Français/French Deutsch/German Italiano/Italian Português/Portuguese Español/Spanish 日本語/Japanese 한국어/Korean 中文(简体)/Chinese Simplified

Welcome!

I, God, welcome you to my blog!

The good book says only God is good, so it seems to me somebody needs to step up.

I hope you enjoy reading this, the Jesse Journal, as much as I have enjoyed writing it. Please feel free to subscribe, write me an email, request that I write about any particular topic you may want my perspective on, send a prayer, click on the charity link, or donate money to my bicycle fund! Have fun!

Your pal, Jess
I'm a straight, virgo/boar INTJ (age 54) who enjoys books, getting out into nature, music, and daily exercise.

(my email is JesseGod@live.com)

F.Y.I. There are about 2500 posts..

Here's a quote from Fyodor Dostoevsky to start things off right: Love the animals, love the plants, love everything. If you love everything, you will perceive the divine mystery in things. Once you perceive it, you will begin to comprehend it better every day. And you will come at last to love the whole world with an all-embracing love.

Showing posts with label SWBP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SWBP. Show all posts

Thursday, February 18, 2016

Problems and Solutions

An (almost) Comprehensive List!

suffering, discontent
                - Buddhism (mindfulness meditation; result: equanimity)*
                -yoga (a hare krishna i met called it the "path to god")
                 -humor, laughter (making yourself and others happy)

crime, sin - law and order, justice; repentance, forgiveness
(e.g. 7 deadly sins: pride, avarice, lust, anger, gluttony, envy, sloth)

unhealth, mental/physical illness
                   -diet, exercise, hospital, meds, time/healing
                   -balanced diet, food groups; variety
                   -vegetarian, fruits and vegetables, of different colors
                    (quality, quantity: not too much, not too little, healthy)
                   -stay hydrated, 7 glasses of water/day
                   -medication/medicine/drugs/pharmaceuticals
                    (self-medicated, and/or doctor prescribed)
                   -fish oil (omega 3), vitamin c
                   -well as we'll: togetherness, community, being social
                    (example, the pope)
                   -mental health: group/cbt (cognitive behavioral therapy)
                   -depression/anxiety:
                          -shower, swim, walk, talk, shop, eat, nap/sleep
                   -enough sleep
                   -cleanliness, hygiene (brush, floss, rinse)
                   -look good, feel good
                   -spiritual life: friends, family, love, nature, comfort, security
                   -moderation
                   -fitness: walk, exercise, fresh air, movement, dance,
                     sports participation, gym, swim, lift, bike

supply meeting demand -logistics              
poverty -employment, money
basic needs- charity, gvt/taxation
insecurity- self-defense/martial arts, military/police, home-security
war- diplomacy (or victory)

ignorance- curiosity, education, discipline, reading,
                    research, teaching, writing
                 -computers/tablets/smartphones: internet
                    (e.g. google, wikipedia, open yale courses, etc.)
                 -library/librarians
                     (books, magazines, newspapers, audio cd's, video dvd's)
                 -enlightenment (mindfulness, reflection, discernment)
                 -"knowing" (in the biblical sense)
                 -science

boredom- art/creativity, blog, exercise, sports, family, books, magazines, newspapers, internet, music, movies, travel, games, tv

tired-nap, sleep; hungry-eat! thirsty- drink.
horny -! (sex? masturbate? extinguish desire?)

behavior, morality, ethics- incentives, inducements,
           carrots and sticks, rewards and punishments

Bjorn Lomborg (his Ted talk on his book, Solutions to the World's Biggest Problems)
solution: read my book report, on this blog! SWBP (link on sidebar, on right, under "SAVE THE WORLD") (again, that's Solutions to the World's Biggest Problems, which I bought, read, have, and wrote about)

Love is the main solution
followed closely by Nature, Money, and Humor
(I listen to a lot more Music than comedy, though, myself)

*about Buddhism:
(extinguish the buddhist "poisons": greed, hatred, delusion)
(what is different about a buddhist vacuum cleaner? no attachments)
(attachments, negative and positive:  craving and aversion*)
 *(attachment/clinging/lust/desire/greed/need/want/craving/
  aversion/anger/hatred/rage)

Friday, May 10, 2013

"Dark" literature

from the Berkeley library

1)The Weird, a compendium of strange and dark stories (new)
2)The Year's Best Fantasy and Horror (14th annual collection)
3)the elements of aikido, greg o' connor
4)The secret art of pressure point fighting, Morris
5)Box like the pros, smokin' joe frazier
6)The Ultimate Mixed Martial Arts training guide (techniques for fitness, self defense & competition)
7)American Shaolin, Matthew Polly

in other news,
3 movies i have (but haven't seen yet), are
1)Valentine's Day (don't call it VD!)
2)Love Actually, the ultimate romantic comedy
3)The Princess Bride (Nikki's favorite movie)

Saturday, December 13, 2008

SWBP: Population, Migration

SWBP (Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems),
a 2007 book, edited by Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Commission,
Ch. 23, Population: Migration, by Michael J. Greenwood, U of Chicago, Final Chapter (!), pp. 425-438, yeah, baby.
Book Report/ Commentary and Summary, by Jesse L. Teshara
(you can call me Jess)

People moving about

This chapter is a bit theoretical, heady, and uses economist jargon like elasticity and the slope of supply schedules/curves in quantifying various scenarios for transfers and redistributions, blah blah blah.

Don't be fooled, the topic of this chapter is migration/immigration, and not about population per se, such as everybody's favorite topic, population and supposed overpopulation.

The current debate about U.S. illegal immigration colors the discussion.

Okay, data:
International migration appears to be at or near historically high levels (2005), and the illegal component is probably the part that has increased most in recent years. The numbers of illegals are difficult to obtain, so substantive discussion is mooted.

Problems with illegals include:
-stress on social programs and educational institutions in receiving nations, and the monetary transfers involved
-culture clash and ethnic tensions
-difficulty assimilating, higher costs for providing bi-lingual education
-disenfranchisement, lack of citizenship availability, long waits.
-they tend to be poor, less-educated, young, and less-skilled...so they displace the lowest income indigenous residents, while putting downward pressure on the wages of those who remain employed.

Benefit
"Because the individual (migrant) typically has a higher marginal product in the destination, which is reflected in a higher wage there, he has a potential incentive to move and his movement improves the global distribution of labor resources." Therefore, the migrant usually gives contribution that raises the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the destination country.

The question lurking behind this chapter is, should we adopt a nationalist or a global perspective? Internationally, the migrants gain. But maybe nationally, there are some unhappy (and perhaps vocal) losers.

In analyzing who enjoys benefits, and who suffers losses, the right data has to be collected to make informed policy decisions (describing elasticities and slopes). Some circumstances create gains to the economy that outweigh (ji.e., more than compensate for) the losses to native workers, so migrants could be taxed and compensatory payments made to the "losers," while in other circumstances, natives are rightly wary of migrants.

The author makes the point that taxing gainers, and compensating losers -redistributing- never happens. Taxing relatively poor migrants is not popular, of course. So Mr. Greenwood has some suggestions:

1. Allow individuals to "buy" their way in. Illegals are said to pay an estimated 3-4k to "coyotes" to help them across the border. If each of the presumed 12M illegal aliens in the USA were to have paid $1,000 to gain legal entry, that would be $12B in the coffer of the US Treasury.
-labor turnover would allow more migrants to come, legally

2. Employers could pay a one-time, or perhaps annual, fee (to hire specific migrants they wish to employ.)
-Border control could perhaps be relaxed, with additional savings.

3. Maybe we can be clear on the supply and demand curves for low-wage workers, and thus set the equilibrium price for a permit to work here, thus creating a more market-oriented approach to immigration.

4. (as a refinement on 3) Migrants could post a bond upon entering the country, and if they return to their origin country at a specified time, it will be retured in full, but if not, they would forfeit the bond (possibly as a rising percentage related to time overdue).

