where information flows easily across the membership, where competing objectives are negotiated and a consensus is reached, where principal-agent problems are eliminated by increasing transparency and accountability, and where collective action can be harnessed require (this is a necessary condition) an a fantastic network facilitator –often aided by a flexible yet effectively designed networking strategy (with its systems, structures and processes).

It is easy to be fooled by the ‘magic’ of the Web2.0 –we assume that is is us, the users who made it all possible. Let us not forget the millions that go into building the platforms that facilitate exchange and the millions invested in continuously improving the services we receive –if anything, to keep us interested and coming back for more. This is the same with research, policy and practice networks.

We now know that unregulated markets (networks, after all) fail (imagine the failure of the aid market).

So, Yes to all of the paper’s recommendations but paragraph 98 demands particular attention.

Unfortunately, this assumes that poverty reduction is the main objective of international aid.

Comment on Episode 18: Portfolios of the Poor by joe

joe — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:59:28 +0000

New to the podcast, but was interested in the contents – even though I found it pretty academic and hard to follow at times. I guess it should come as no real surprise that those who survive on low incomes are pretty resilient and have survival strategies. The next question is then what it takes to lift people from this wealth bracket and the difference it would make to them.

Comment on Episode 18: Portfolios of the Poor by Peter Burgess

Peter Burgess — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 19:30:19 +0000

Dear Colleagues

There is another question worth asking … not so much how do the BoP live on under $2 a day, but how people in “rich” countries are so poor on $100 a day? My answer to this question is that the metrics being used make almost no sense at all … an accounting and academic disgrace!

Peter Burgess
Tr-Ac-Net Community Analytics!

Comment on Episode 18: Portfolios of the Poor by Brian Barder

Brian Barder — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 16:39:01 +0000

I really enjoyed listening (on the treadmill in the gym with the iPod) to this extraordinarily informative and instructive interview. It was refreshing to get so many insights into the way the poorest of the poor in Asia and Africa actually manage their precarious, exiguous, uneven and unpredictable finances: the facts and figures seemed so remote from the speculative pronouncements of some (no, of course not you) academic development gurus. A most valuable corrective to ill-informed guesswork. Many thanks to you, Daryl Collins and Jonathan Morduch (however did Murdoch get transmogrified into Morduch, by the way?) Brian http://www.barder.com/ephems/

Comment on Episode 15: Peter Singer by Richard Laming

Richard Laming — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:18:49 +0000

I thought the discussion was very interesting indeed. The conflict between morality and human nature is an important one to solve.

http://www.federalunion.org.uk/blog/2009/07/life-you-can-save.html

Comment on Episode 17: Obama in Ghana by Paul C

Paul C — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 10:05:09 +0000

Just dropping a note to say thanks for this series of podcasts. It’s a fantastic resource both for practitioners and a wider audience.

Comment on Episode 17: Obama in Ghana by Owen

Owen — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:25:14 +0000

Julian

It sure is. The link is the big orange graphic at the top right of the page. It is:

http://developmentdrums.org/feed

Thanks for asking.

Owen

Comment on Episode 17: Obama in Ghana by julian

julian — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:00:55 +0000

Is it possible to subscribe to that podcast with another program than itunes (I use Media Monkey). And if yes, where do I find the link?

Comment on Episode 17: Obama in Ghana by Joe

Joe — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 17:18:26 +0000

You missed Andrew Mwenda’s criticism on Uganda Talks: http://www.independent.co.ug/index.php/uganda-talks/uganda-talks/102-uganda-talks/1259-mwenda-on-obama-old-wine-in-new-bottles

Worth reading through some of the comments too – pretty heated debate still going on.

Comment on Episode 14: Philanthrocapitalism by Giving is believing « Aid Thoughts

Giving is believing « Aid Thoughts — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:28:19 +0000

[...] comments on their blog. A great and very relevant discussion on philanthrocapitalism can be read here (Development Drums). Createquity’s discussion of Givewell is also required reading. [...]

