Thursday, October 22, 2009

Lecture by Esther Duflo - Fighting Poverty: What Works?



Source: http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/375


About the Speaker

Esther Duflo PhD '99
Abdul Latif Jameel Professor of Poverty Alleviation and Development Economics;Director, Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab



Esther Duflo specializes in development economics. She obtained her Masters in Economics from DELTA and Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris in 1995, and completed her Ph.D. in Economics at MIT in 1999. Most recently, she was the recipient of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Fellowship, the John M. Olin Faculty Fellowship, the Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship, and the Elaine Bennett Prize for Research.Duflo's work focuses on the evaluation in developing countries of the efficacy of policies and initiatives put forth by governments and non-governmental organizations involving education reform, political participation, within-family patterns of resource allocation, and health care delivery. She is also interested in the political economy of public goods provision and gender issues and the economics of the family. She co-founded the Poverty Action Lab, a research center at MIT focusing on randomized evaluation of anti-poverty programs.

About the Lecture



Esther Duflo hopes to take the measure of a wide range of anti-poverty programs. Applying scientific methodology, her colleagues and students at the MIT Poverty Action Lab are approaching the projects of well-intended governments and NGO’s (non-government organizations) with a fresh eye. “We have a spotty and scattered idea of the most effective ways to deliver social impact,” says Duflo, so evaluating what works is important. She describes the U.N. goal of ensuring that all children worldwide attend school. Many programs aimed at achieving this goal simply don’t deliver the results intended. Some approaches that gained credibility and support involve giving away school uniforms and providing free meals. But, says Duflo, “Sometimes ideas that become conventional wisdom are erroneous and need to be rethought,” especially since the “budget for fighting poverty is extremely limited and will remain limited.” Researchers compared a program that aimed to improve children’s school attendance through a program of deworming, with a program that paid kids to go to school. Testing these projects “the way we do drugs, with treatment and control groups chosen randomly,” Duflo found that the $3 per year deworming program resulted in a dramatically higher increase in school years attended than did the $6,000 per year program paying kids to attend school.Duflo insists on “being pragmatic about what works and what doesn’t,” and attempts to evaluate not just the effectiveness of programs but the auditing of corruption often found in social programs in the developing world. If the groups implementing a program partner early with Duflo, and embrace a rigorous evaluation of their work, they can often abort ineffective approaches and expand successful ones, maximizing their anti-poverty investment, says Duflo. “The best quality research must form the basis of good policy,” she concludes.

No comments: