This is Emily Ingram's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Emily Ingram's activity
Emily Ingram
Recent Activity
Echoing most of the other sentiments of this thread, I think this paper was an excellent tie-in to what we've been discussing about investment in human capital. The evidence of this paper clearly shows that investment in education leads to positive returns (especially for women) Even looking at social returns, the article pointed out that when accounting for externalities, the return to investment in low-income countries was higher than returns based on earnings. Having seen and discussed the positive spillover effects of these investments in class, it's somewhat perplexing as to why the argument for more investment in education is consistently undermined.
Paper for Friday
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/442521523465644318/pdf/WPS8402.pdf
I share a lot of the same sentiments as everyone else in that although this article did a good job laying out the evidence and predictions that come with lack of progress towards climate change around the globe, it still is sad to see that we are not achieving our long-term goals when it comes to climate change.
The part of the paper that stood out to me was the discussion of who was most impacted. The evidence that those in poverty and low-income areas are the most affected by climate change speaks volumes of the lack of accessibility to sustainability. If decision makers could address this issue instead of constantly hammering on the negative impacts, some progress might actually come to fruition.
Paper for Friday
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/990301468046859794/pdf/927040v10WP00O0sh0Executive0Summary.pdf
I found it interesting that they made the argument of gender equality and economic development as a chicken-or-egg scenario. Although both sides make a convincing argument for a better society, I lean more towards the idea that female empowerment will lead to an increase in economic development. What stuck with me the most is that restrictions on women's educational and job opportunities are not always explicit, and that these norms are imposed on them as early as childhood. Using gender equality policy to encourage women to become more involved in the labor force could definitely increase economic productivity. I do agree that this change may not occur instantaneously and that the problem will be instantly solved, improving gender equality and closing the gap is an important step in general economic development.
Paper for Friday
https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2022-08/Women%20Empowerment%20and%20Economic%20Development%202012.pdf
I thought this paper was very interesting in explaining South Korea's somewhat unusual path of economic development. Park Chung Hee not only used his dictatorial power to improve South Korea's economy through gaining political alliances and promoting nationalistic ideas, but he also was able to collaborate with multiple family-owned businesses to help them contribute to the country's overall economic progress.
I found it particularly interesting how the state provided motivation for these businesses to perform better in the form of receiving loans and funding, and somehow kept a competitive market going while avoiding a monopoly. One would think that the state would favor the more productive industries in their funding, but in South Korea, all family-owned businesses were encouraged to perform well and expand throughout the country.
Lastly, I liked the argument made at the end of the paper about how South Korea's economic development was a "product of a unique set of historical circumstances." This definitely emphasizes what we discussed in class this week about the context-specific nature of growth strategies and how strategies that worked for some countries don't always work for others that try to imitate them.
Miracle on the Han for Friday
https://oxfordre.com/asianhistory/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.001.0001/acrefore-9780190277727-e-271?print=pdf
Krueger makes a lot of valid points about the clashing of economic theories and how it's difficult to accurately model human behavior and decision-making. That being said, I will disagree with the idea that there is only one perfect model that hasn't been discovered yet. With development comes more new theories and new assumptions to be made. Krueger argues that although economists tend to simplify their models to make sense, they get caught up in perfecting the complex details and morals, and thus their ideas faded into the shadows during the era of developmental economics. This goes back to what we discussed in class about having multiple hypothetical "if" conditions in order for a model to function, which is why economists can't fully rely on them. Additionally, each economist's perspective is different, so I would have to disagree with Krueger's assumption that there are "good" models and "bad" models in developmental economics. I agree that models are good when visualizing economic theory, but some social issues are much too complex to be put into the confines of a model or even multiple models.
Paper for Friday
http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/dishpan.html
I personally haven't read too much about environmental economics or SDGs, but Sach's argument was very captivating. I noticed that Sach's perspective of SDGs and eliminating issues such as poverty and hunger, as well as improving quality of life and fighting climate change, are much more optimistic than what I recall reading in my Environmental Studies class. Although he acknowledges the hurdles of accomplishing these goals as a global entity, he sees the SDGs as "a shared focus on economic, environmental, and social goals...a broad consensus on which the world can build".
Another part of Sach's SDG analysis that I thought was interesting was that he believed that human activity and technological advancement could help the progress of the SDGs rather than hinder it, if the right advancements are made. We previously talked about how different countries are at different stages of development and therefore have different priorities in addressing both the MDGs and the SDGs, which might make global cooperation in achieving these goals very difficult. This also depends on the economic structure and the funds that different countries have to put towards achieving these goals.
In addition to Sach's acknowledgement of human activity and technology, another important hurdle in achieving the SDGs he emphasizes is social cooperation. The variation in types of government as well as cultural and socioeconomic structures will make it difficult to enforce the SDGs concerning social equality and eliminating persecution and discrimination.
Overall, I agree with Sach's clear propositions and solutions for achieving the SDGs, although we must keep in mind that both the MDGs and SDGs are moral contracts that aren't socially or legally binding, so Sach's objectives may be feasible, but not necessarily guaranteed to solve the issues of poverty and improvement of quality of life.
Paper for Friday
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2812%2960685-0/fulltext
Emily Ingram is now following The Typepad Team
Sep 16, 2022
Subscribe to Emily Ingram’s Recent Activity