Comment on Episode 8: Timkat by paul t

paul t — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:39:54 +0000

MJPC blames the Congolese Government for the Deteriorating Situation in East Congo(DRC)

“There is no excuse for missing to pay salaries to soldiers in lawless eastern Congo for six months”

Following the deteriorating situation in east Congo, the MJPC called today for the Congolese Government to urgently pay the salaries to thousands of soldiers who have not been paid for over six months in eastern Congo, take swift action to enforce the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) warrant against Bosco Ntaganda and to hold accountable perpetrators of sexual violence against women for their acts.

“Failing to hold accountable individuals who commit war crimes and crimes against humunity continues to be the leading cause of widespread and systematic sexual violence acts against girls and women in the easten Congo” said Makuba Sekombo, Community Affairs Director of the Mobilization for Justice and Peace in the DR Congo (MJPC).

Mr. Sekombo again criticized the government of Congo for not only the continuing failure to protect women and young girls from sexual violence, but also for “encouraging conditions that create opportunities for sexual violence to occur”. “There is no excuse for missing to pay salaries to soldiers in the lawless eastern Congo for six months” said Sekombo. The MJPC has also renewed its call for the Congolese government to take urgent needed action to end human rights abuses in east Congo, hold perpetrators accountable and ensure reparation for the victims of sexual violence.

The MJPC has been urging the Congolese government to compensate the victims of sexual violence in order to also help combat impunity in eastern part of Congo where sexual violence against women and children has been widely used as weapon of war for more than decade. The MJPC online petition calling for help to put pressure on Congolese Government to compensate victims of sexual siolence in Eastern DRC can be signed at http://www.gopetition.com.au/online/26180.html

About MJPC
MJPC works to add a voice in advocating for justice and peace in the DRC particulary in the east of DRC where thousands innocent civilian including children and women continue to suffer massive human rights violations while armed groups responsible for these crimes go unpunished

For more information about the MJPC and its activities, visit http://www.mjpcongo.org. or call Makuba Sekombo @ 1-408-8063-644 or e-mail: info@mjpcongo.org. The online petition calling on the Congolese Government to put urgently in place a comprehensive program of compensation for the victims of sexual violence in eastern Congo can be signed at http://www.gopetition.com.au/online/26180.html

Comment on Episode 5: Kivu – A Congo Backgrounder by Justin P

Justin P — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:11:41 +0000

MJPC Joined HRW in Calling to Hold the Congolese Army Accountable for War Crimes

‘Failing to hold accountable soldiers who commit war crimes and crimes against humanity will result in continued sexual violence against girls and women in the DR Congo”, says MJPC.

The Mobilization for Justice and Peace in the DR Congo (MJPC) called for a full inquiry into new allegations of continuing rape and sexual violence committed by the Congolese Army after a recent report by Human Rights Watch revealed shocking new evidence. The report documents how the Congolese Army (FARDC) has been committing serious human rights abuses that amount to war crimes in East Congo and calls on the UN Security Council to demand the Congolese Government to immediatly investigate and hold accountable soldiers responsible for war crimes.

The MJPC is gravely concerned at continuing reports of sexual violence in eastern Congo. Makuba Sekombo, MJPC’s Community Affairs Director, stresses “paramount importance of sending a clear message to all armed groups in the region – and to the victims of sexual violence in the DR Congo – that rape and other forms of sexual violence are unacceptable and will not be tolerated regardless of the circumstances”. “Congolese army officers are not above international criminal law”, and “Congo has clear international law obligations to do something effective to protect girls and women from sexual violence” added Sekombo.

Congo has clear international law obligations to do something effective to protect girls and women from sexual violence
Rather than receiving appropriate medical and psychosocial care, women and child survivors of rape and sexual violence in eastern Congo continue to face rejection and stigma while the perpetrators of the crime go unpunished. The MJPC has launched an online petition calling on the Congolese Government to put urgently in place a comprehensive program of compensation for the victims of sexual violence which will encourage victims of sexual violence in Eastern Congo to report perpetrators to police and to express their needs for access to medical treatment, psychological services and other social resources. The petition can be signed at http://www.gopetition.com.au/online/26180.html . “While no amount of money can reverse or address the impact of sexual violence on victims, the MJPC maintains that in this way, society at large, through the government, can acknowledge the humiliation suffered, shock and pain experienced by victims and provide the resources to help victims rebuild their lives.

