If you had $75 billion to spend over the next four years and your goal was to advance human welfare, especially in the developing world, how could you get the most value for your money? An expert panel of economists, including four Nobel laureates, would tell you to invest mainly in nutrition and reduction of chronic disease.
COPENHAGEN – If you had $75 billion to spend over the next four years and your goal was to advance human welfare, especially in the developing world, how could you get the most value for your money?
That is the question that I posed to a panel of five top economists, including four Nobel laureates, in the Copenhagen Consensus 2012 project. The panel members were chosen for their expertise in prioritization and their ability to use economic principles to compare policy choices.
Over the past year, more than 50 economists prepared research on nearly 40 investment proposals in areas ranging from armed conflicts and natural disasters to hunger, education, and global warming. The teams that drafted each paper identified the costs and benefits of the smartest ways to spend money within their area. In early May, many of them traveled to Denmark to convince the expert panel of the power of their investment proposals.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
Antara Haldar
advocates a radical rethink of development, explains what went right at the recent AI Safety Summit, highlights the economics discipline’s shortcomings, and more.
The prevailing narrative that frames Israel as a colonial power suppressing Palestinians’ struggle for statehood grossly oversimplifies a complicated conflict and inadvertently vindicates the region’s most oppressive regimes. Achieving a durable, lasting peace requires moving beyond such facile analogies.
rejects the facile moralism of those who view the ongoing war through the narrow lens of decolonization.
The far-right populist Geert Wilders’ election victory in the Netherlands reflects the same sentiment that powered Brexit and Donald Trump’s candidacy in 2016. But such outcomes could not happen without the cynicism displayed over the past few decades by traditional conservative parties.
shows what Geert Wilders has in common with other ultra-nationalist politicians, past and present.
Log in/Register
Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.
COPENHAGEN – If you had $75 billion to spend over the next four years and your goal was to advance human welfare, especially in the developing world, how could you get the most value for your money?
That is the question that I posed to a panel of five top economists, including four Nobel laureates, in the Copenhagen Consensus 2012 project. The panel members were chosen for their expertise in prioritization and their ability to use economic principles to compare policy choices.
Over the past year, more than 50 economists prepared research on nearly 40 investment proposals in areas ranging from armed conflicts and natural disasters to hunger, education, and global warming. The teams that drafted each paper identified the costs and benefits of the smartest ways to spend money within their area. In early May, many of them traveled to Denmark to convince the expert panel of the power of their investment proposals.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
Subscribe
As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.
Register
Already have an account? Log in