I say the whole world should simply open all it's borders, come what may.
I'd like to know what the "experts" think would happen, if that were to actualize.

SWBP: Unsafe Water and Lack of Sanitation

SWBP is Solutions to the World's Biggest Problems,
a 2007 book I'm reading, edited by Bjorn Lomborg,
Ch. 22, pp. 405-422, by Guy Hutton (from Development Solutions International),
Book Report / Commentary and Summary, by me, god :-)

Cough! Yuck..

The Problem
In 2002, it was reported that 1.1B people drink unsafe water (the words used are "lacked access to improved drinking water sources"), and 2.6B people lacked proper sanitation (again, the words used are "lacked access to improved sanitation.")

More than 90% of these live in Asia and Africa.
70% of the 1.1B, and 78% of the 2.6B live in just 11 countries:
(India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Ethiopia, Vietnam, Brazil, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Afghanistan).

In some regions, the percentage without proper sanitation is "disturbingly high," or as I would rather put it, the potential for improvement is excitingly vast (seriously, when you're cleaning a house, isn't dusting the dirtiest spots the most satisfying? Come on guys, help me out. I'm trying to implement the Secret, here.)

This is an obviously central element of a basic human need, right?
(I don't see why I should have to think about ranking it according to CBA).
Anyway, in recognition of it's importance:
-WS&S (water safety and sanitation) Improvement is MDG (UN Millennium Development Goal) 7. Specifically, to halve by 2015 the % of poor souls without sustainable access to safe water and basic sanitation.
-It is, of course, (like everything else), tied up with improvement in other areas and goals like health and nutrition, environmental sustainability, gender equality, primary school attendance, and overall poverty rates.
-The UN has declared 2005-2015 the International Decade for Action: Water for Life.

SOLUTION
The Solution is, well, Universal Access (you don't have to make that an acronym, kay?) Um, the MDG is good, of course, but the overall objective is still not half, but everybody, healthy and happy, with clean water and sanitation.

This means "flush toilets, VIP latrines, and simple pit latrines, with properly treated and disposed of sewage, and adequate water quantity and quality." (I don't know what a VIP latrine is..)

Specifically, there are 4 areas for intervention:
1. Hygiene (hand washing, education)
2. Sanitation (sanitary pit latrine, septic tank, household sewer connection)
3. Water Supply (new water supply or improved distribution, piped household water suppy)
4. Water Quality (treatment at community source, treatment at water plant for household piped water supply, treatment at point of use [chemical, pasteurization, filter, boiling, or solar disinfection techniques], combined with safe storage).

Adequate water quantity prevents water-washed disease transmission, such as scabies and trachoma. Adequate water quality prevents waterborne diseases like diarrhea, dysentary, and typhoid.

The author says that meeting the MDG-7 (WS&S) would cost $83B USD. This is a must do. Humanity would be inhuman not to. I don't know if this means the other half would cost the same, less, or more.

-For those 11 countries in dire need, the BCR's (Benefit-cost ratios) range from 4.4 to 31.6.
-The majority (>75%) of deaths averted would be in the 0-4 age group.
-Some groups would end up paying less than what they already pay for bad water for improved water...due to payments for water vendors, bottled water, purification materials and energy expenses, collection and waiting time, sewage removal.

A more complex economic analysis for policy makers to use would include not only the financial considerations, but the health considerations, and the economy of time saved and household production opportunities. The authors seem to think it's all about plugging in the right data into a computer with an econometric model, it seems, but I think it might be equal part art. Something as important as this deserves some personal time to meditate upon and have simmer.

The author finishes with pointing out that resources, both financial and water itself, are constrained in those 11 countries, which have low gvt. spending and income per capita., weak institutions to oversee water supply expansion, and large populations. Personally, I think all those people want WS&S more than he does, and can be mobilized to improve their lives, so it's very doable. Is the glass half full of clean water?

Certain impacts can be had at low cost: The mobilization of the health sector to improve household water purification at the point of use or in the community, hygiene education in the community, health promotion and latrine building in schools and health centers, and extending micro-credit to households to allow them to invest in water and sanitation improvement.

Also, Improved advocacy could be done by studies, country-level and sub-national, that help convince (obstinately idiotic?) governmental departments, as well as the population, that water and sanitation are worth investing in.


Micro-loan link; kiva.org

Friday, December 12, 2008

SWBP: Hunger and Malnutrition

SWBP is Solutions to the World's Biggest Problems,
a 2007 book I'm reading, Ch.22: Hunger&Malnutrition,
by Jere R. Behrman (U of Pa), Harrold Alderman (World Bank),
and John Hoddinott (Int'l Food Policy Research Institute)
My book report/ Commentary and Summary
pp. 390-403

Brother, can you spare a dime (I haven't eaten today)?

Almost a billion people, of all ages, are chronically malnourished.
160M of these are children of pre-school age.
Each year, 12M babies are born underweight due to maternal malnourishment.

Improved nutrition and reductions in hunger create LARGE productivity gains in poorly nourished populations (as if all we care about is productivity...actually, we kind of do). Also, nutritiously fed/unhungry populations have less costs associated with infectious diseases and premature mortality, money from which is then freed up for other purposes.

Hunger, defined, is when people lack the basic food intake to provide the energy and nutrients to live fully productive lives. It is measured according to varying requirements for each individual (defined by age, sex, and activities).

Malnutrition, defined, is (I guess) hunger plus other factors, including the person's health state, which describes a person's "nutritional status."

In any case, 90% of the world's hungry are in 2 regions:
Asia and the Pacific, and
sub-Saharan Africa

In 2003, Asia had 505M and Africa had 198M undernourished.

Regarding low birth-weight, IUGR (intra-uterine growth retardation) is significantly caused by mother's long run nutritional status, her weight and micro-nutrient status prior to conception, and her weight gain during pregnancy. Also, infections and parasites play a role, such as malaria, where endemic.

Besides LBW (low birth weight), other factors contributing to poor childhood nutritional status are: limited periods of exclusive breastfeeding, poor diets, and infections (primarily gastrointestinal). Most malnutrition occurs in the first 2 years of life, and it often leads to deficits in cognitive development.

-30% of S. Asian babies are born with Low Birth Weight, and
-The 162M malnourished children are STUNTED (about 1/3 of all children). Stunting link.
-In sub-Saharan Africa, prevalence of stunting has remained unchanged, and numbers have increased (2004).

Micro-nutrients, as they are called, deserve special mention. These are Iodine, Vitamin A, and Iron. So anemia (iron-deficiency) is tied into this. The chapter says "more than 40% of children aged 0-4 in developing countries suffer from anemia." Anyway, Iodine prevents iodine deficiency (um, yeah), which adversely affects development of the Central Nervous System (e.g. the brain) and results, on average, in lower IQ's. Adequate Iron is also necessary for brain development. Vitamin A deficiencies are associated with increased risk of infant and child mortality.

To do the BCR thing, this book describes how it is a somewhat vague and fuzzy process, albeit informative nonetheless. Life-expectancy tables, such as those used by life-insurance companies, are a part of this. Depending on what figures you use for benefits and costs, your priorities can be re-arranged all over the place. But I seriously think the world needs to find the leadership and the heart (the leadership within ourselves) to do it all. Basically, everything listed in this book is a good investment. Some investments are described as better than others, and we should obviously do those. But the world MUST have the WILL to ACT (and SPEND) to solve it's major quality of life problems. Personally, I think every problem can be solved. I'm just that way. And certainly, every problem in this book can be addressed simultaneously, in a coherent framework. I'm pulling for you, Barack (in tandem with the UN).