About MJPC
MJPC is a non-profit organization working to add a voice in advocating for justice and peace in the DRC particulary in the east of DRC where thousands innocent civilian including children and women continue to suffer massive human rights violations while armed groups responsible for these crimes go unpunished.

Comment on Episode 15: Peter Singer by The Atheist Missionary

The Atheist Missionary — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 22:27:15 +0000

Your podcast with Singer was fanstastic. It was my pleasure to add you to my subscriptions on iTunes. Best regards from Ontario, Canada.

Comment on Episode 14: Philanthrocapitalism by Tyler Seed

Tyler Seed — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:28:40 +0000

(couldn’t find an email address to send this too)

We are three students who just completed the Master’s Programme in Leadership Towards Sustainability at Blekinge Technical Institute in Karlskrona, Sweden.

As a diverse group; a Greek, a Brazilian and a Canadian of different ages, with varying degrees of experience in the field, for the past several months we’ve been working closely together on a thesis project aimed understanding how strategic approaches to sustainability might be better incorporated in the field of international development assistance. Specifically we’ve focussed on current and possible sustainability strategies of bilateral ODA donor agencies like DFID, CIDA, SIDA, USAID, etc.

Your podcast was discovered during our initial literature review and was a valuable asset in enhancing our understanding of some of the currently held expert opinions on the challenges facing the improvement of ODA effectiveness. We were also alerted to some new and relevant areas of research. It was a relief to hear being debated on your show the same essential concerns that we’d been discussing around issues like donor and recipient accountability, conditionality, and ownership.

After a recent opposition and defence of our work in which much of the discussion focussed on the likelihood, or ability of bilateral donors to accept experimental planning strategies, it was extremely interesting to listen to your recent episode on philanthropy.

The notion of flexible smaller organizations lacking the accountability of a governmental agency is something we hadn’t thought much about, but which is both compelling (re: flexibility) and worrisome (re: lack of accountability) for the reasons discussed on the show. Listened to the discussion, it occurred to us that the sustainability planning model we’ve developed might actually be better suited to such organizations because it is at the same time quite experimental but based on restraint-based precautionary principles. Our Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development Assistance is firmly rooted in a constraints-based approach to planning toward sustainability. In such a case where donors are not subject to political mechanisms of accountability it seems that a definition of sustainability based on a concrete set of constraints might be exactly what is needed to mitigate risk of unforeseen negative consequences.

Obviously you are a busy man, but if you’ve got time we’d love to send you a copy of our work, the brief summary we’ve been sending to various professors and experts. If you are at all interested, please provide us with an email address to send to.

Thank you,

Antonios Balaskas

Eduardo Nunes de Lima

Tyler Seed

Comment on Episode 15: Peter Singer by Brian Barder

Brian Barder — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:35:17 +0000

Another fascinating and — this time — challenging interview. My only rather self-serving reservation about Professor Singer’s injunction to individuals to obey the moral imperative to give money for third world poverty reduction is that in practice private contributions by individuals are never going to be more than a fraction of the money spent for the same purpose by governments: which arguably means that each individual’s top priority should be actively to support whichever political party is likely to carry out generous and effective development policies in office (including development aid but also trade and other policies likely to contribute to poverty reduction). In other words, collective action, as always, is incomparably more likely to be effective than any number of individual acts. But of course the two things are not in any sense alternatives and I accept that we should all do both.

Brian
http://www.barder.com/ephems/

Comment on Episode 13: Butijira by Ephems of BLB » Blog Archive » Attitudes to poverty in Africa: 1991 to 2009 (updated)

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 17:05:07 +0000

[...] Fortunately the current Tory shadow international development secretary, Andrew Mitchell, has publicly declared that a Conservative government will spare development aid from cuts, and committed himself to [...]

Comment on Episode 14: Philanthrocapitalism by paul canning

paul canning — Wed, 27 May 2009 01:13:54 +0000

what a lovely voice you have Owen :] (oh, and v.interesting show!)

Question from me would be how Africa can leverage its great technological initiatives – especially around mobiles – to win business/exports from the ‘west’ and build up this sector.

Comment on Episode 13: Butijira by Joe P

Joe P — Fri, 15 May 2009 14:18:09 +0000

Having listened to the section several times I still can’t work out what Mitchell means by an ‘injection of civil service DNA’ – any idea?

Comment on Episode 13: Butijira by Brian Barder

Brian Barder — Wed, 13 May 2009 19:46:37 +0000

Quite a scoop!

Comment on Episode 12: The Hague by terence

terence — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:56:29 +0000

Hi Owen,

Like Jacob, I really enjoy your podcasts and think the length is about right (any shorter and you’d loose depth; and longer and they’d require multiple sessions to get through). The level of technicality also works for me – interesting in the areas I know something about (Aid, for example), but also still intelligible in the areas about which I know nothing (ICC, ICJ, etc).

In terms of suggestions for who to interview:

Robert Wade or Dani Rodrik would be great on the development impacts of the financial crisis (and more generally on the non-aid related aspects of international development).

On aid, personally, I think people investigating what works and what doesn’t are more interesting than people with blanket views such as Moyo. Maybe someone from CGD’s What Works Group (Ruth Levine et al) or MIT’s Poverty Lab.

Having said all that, your picks so far have been excellent – really enjoying the podcast.

Comment on Episode 12: The Hague by Owen

Owen — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 14:13:42 +0000

Thanks Jacob. That is very useful feedback; and I’ll follow up your suggestions on Agriculture and Trade.

I have invited Moyo but her publicist turned it down. I’ll try again.

Comment on Episode 12: The Hague by Jacob Humber

Jacob Humber — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:56:31 +0000

Hi Owen
I just listened to your most recent Development Drum podcast, and I thought that I would respond to some of the questions you asked the viewers on your show. I hope this is an appropriate place to post it.

I would like to start by saying that I think that this is a wonderful podcast, and I have not missed an episode. You not only are my main outlet from in-depth development news, but your engaging podcasts have increased my interest in development.

Now to answer your questions:

I feel that the length of your podcasts are great, I usually listen to them during my commute and I imagine most of your other listeners will as well.

I think the level of technicality is good; if it were too technical I would probably not be about to whole-hearty pay attention and drive. Plus, your current level of technicality makes the podcast very accessible.

As far as content goes, I think it is always, intriguing and thought provoking. However, the one qualm I have is that Aid seems to be covered somewhat redundantly. Now, I understand that Aid is a sexy topic, is always in the news, and therefore, is going to be in a podcast discussing Development News. However, I still feel that there are a plethora of current development topics out there to discuss that play are equally or even more pivotal to the development process than aid.

As for further topics, I would personally be interested in podcasts discussing Trade, Agriculture or where these two topics meet, namely, agriculture subsides. More specifically, I think a show discussing the outlook of trade reform in light of the increased protectionism due to the financial crisis would be interesting. The show could also touch on the giant agriculture subsides in the USA and EU that seem to do only one thing efficiently, keep agriculture focused developing countries out of world markets. (I know you have done a show in the past about the financial crisis, however, I really just want a podcast on Trade and the financial crisis seems like a good platform to begin this discussion).

One person I would like to hear on your show is Dambisa Moyo. Now I know I just talked about how there is too much aid talk, however, I would really like to hear you interview her as I think that interview would be very engaging and interesting, as it seems that your opinions on aid differ a bit.

Finally, since information is everything in economics, I thought I might tell you a little about me so you know your viewers. I have BA in economics and will be attending a master’s program this fall in either economics of agriculture and resource economics, I hope this master’s will lead to a PhD as I would love to be a researcher at IFPRI or WB. I was already deeply interested and somewhat well versed in development economics before I discovered your podcast, however, your podcast has definitely increased my knowledge. Also, I live in a suburb of Chicago.

Hope this helps some, and keep you the good work.

Comment on Episode 12: The Hague by Forex News Blogs » Blog Archive » More good things to say about the ICC…

Fri, 03 Apr 2009 13:32:00 +0000

[...] Owen Barder interviewed the Wronging Rights ladies. Does Sudanese President Bashir really need to give his permission to be [...]