Anyway, the solutions listed in the tables in this chapter (with various associated figures I won't give you) are: 1. Reducing low birthweight for pregnancies with a high probability of LBW (particularly in S. Asia), 2. Improving infant and child nutrition in populations with high prevalence of child malnutrition., and 3. Reducing micro-nutrient deficiencies in populations in which they are prevalent.

Specifically, for 1., this means: treatments for women with asymptomatic bacterial infections, treatment for women with presumptive STD, and drugs for women with poor obstetric histories.

Specically, for 2., this means: breastfeeding promotion in hospitals in which the norm was promotion of infant formula, and integrated childcare programs (adding improved home child care practices).

Specifically, for 3., this means: Iodine (per woman of childbearing age), Vitamin A (per child under 6), and Iron (per pregnant woman, and then over the lifecycle of the child(ren)).

I have to give this BCR example, just to show you how easy it is to do something immensely good and important: (iron) A cost of $19 yields a benefit of $12,821 (at a 3% discount rate).

Another one (breastfeeding) is a cost of $599 yields a benefit of $159,401 (!) (also, 3%).

In the summary, the authors mention how health and productivity gains aren't the only benefits to reducing health and malnutrition. There's obviously significant spillover into everything else, like women's education and status, infectious disease, improving infrastructure to reduce possibilities of famine or chronic hunger, improving water and sanitation, reducing international trade barriers, lessening conflicts, and improving governance.

They also mention that there are probably many other solutions, such as improving agricultural technology or lessening zinc deficiencies, that didn't lend themselves as well to analysis for the BCR format of this book.

And finally, why the hell haven't these awesome opportunities already been taken?? For example, Do the children and infants just have too little a political voice? And, Do marginal costs rapidly increase if interventions are scaled up?

Whatever, just do it. Git'r done.
I don't know if I want to say inaction is the equivalent of murder, but there's definitely a wide world of opportunity for happiness, on the other hand.

Thursday, December 11, 2008

SWBP: Living Conditions of Women

an ongoing series of book reports (just like grammar school, lol)
Ch. 20, Living Conditions of Women, by Brinda Viswanathan,
of the Madras school of economics. (only 3 posts to go..)
SWBP is Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems,
edited by Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Commission.
Summary and Commentary

Women take back the night (and the day, too)! If women ruled the world...

Compared to men, women have benefited less around the world during various courses of economic development. Women have a lowered status within the house, in the workplace, and in the community. This status differential has been proven to NOT be due to their biological or physiological differences, but rather is due to society and culture. Women have been kept down.

As this book, (and the chapter's author), have an economic emphasis, 2 examples of improving women's living conditions that profitably reduce the gender gap are:
(1) Reducing the gap between male and female education, especially at the primary level
and
(2) Providing childcare facilities to allow more women to participate more effectively in the labor market.

Other measures to improve women's living conditions that are harder to quantify cost:benefit ratios for are: reductions in sex trafficking and domestic violence, improved access to reproductive healthcare, and a less clear-cut definition of gender roles and the consequent overburdening of women with things like carrying firewood and water and agricultural labor like hoeing the fields or whatever, while men spend a proportionally larger time with leisure activities. The deeply-rooted gender biases cause women with similar education levels to be paid less than men, and not advance as high (the glass ceiling).

1. Educating away "gender inequality"
I heard a Grateful Dead song this morning with a refrain about women being smarter than men. That very well might be true, I don't know (I'm a man, lol).

The benefits of education are 1) a higher return on human capital investment (the cost of education, I assume vs. the cost of being less/un-educated), and the consequently higher rates of economic growth, 2) sexual knowledge, i.e. refusal tactics and recognizing dangers involved in risky behavior (with consequently less HIV infections and sexual exploitation and unwanted pregnancies), 3) better health, 4) increased ability to bargain / participation, in household decisions as well as the public sphere, 5) better employment opportunities and a lesser chance of workplace discrimination, 6) improved nutrition and health status of children, and 7) eliminating discrimination between boys and girls in the household.

Here's number 8, a macro-level result:
"Gender inequality in education acounts for a sizable portion of the empirically observed growth differences between countries and regions."

and
2. Childcare Facilities
Specifically, improving the access to, and affordability of, them.
This gives women a choice of if they want to work or not, and then whether part-time or full-time. Childcare-provision also reduces absenteeism and improves the chances of retaining jobs.

I have tables that show CBR's (cost benefit ratios) for South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, Rep. of Korea, and Argentina, for both solutions. Whatever, you get the idea. Just do it. There is so much opportunity for insanely helpful, and rewarding, investment in the human condition, it's maddening to not be living in a virtually perfect world. Please stop, everyone, with the wasteful selfish expenditure, that's all I have to say right now. You're not sinners in the hands of an angry God, and I have no plans at this time to smite everyone (at least not all at once). I come from a place called Hope, lol.

You know, the culture could be reversed, with women having more power, and men staying home taking care of the kids. Who knows, right?

Saturday, December 6, 2008

SWBP: Living Conditions of Children

Chapter 19. SWBP is Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems, a 2007 book I'm reading, edited by Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus. This chapter written by Harry Anthony Patrinos (Can I just call him Harry Patr?), of the World Bank (views are his). Summary and Commentary, by Jesse L. Teshara.

Children are our Future
and "The child is the father of the man"

This is a BIG problem. They didn't title this book the world's BIGGEST problems for nothing. Forget your garden and a new Porsche, folks. Make a nice pretty rock garden or something, and buy a Smart car. This is where suffering can be met head on, and some real personal joy can be had, in my opinion.

Half a billion children under 14 live on less than a dollar a day.

Everyone seems to just think that there is a sea of human suffering, and it's not worth doing anything (or much) about, but we should concentrate on ourselves and our children, ROW (rest of world) be damned, because that's what really matters. I disagree. Eventually, humanity will go extinct. So you and your family aren't as all-important as you think they are. I seriously doubt humanity will survive, forever. Oingo Boingo sings no one lives forever. What's true for an individual, is probably true for anything else. Matter has a half-life. Stars go extinct. They say the universe will eventually go black. We'll surely evolve, and probably are evolving, in process, right now. In fact, yeah, now that I think about it, as long as the environment is interacting with genes, then the human genome, in addition to the change with each generation from the variability in partnering and particular sperm and eggs, is being selected upon by the environment. Even if humanity evolves into something completely foreign looking or technological or whatever, I imagine there's surely an end. Then again, maybe your baby will change the course of history and/or even evolution. Still, one second or a trillion years, things seem likely to be ephemeral. Being selfish is one's prerogative. But if we are to see ourselves as good, if we are to entertain hope of a "heavenly reward: i.e. being saved, i.e. having our 'soul' or consciousness live on after death (such as in a virtual world, with your personality and lifetime data saved on some form of a computer), then maybe we should take the road of compassion and seek to reduce the suffering, increase the peace, maximize the happiness of everyone else, too. The possibility of however improbable an eternal reward (paired with the possibility of however an improbably eternal punishment), is the carrot and stick that in many religions attempts to induce good behavior. But experience and commonsense tell us to be good, too. Everyone knows mean people suck. And karma can bite you on your ass. Maybe not always, and perhaps not necessarily. I happen to believe Hitler got the same (or better) fate as Jesus. But everyone appreciates a needed kind smile or helping hand. We're a human family, we're all in this together, and unless you're maximizing happiness (the right mix of selfish and altruistic activity) you're doing everyone a disservice, I think. I also think people have the wrong ideas about how to do this, and neglect the real sources of true happiness all around them. People really do live lives of quiet desperation. People live deluded, confused, angry, sad, hungry, unhealthy, neglected, and needy lives. And for me, at least, making others happy is what makes me happy, and I subscribe to the basic philosophy that if everyone met their basic clothing/ shelter/ dietary/ relationship needs, and gave all their other effort to helping others meet theirs, instead of constantly seeking selfish gain, then the world would be a much friendlier place.

Half a billion.
I'll just leave it at that.

SWBP: Lack of People of Working Age

SWBP is Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems, a 2007 book I'm reading, edited by Bjorn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus. Chapter 18, Lack of People of Working Age, by Robert E Wright and Katerina Lisenkova, both U of Strathclyde, Summary and Commentary

A monster of a problem for Monster.com?

At first glance, this seems like a ridiculous problem, knowing that the average age of humanity (the median age of the world human population) is 28. And I would be right. The best, and most economical, solution, it turns out, is simply letting the younger populations of foreign countries into the states where the working population is graying out.

The problem, to be precise, is that 95% of the employed population in industrialized countries (namely N. America, Europe, Russia, Japan, Australia, and NZ) are aged between 20 and 65, a cohort whose size will plummet if current demographic trends continue: specifically, 80 million employees over the next 4-5 decades.

The chain of causation, without a policy remedy, runs from an implied upward pressure on wages, to less domestic and international competitiveness, lower economic growth, lower tax revenues to fund services for an ageing electorate, possibly raised taxes, and then even lower rates of economic growth.

In industrializing countries, however, the 20-65 age group (the 'traditional labor force'; I'll call it tlf) will be growing by over 1.5 billion (about 60%) between 2005-2050. So a transfer from excess supply of workers to excess demand seems called for.

This chapter also points out that not only will the number of the tlf be diminishing, but the distribution of those still in the workforce will be ageing, as well. Without fresh supply, this increase in older worker supply and decrease in younger worker supply means 1) wages for younger workers will increase, while wages for older workers will decrease, and 2) if labor markets don't adjust, then population ageing will generate unemployment, potentially for older and younger workers alike, resulting in lower economic growth.

Actually, the labor force, according to recent UN population projections, will be growing in industrialized countries until 2010, when a steady and substantial decline will occur over the next 40 years, so that by 2050 100 million people, or 10% of the labor force, will leave work. Using a U of Strathclyde econometric model, this 10% decrease is associated with a 5.6% lower level of output, which, using a 2010 tlf baseline, 40 year time-horizon, and 3 and 6 percent discount rates, would mean a dollar value loss of 19 trillion or 8 trillion, respectively.

That's a fair amount of cheddar.

Solutions
1. We could ask our populations to make more babies. But most industrialized countries have experienced below replacement level fertility for at least 3 decades, and it seems unlikely to exceed replacement level anytime soon. Without migration, the population structure will stabilize, i.e. the share of the population across different age groups will be virtually constant.

2. So another solution is to 'ride out the storm.' It's a temporary phenomenon. They say this is a 'policy' not currently advocated by any government, as it would be politically dangerous in countries with democracy (because?) It is argued that low rates of economic growth are needed to generate improvements in standard of living, with a stabilized populaton structure (I can't say I understand, exactly -why wouldn't that be true for an "unstable" population structure? And can't you improve your happiness, your standard of living, on less income...living more frugally? For example, I know I enjoyed a blackout, myself, because we went outside and talked to neighbors, and almost started a campfire. If we really hashed out the minimum amount of money to live healthy and happy lives, we'd rock. Still, the authors seem to think it isn't practical).

3. With fewer workers supporting an increasing number of those not in work, labor productivity must increase. Human capital investment, as it is called (or education and training), across all ages (lifelong learning), to produce skill-intensive production, is required, they say.

4. Increase the tlf participation rate. For example, employment and labor force participation (what's the difference?) rates for women with pre-school and school-age children are still low. A shortage of affordable day-care and other child services makes it financially irrational for them to work. A cultural shift to one like in the Scandinavian countries, where 'family-friendly' policies enable parents (particularly mothers) to combine child-rearing and employment, would be beneficial.

5. Finally, immigration. An immigration system can be devised that matches people to jobs. And return migration can be significantly reduced through payments. Even giving each migrant $100,000 has a benefit-cost ratio of 4.1 or 3.3, at 3 and 6% discount rates, respectively. I hope we wouldn't create a future problem, though, in which we have demographic difficulties pushed further down the line.

6. Okay, I lied. Penultimately, labor market reforms. "In many industrialized countriesm labor markets are regulated, and adjustment is at best slow and hampered. In such countries, reforms (regardless of their political unpopularity) aimed at 'freeing up' the labor market would be desirable.'

7. Now, finally: Increase the age of retirement. With increasing life expectancy (and vigor around retirement age), the age of retirement at 65 is often seen as too low. This would have massive political ramifications, they say (although I'm not clear on what these would be). Wages might perhaps be considerably lower, and some people would be forced to work to an older age, to receive a pension, while some would welcome the opportunity to work longer, for a variety of reasons.

Conclusion
An increase in pensioners, and decrease in workers, is a recipe in need of a solution, probably a mix of the above ingredients. Increasing immigration seems the most likely, as it clearly has the lowest direct cost to taxpayers.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

SWBP: Disease Control

SWBP: Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems
Chapter 17, Disease Control, by Dean T. Jamison,
of Harvard and UCSF.
Summary and Commentary
Future D.C. policy from D.C.?

The chapter emphasizes opportunities in S. Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, and builds on results of a project (the DCCP) that engaged over 350 authors and estimated the cost-effectiveness of 315 interventions, some of which are more attractive, others which are clearly lower priority. Addressing multiple problems with constrained budgets will require hard choices, he says.
He summarizes with 7 interventions that range from 30:1 to 10:1 in their cost-benefit ratios.

There has been great progress in recent history, but challenges remain. Progress has been uneven. Microbial threats evolve; and HIV is still a big deal.

Specifically, life-expectancy for low and middle-income countries averaged 44 years in 1960, whereas in 2002 it was 65. Not too shabby (progress). Mortality is a key emphasis in this chapter. And keeping people alive should be the highest policy priority. Some countries have lagged on this score. "There are continued high levels of inequality in health conditions within and between countries." But I would also add that quality of life, and what has been called gross national happiness, are the vital component. If people are happy, they'll be more motivated to keep others alive. More hopeful about the human condition, if we feel good about ourselves. I would surmise that every country has room for improvement, and there is a role for all of us in making an alive, healthy, happy world. Good nutrition and fitness and a positive attitude, with healthy relationships, including maybe pets, seems to be the basic prescription. Maybe every individual has their own recipe.

Challenges
1.Uneven progress
by place: in Africa, China, and with indigenous communities:
by age: under 5, adult
by disease: some problems are cheaper to solve than others

AIDS in Africa
But because of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa, life-expectancies there, which were 40 in 1960, and 60 in 1990, went back down to 46 in 2002 (There's either a typo or a misunderstanding on pg. 297 (sub-Saharan Africa either lost 4 years or 14)).

Other regions, like Sierra Leone remain far behind, and the interior provinces of China lag behind the more advantaged coastal regions.

Indigenous populations, generally speaking, everywhere, have not joined the party, as well, so to speak. Technology diffusion, and education levels of the population are important factors in improved health, while income growth much less so.

Good News
Policies, he says, make a huge difference, and "today's tools for improving health are so powerful and inexpensive that health conditions can be reasonably good even in countries with low incomes." Cool.

Although health conditions in many countries remain unacceptably -and unnecessarily- poor, the outlook is good. Grief and misery could be said to be on the decline. Global inequality in health is declining faster than income inequality. That is to say, the world is becoming more equal, as regards health, toward the upper-end of life-expectancy. Highly effective and low-cost interventions financed by the public sector can improve welfare health and population health where the needs are greatest. (FYI: The average income is 7,880 dollars (2002) and the average human life expectancy at birth is 66.12 (2008 est.)).

I want to say, The graph of income distribution for humanity is here, and the graph of life expectancy for humanity is here. Health influences income, and income influences health; it's a virtuous spiral, and It can also be a vicious downward one, and the relationships can be mathematically defined, or maybe painted in broad strokes...But basically, the chapter just says Income growth is neither necessary nor sufficient for sustained improvements in health. Which is good, and a lot simpler for me :-)

To meet the MDG-4 (reducing under-5 mortality by 2015), treatments for diarrhea, pneumonia, TB, and malaria, in addition to immunizations, to reduce stillbirths and neonatal deaths, are all highly cost-effective. TB treatment stands out as the most cost-effective investments, for all ages, because of it's C:B (cost-benefit ratio) of 30:1. It is also has a "high level of financial risk protection," moderate systemic requirements, and a large size disease burden potentially averted. For an annual cost of 1B$, 1M adult deaths would be averted per year. Many countries need to get their butts in gear on the millenium development goals. Besides official national policy, I think every doctor should be a member of MSF (Doctors without borders), too. Any doctor that doesn't have his hands full already, I mean, which I imagine is probably a rarity. What is the global demand for doctors? Anyway, if the people lead, the leaders will follow. We should lead by example. But we should also lobby for effective policy. 23 countries had their under-5 mortality rates remain stagnant or increase between 1990-2001, while another 53 countries were less than half-speed to be on track to meet the goal (including China).

Some categories of progress:
Causes of childhood mortality
There's a table of 11 causes of under-5 mortality, with the numbers of neonatal (0-27 days) and 0-4 deaths. The causes are HIV/AIDS, diarrheal disease, measles, tetanus, malaria, respiratory infection and sepsis, low birth weight, birth asphyxia and trauma, congenital anomalies, injuries, and other. The total, worldwide, for 2001, was 13,874,000 (est., by the GBD [initialism for?]). Only 0.9% occurred in high-income countries. Half of under-5 deaths occur within the first 28 days of life, adding stillbirths to neonatal deaths. Email me if you want the specifics from the book (or on anything I write, anywhere, if you like).

So various categories are used to parse medical problems into: a) for each country, b) by age, c) by each disease/cause of death. I think the stats should be all online in a really accessible format. I bet they are.

Anyway,
There's a table in the book that lists the causes of death (age 5 and older, in low and middle-income countries), giving deaths in millions, and percentage of total, broken into 3 categories: injuries, noncommunicable diseases, and (communicable, maternal, perinatal, and nutritional conditions).

Injuries are 4.4M (11.6%), ncd's are 25.2M (66.7%), and the last one is 8.2M (21.7%). There were 37.8M deaths in 2001. Injuries are broken into road traffic accidents, suicides, and other (1.0, 0.7, and 2.7M, respectively). NCD's are cancers (4.9M/13%), diabetes (0.7M/1.9%), Ischaemic and hypertensive heart disease (6.5M/17.2%), Stroke (4.6, 12.2), COPD (2.4, 6.3), Other (6.1, 16.1). And then Communicables, etc. are broken into TB (1.5, 4.0), AIDS (2.2, 5.8), Respiratory Infections (1.5, 4.0), Maternal conditions (0.5, 1.3), and Other (2.5, 6.6).

This is really about reducing grief and misery while creating the conditions for happiness (survival and health). Unhealth and SID vicious (Sickness, Illness, Disease) also sustain poverty, and brake economic growth, to use more dour terminology. Like Kaiser says, Thrive! Like your car says, do Preventive Maintenance. Like my old high school said, Be a man for others. Like Spiderman says, Action is his reward. Anyway..

The chloroquine and sulfadoxine-pyramethamine (SP)-resistant malaria parasite is rapidly spreading, and the loss of these inexpensive, highly-effective, widely available drugs is leading to a rise of malaria mortality and morbidity in Africa. A high priority, the book says, is creating the rapid transition to effective new treatments like ACTs (artemisinin combination therapies). Also, insecticide treated bed nets, expanded use of intermittent preventive treatment for pregnant women, and indoor residual DDT sprayings are called for.

Also, for kids,
-immunizations need to be expanded,
-diarrhea and pneumonia treatments (simple, low-cost, highly-effective) need to be expanded, along with treatment for all childhood illness,
-ensured distribution of key micronutrients,
-and expansion of the use of packages of measures to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV.

2. Epidemiological transition
Dr. Jamison relates that the trend, the transition, is from the traditional scourges of infectious diseases and undernutrition to the major noncommunicable diseases (ncd's) and injury, as a consequence of fertility decline and population aging (I'm not sure I see the relation, exactly). The major ncd's are circulatory system diseases/cvd, cancers, and major psychiatric disorders. Road-traffic injuries are increasing, and replacing "traditional forms of injury" (like a fiddler falling off a roof?). Noncommunicable diseases account for 2/3 of all deaths in low and middle income countries. 22% of deaths, though, are still from infection, undernutrition, and maternal conditions. This is called a "dual burden." The challenge is to respond to them with constrained resources (has the overall health burden become more expensive?).

A good chart with the numbers for all causes of disease, by country income, is in the chapter.

Here's a salient fact:
The public health research and policy community has been surprisingly silent about the epidemics of CVD (cardiovascular disease), cancers, psychiatric disorders, and automobile-related injuries, despite their killing over twice as many people in 2001 as AIDS, malaria, and TB combined (in low and middle-income countries).

Smoking is a risk factor for multiple NCDs. See my article on smoking.
-CVD results in over a quarter of low/middle-income country deaths (about 13M deaths/yr).

The risk factors for CVD collectively account for 78% of these countries' deaths. These risk factors are high blood pressure, high cholesterol, smoking, obesity, excessive alcohol use, physical inactivity, and low fruit and vegetable intake. Efforts to change most of these, at the population level, have had little success. (What works, though? Let's do that ).

But the tobacco front has seen favorable development. Many promising approaches remain to be tried, the author says, which will require systematic efforts to evaluate. Developing other ones might be important, too. All the risk factors need aggressive experimentation, and dynamic policy measures/effort. Systematic efforts are required to acquire hard knowledge about which approaches work and which do not, so that unsuccessful efforts will be discontinued, and successful ones expanded.

The world spends x dollars/year on tobacco products. Think what that could do if spent on health, like food or cookbooks or cleats or jumpropes or dumbells or gym memberships or even bicycles.

Individuals at high risk of a heart attack or stroke, such as those who have already experienced a cardiovascular event, have the option of taking cost-effective pharmaceutical interventions for hypertension and high cholesterol which can reduce CVD risks by 50% or more (even in the absence of behavior changes).

Aside:
Healthcare personnel and systems, in addition, can use improvement, in low/middle-income countries. Well, in high-income countries, too, but the author adopts the approach for developing countries, the focus of the chapter, of the model of strengthening systems by creating specific capacity to deliver priority services in volume and with high quality, in which capacity strength spreads to other areas from high-performing initial nodes. Love of life, respect for life, the desire to be healthy, a culture that encourages healthy living, is the prerequisite. Then, good hospitals for when the preventive maintenance, etc. isn't enough.

3. HIV
Successes and control efforts have been real, but with few exceptions limited to upper middle-income and high-income countries. Poorer countries have been mostly screwed, and remain in dire straits (The sultan of swing wants his mtv). AIDS deaths are often associated with excruciating pain. And by the numbers, with the possible exceptions of the use of nuclear weapons in densely populated areas or a devastating global episode like the 1917-18 influenza pandemic, HIV-AIDS devastation is the greatest threat to development for dozens of countries around the world, including several of the most populous. Thailand and Uganda are examples of success in countries with fewer financial resources, against more established epidemics. Of upper middle-income countries, Brazil and Mexico successfully forestalled potentially serious epidemics. Mexico, in particular, is singled out for responding early and forcefully. Although unfortunately development assistance was slow in coming, the Global Fund (to fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria) had initial years of substantial success. R&D, both public and private, made rapid progress, however, although a vaccine or cure has not been found (this 2007 book says. Is there one yet? I guess I would know, probably).

-The prevention record has been dismal. Little has been spent, and little achieved. Fewer than 1 in 5 high-risk people by even 2003 had access to even the most basic preventive services. There is plenty of blame, including for the US administration that discouraged condom use and stigmatized and alienated commercial sex workers.

-As the absence of STI's (sexually transmitted infections) greatly reduces transmission of HIV, treatment of them is a high priority, in addition to deserving treatment in their own right.

-Medically inappropriate restrictions on the use of inexpensive but powerful opiates for pain control continue to deny dignity and comfort to millions of patients with AIDS and cancer in their final months.

-Antiretroviral treatments, over a dozen of them, though originally costly, are feasible, at least in principle, for effective use in low-income settings now, due to scientific advances. Challenges to this are formidable, however. Substantial resources could be diverted from prevention or other healthcare high-payoff activities, and a false sense of complacency has led to increased risky behavior and increased HIV transmission. Interruption of drug supplies and low adherence are also problems. Systematic effort to study which approaches work or do not requires variation in approach and careful evaluation, to prevent needless deaths from not halting ineffective programs or giving resources to effective ones. Evaluate. Also, the cheapest possible drugs are often used, risking problems with toxicity and resistance. In Jamison's view, widespread adoption needs to be carefully sequenced, and only with a benefit-cost ratio greater than 1, because other highly attractive health investments exist.

So, for HIV/AIDS, the answers are a)condoms/needle exchange/other preventive services, b)std treatment, c)opiates, and d)ART (anti retroviral treatments), in ways that work, and with profitable b:c ratios, properly sequenced.

In Conclusion
The 7 big investments he recommends are
1.TB, appropriate case-finding and treatment..............B:C is 30:1
2.Heart attacks, acute mgmt. with low cost drugs........B:C is 25:1
3.Malaria, prevention and treatment............................20:1
4.Childhood diseases, expanded immunization coverage.......20:1
5.Cancer, heart disease, tobacco taxation......................20:1
6.HIV, prevention..............................................12:1
7.surgical capacity at district hospital (injury, difficult childbirth, other)...10:1

Monday, October 13, 2008

SWBP: Drugs

SWBP: Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems
Chapter 16, Drugs, by Jeffrey A. Miron
Summary and Commentary

Illicit drugs, that is.
Presumably prescription pharmaceuticals are A-okay.
Actually, he doesn't think illicit drugs are much of a problem. It's the criminalization, illegality, and prohibition that is.

Miron proposes this solution: To LEGALIZE the production, distribution, sale, possession, and use of all illicit drugs, worldwide. "What?" you say?
Not just Peter Tosh says "Legalize It"

Well, to be fair, any set of auxiliary policies would be acceptable so long as the market is not driven underground, such as the current alcohol and tobacco laws, dui laws, age restriction, sin taxes, subsidized treatment, advertising restrictions, etc.

Drugs, as we all know, can be bad. They can seriously reduce health, productivity, cause traffic accidents and industrial accidents, harm fetuses, and diminish the public purse under gvt. funded healthcare. For starters.

But drug prohibition laws have their own problems: black markets, violence, corruption, aiding terrorism, the increased spread of HIV, diminished respect for the law, enriching criminals, unnecessary restrictions on the use of drugs as medicine, and excessive restrictions on civil liberties. Also, the cost of enforcement.

The challenge is to balance the evils of both, and legalization is the solution. Here's why:
1. Prohibition does not eliminate the market for illicit drugs. It simply creates a black market. To what extent, though, does prohibition reduce drug use? (demand: a-d) a) To the extent society has respect for the law, drug use would be diminished. He argues, however, that violation of other weakly enforced laws is widespread, such as speeding, tax evasion, blue laws, and sodomy. b) the penalties are mild and rarely imposed. c) the price going up due to illegality, and therefore lowering demand, seems to be minimal. d) the "forbidden fruit" effect might make demand for drugs even higher. (supply: e) e) black market drug suppliers face increased costs of manufacturing, transporting, and distributing drugs under the threat of police detection/while operating in secret. However, this is partially offset by the low marginal costs of evading tax laws and regulatory policies.

So, while he admits prohibition probably reduces drug consumption, as theory would dictate, he suspects it's not by much. Alcohol prohibition, for example, didn't have a dramatic effect on consumption. Cross-country comparisons between nations with strongly and weakly imposed prohibition show little evidence of higher drug consumption under weak enforcement. And variation in strength of enforcement in the United States over time has not corresponded with substantial fluctuations in drug consumption levels. He admits drug use might increase by 25%, however (but not by orders of magnitude, as some have charged).

In his view, this possible effect is not as bad as the sum effect of drug prohibition, which is characterized by these 10 elements: increased crime, harm to drug users, reduced product quality, enriched criminals, increased spread of HIV, medicinal use restrictions, compromised civil liberties, aiding terrorism, diminished respect for the law, and the direct costs of enforcement.

To explain:
1. Increased crime
Participants in illegal markets cannot resort to courts and lawyers to resolve disputes, and therefore turn to guns, increasing violent crime. The ups and downs of the homicide rate in the US over the past century coincide with the ups and downs of drug prohibition enforcement. Other commodities like prostitution and gambling are associated with violence only when they are prohibited. During US alcohol Prohibition, violent crime went up markedly, and upon repeal, went down just as dramatically. The case is clear.

In addition to homicide, corruption and theft and prostitution are encouraged by illicit drug prohibition laws and enforcement. Corruption, because participants evade law enforcement authorities, or pay them to look the other way, and theft/prostitution, because prohibition increases the price of drugs. Also, because criminal justice resources are diverted to enforcement of drug laws, deterrence of other kinds of crime suffers.

The usual claim that drug use causes crime doesn't hold (much) water, in his view. "The evidence provides little indication that drug use promotes violence or other criminal behavior."

2. Harm to drug users
Higher prices, legal penalties, more time spent buying drugs, and having to deal with criminals in order to do so. Becoming a criminal, in fact. (Side note: All this while possibly self-medicating, as some manage to do. Not that heroin, for example, could ever really be medication, though, right? Or could it...)

3. Reduced product quality
In the face of an illegal/black market, product quality is lower and more uncertain. Accidental overdoses and poisonings are much more likely, with variable quality and purity. In a legal market, consumers can punish suppliers with liability claims, bad publicity, avoiding repeat purchase, or complaining to private or government watchdog groups. These mechanisms are unavailable or less effective under drug prohibition.

4. Enriched criminals
Legal markets are subject to taxation, with tax revenues accruing to the gvt. (of course). In a black market, these revenues become profits, enriching that segment of society most willing to evade the law. How much money are we talking? Hundreds of billions of dollars annually worldwide. Gvts. could collect tens of billions in additional revenue by legalizing and taxing currently illegal drugs.

5. HIV spread
Increased drug prices under prohibition result in restricted sale of syringes, and increased incentive to inject, for a bigger bang for the buck. Sharing dirty needles spreads HIV, hepatitis, and other blood-borne diseases.

6. Medicinal restrictions
Marijuana, for example, alleviates nausea, pain, migraine headaches, muscle spasms, symptoms of glaucoma, epilepsy, ms, AIDS, and others. Doctors fear legal sanctions for over-prescribing opiates and so under-treat pain in cancer patients and others with chronic conditions.

7. Compromised civil-liberties
Drug crimes involve voluntary exchange, as he puts it. Enforcement relies on asset seizures, aggressive search tactics, and racial profiling, which strain accepted notions of civil liberties and generate racial tension.

8. Aiding terrorism
Prohibition provides major cash for countries like Columbia and Afghanistan. Terrorist groups sell protection to drug traffickers. Legalization wouldn't eliminate these groups, but would eliminate most of the profits that help fund terrorism. Public resentment of governments who do things like crop eradication, and sympathy for insurgent groups, would no longer be a problem.

9. Respect for the law
"All experience to date indicates that, even with draconian enforcement, prohibition fails to deter a great many persons from supplying and consuming drugs. This fact signals that laws are for suckers, so prohibition undermines the spirit of voluntary compliance that is essential to law enforcement in a free society."

10. Enforcement's direct costs
Police, prosecutors, judges, and prisons are expensive. Many drug users, even heavy users of hard drugs, use drugs responsibly. Calm, pain relief, high, and stimulation are all considered benefits by the users. In his view, externalities that harm innocent third parties, like driving under the influence, foetal harm, or additional expenditure on healthcare can and should be addressed by policies dealing with those externalities rather than targeting all drug use.

The CBA shows that legalization would produce net benefits to the world of $130 billion dollars a year, with a ratio of 3.71 (a net benefit of 2.2T under a 6% discount rate, and a net benefit of 4.1T under a 3% discount rate). He admits, however, that the benefit is uncertain. On the other hand, legalization might generate all the benefits with few of the costs.

He concludes with this clincher argument: Legalization would provide consistency across policies regarding alcohol, tobacco, and drugs. Most illicit drugs are no more harmful, if not substantially less harmful, than these legal substances, so consistency demands that these drugs be legal as well. (sidenote: I heard aspirin wouldn't be approved by the fda for otc use now, if it was a new drug, instead of a historically widespread-use pharmaceutical. Also, food, technically is a drug. McDonald's can be addictive, right?).

Here's an article that might put all this in perspective; link.
Here's an article on the effective USE of heroin; link.

SWBP: Terrorism

SWBP: Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems
Chapter 14, Terrorism, by Daniel Linotte
Summary and Commentary
Do you fear more than just "fear itself"? (phobophobia)
Or do you wear No Fear t-shirts? (Do you fear people who are unafraid?) Ha.

Terrorism means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

Terrorism is a daily menace in spots throughout the world, is a global problem, and is one of the main obstacles to security and peace. Meeting the challenge is a complex task, that requires understanding of social conditions, minority and majority status, social stratification and mobility, "territoriality", history, politics, human rights and freedoms, governance and corruption, demographic trends, cultural identity, and modernization. Phew.

Costs of terrorism
-Thousands of individuals are under tight surveillance. In 2006 alone, there were 6,425 terrorist incidents, with 11,886 fatalities. It creates an unnecessary us-them mentality between religions and ethnic groups, and therefore tension, hostility, xenophobia, and anti-immigration and anti-integration of foreign communities. In the long-term, it could hinder political, social, and economic progress within developing countries and between rich and poor countries.

-One study puts the economic cost in 2002 as, "If there were no terrorism incidents in 2002, world GDP would have been 3.6 trillion USD higher than it was that year." 3.6T is more than the combined GDP of the UK and Italy, about 1/3 of the US economy, or about 7-9% of world GDP.

case in point, 9-11
9-11 resulted in hundreds of lost lives. X, actually. And even more permanent disabilities. Y, actually. Suffering. An untold amount. The destruction of planes and buildings were just the beginning of the economic toll:
-Physical assets destroyed amounted to 14B USD for the private sector
-and 2.2B for the public sector.
-Rescue, cleanup, etc. cost at least 11B.
-The stock market fell. Z points in A days.
-wider bonds spreads in the short-term on financial markets
-The insurance industry disbursed 58B dollars.
-200,000 jobs in NY were lost or reallocated
-more controls on the shipping and transportation industry
-public defense spending increased
-the private sector is spending more on security
-higher stress when travelling
-border patrol costs, and affect on exports
-tourism, immigration, and remittances

All that from only x people.

Costs could increase, with wmd's (weapons of mass destruction: nuclear/atomic, biological, chemical, or dirty bombs; abcd, i call it). One of the worst scenarios involves rogue or failed states supplying wmd's to terrorist organizations. Critical transportation or telecommunication infrastructure could be targeted.

SOLUTIONS
-1. Models. Statistical analysis may aid with making forecasting models, to better plan and mobilize resources and forces.
-2. Psychology. To understand suicide terrorism, we need to forget about pegging them as madmen (although I still think they are), and understand it as "trading life for identity." In other words, it can be considered as rational -a welfare gain. As suicide terrorism increases, the identity factor would diminish, thus reducing the incentive to suicide, perhaps. Also, the response must target sponsors, trainers, host countries, and hateful ideologists. (aside: Jesus was a suicide pacifist?)
-3. Development. Poverty can play a role, but needs to be assessed on a case by case basis. For example, 9-11 terrorists were middle-class. But youth violence in the West Bank and Gaza, in addition to vengeance and retaliation factors, is also caused by unemployment and poverty. (Personally, I think all factors matter, some more than others, but maybe what matters most is the proverbial "straw that breaks the camel's back" in individual terrorist's psychology. We should address the motives of terrorists productively. Economic development I would think would ameliorate the conditions which engender terrorism).
-4. Implement the FATF (financial action task force) recommendations on money-laundering. Informal banking and international seed money for terrorism can be monitored, he seems to be saying. He seems to have confused money-dirtying with money laundering, though.
-5. Adopt maritime security measures. Normal trade could carry a wmd, so the estimated 1.3B pricetag of this may prove well spent (excluding operation, maintenance, and upgrading costs). Developing countries lack resources and expertise, so assistance will have to be provided by rich countries.
-6. Move from integration to assimilation of immigrant communities. Integration is simply inclusion in a society composed of differing ethnic, cultural, and religious segments. Assimilation, however, is absorbing one group into another, and adopting their values. Islamophobia needs to be addressed. Emigration can be contained by democratization, development aid, human rights, and the reduction of gender gaps.

He makes the CBA assessment by pairing the 2002 world defense budget of 0.8T USD with the net benefit of eliminating terrorism that year, 3.6T USD. The B:C ratio is 5.5 (4.4/0.8), which he believes is low, because an effective fight against terrorism might actually cost less.

Other solutions
-7. Countries, if unified, could present a common front against a common enemy.
-8. If anti-Western feelings in Iraq and Afghanistan could be diminished, that would help.
-9. Punitive anti-terrorist actions, especially when unrestrained, lead to retaliation and vicious circles of violence. They are often counterproductive.
-10. A "Marshall Plan" for the Mideast, involving all parties, and recognizing Israel, and consolidating the Palestinian entity, and involving Iran and Syria in a peaceful region, post Iraq-war.
-11. Unspecified societal changes and political reforms to create more "open and democratic societies" that respect multilateralism, universal values, and global governance.

Sunday, October 12, 2008

SWBP: Lack of Education

SWBP: Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems,
Ch. 14, Lack of Education, by Peter F. Orazem
Summary and Commentary

Um, how do you spell edge-ooh-kay-shun?

This chapter deals with education in developing countries

Literacy and and earnings and health are all related to years of schooling. From an economists perspective, "Average returns are almost universally positive and at or above market returns on other investments." Benefits are social, in addition to individual. Improved governance, economic climate for growth, and reduced "fertility behavior" are listed. Women and urban residents see higher returns. Markets experiencing "shocks" requiring adaptation see better returns on education.

"Human capital will be most valuable when social or governmental institutions place few restrictions on mobility or trade, when wages and prices are flexible, and when property rights are enforced."

It is the measure of improvement in cognitive skills, not time in school, that indicates if a student is more likely to have greater earnings. "Average cognitive attainment drives economic growth." Relatively few literate individuals never attended school. So the MDG of attaining universal primary education by 2015 is underlied by the presumption that schooling is needed for literacy. (Reading is to the mind what exercise is to the body). This goal is estimated to cost $11-28B.

Cost:benefit analysis (CBA) tells us how to make efficient progress to reach what groups most cost-effectively. Education policies can be supply side or demand side. Supply side policies aim to improve quantity or quality of schooling. Orazem feels there are several reasons supply side policies may fail the cost-effectiveness criteria: 1) if you build it, they may not come (facts: halving the average distance to school only raised years of schooling by about 1.5%. some enrollment will come from already-enrolled children switching schools. New schools will be disproportionately located in relatively remote places with few children and relatively high costs.), 2) good teachers and bad teachers look very much alike statistically (education levels,demographics, in-service training), and there is lack of agreement on how to foster teacher-quality. 3) decentralization of school management, while a central theme of the World Bank and other international agencies, is not a proven strategy. 4) time-lag of responding to better management, or for parents to respond to school quality improvements, or before children attain literacy, place supply-side policies at a cost-benefit disadvantage compared to....

ta-da! Demand-side interventions!
Demand-side can target populations not in school, and only give payment if the program is working (i.e. contingent upon attendance), and immediately influence behavior.

He proposes 3 solutions:
1. Interventions in child health and nutrition, to attempt to imprope the child's physical/mental ability to learn.
2. efforts to lower the cost of public/private schooling, (enhance the ability to pay)
3. income transfers to households, conditional on enrollment, that lower the opportunity cost of a child's time in school, (and which enhance affordability).

Health and Nutrition
"Mechanisms" include supplements, school lunch plans, immunization programs, health instruction. Cases in point: Nutrition, Iron supplements, and Deworming medicine. Malnutrition early in life affects both cognitive and physical development, which is only partially reversible by good nutrition later on. Physical stature can be affected, which has been shown to affect lifetime earnings. In secondary school (age 13-15), iron supplements can raise cognitive abilities by 5-25%, or the equivalent of 0.05 years of schooling. A cost of 11 dollars (per added-year of schooling) yields 32X the benefits. (added to what?). De-worming in Kenya, according to one study, increased attendance by 0.15 years per pupil (an implied cost of $3.50 per child-year of schooling).

You know, I'm starting to think these economists are kinda nuts. De-worming for education?Well, yeah, but for everything else, too. DUH. Health is a human right. They make the simple so complicated. People should just do what needs to be done, for everyone, and once everyone's happy, we can all worry about extras for ourselves, then. That's my PRIORITIZATION SCHEME. I mean, we should all be happy and healthy. Intellectuals love to make everything seem like they're all about Efficiency and Intelligence. This book seems to have lost touch with human warmth and happiness. What are we, robots on a mission to meet a command from the UN high-command, dictating universal literacy? NO, we're HUMANS who have read GOOD BOOKS, with the desire to share our JOYs. Geez.

Lowering Schooling Costs
Costs include uniforms, supplies, tuition, fees, tutorials; they can represent a significant share of a poor houshold's income. Programs to reduce schooling costs can have dramatic and speedy impacts on children's achievement, and years of schooling completed.
The angel is in the details: Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda cut or eliminated the school fees.
-Enrollments rose by 1.2M children in Tanzania.
-A program that cut houshold costs of uniforms and school materials in Kenya increased years of schooling completed by 15%.
-In Uganda, the elimination of primary schooling fees lowered costs by 60%, and increased enrollments by 60%, with the largest gains in rural areas. Pupil:teacher ratios rose from 38 to 65.
-In many developing countries, poor students who cannot afford tutoring may fall behind their peers. A program in India hired local women with high school degrees to tutor 3rd and 4th graders who had fallen behind. The numbers for the cost is an example of success. The two year program raised the likelihood of a child performing at first-grade math level by 11.9 percentage points, and at second grade language level by 9.9 percentage points. At the end of the two years, these children were performing 0.28 standard deviations higher on the test scores, equivalent to having attained an additional year of schooling, at a cost of 5 dollars/child, because teacher-certifications were not mandated and they paid the market rate for less-qualified tutors instead of the gvt. rate for teachers.
-In Balochistan province, Pakistan, in an effort to increase girl enrollment, "randomly selected neighborhoods were given 100 girls' scholarships of 100 rupees per month (= USD 3$) to try to induce a school operator to try and open a school in the area. In urban areas, even this modest sum was sufficient to get schools to open, and enrollments for both girls and boys rose relative to control neighborhoods. (control is a scientific term, here...) The schools were opened at 1/4 of the cost of a public school. (lesson: in rural communities, schools opened but they were not self-sustaining. Areas that would have been able to raise public schools in the absence of a subsidy will support private school options to support enrollments-in other words, areas with the greatest elasticity of supply for private schools).
-private schools are a more important element of school supply in developing countries than in developed ones. Private schools will often have excess capacity, where vouchers can expan access more cheaply than building new schools. Voucher students in one study were 10% more likely to complete the 8th grade, and scored 0.2 standard deviations higher in standardized tests, equivalent to adding an additional year of school. They were also less likely to marry young, cohabit, and engage in child labor. The gains were permanent and not transitory. The voucher cost was 228 dollars per recipient, compared to the much higher value of the induced additional years of schooling and cognitive attainment.

Conditional Cash Transfers
-Latin American countries have done this, giving money to families in exchange for parents sending their children to school, and sometimes other components, like nutritional supplements and mandated health clinic visits, as well as health training for mothers. Countries like Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, Costa RIca, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Turkey, Chile, Ecuador, and Peru. These programs are most effective where large numbers of children are not in school, and so have been aimed at the lowest income strata of society, and rural areas.

There is a table of Benefit Cost Ratios (BCR) at 3% and 5% discount rates, of various efforts to reduce illiteracy:
health and nutrition
Bolivian preschool nutrition, 3.66/2.48
Kenyan deworming, 642/472
Kenyan preschool nutrition, 77/58
Iron supplements to secondary students, 45.2/32.1

scholarship/voucher programs
Columbia secondary school urban voucher, 4.41/3.31
Pakistan urban girls scholarship, 17.4/12.9
Pakistan rural girls' scholarship, 10.1/7.1
India balsakhis tutorial program, 711/528
Uganda free primary school program, 26.3/19.3

conditional cash transfers
Mexico Progresa, 6.8/5.1
Nicaragua RED, 3.8/2.8

Keep in mind that a BCR of 3.8 means a 1 dollar investment yields an almost 4 dollar return.
A BCR of 642 is AMAZING...

Thursday, September 11, 2008

SWBP: Corruption

Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems, 2007
a book I'm reading, edited by Bjorn Lomborg,
Director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center
Chapter 13, Corruption, by Susan Rose Ackerman, Yale
(only 10 chapters to go!) Commentary and Summary

Aside:
Wikipedia, to deviate from SWBP, defines corruption as, "An "impairment of integrity, virtue or moral principle; depravity, decay, and/or an inducement to wrong by improper or unlawful means, a departure from the original or from what is pure or correct, and/or an agency or influence that corrupts." It goes on to define institutional and political corruption as,

a."Institutional corruption, as corrupt actions or policies within an organization that break the law, serve to subjugate humans in unlawful manners, discriminate against humans based upon race, ethnicity, culture, or orientation, or serve to degrade other humans or groups for that institution's own profit.

b. Political corruption, as the dysfunction of a political system or institution in which government officials, political officials or employees seek illegitimate personal gain through actions such as bribery, extortion, cronyism, nepotism, patronage, graft, and embezzlement. Political corruption is a specific form of rent seeking, where access to politics is organized with limited transparency, limited competition and directed towards promoting narrow interests (rent seeking is not to be confused with property rental).

Anyway,
Corruption is a big problem (all 23 of the problems addressed in this book were deemed, collectively, the "biggest"). Specifically, bribery is estimated to total 1 Trillion dollars a year by researchers at the World Bank Institute. (Political corruption is the topic of this chapter)

(There's a lot of Trillions floating around these days...a 47T world economy...a 1T Iraq war...a 1 T sub-prime mortgage bailout mess...geez, it's like mind-blowing. A TRILLION dollars is 1 billion dollars more than 999 Billion dollars, allright? One BILLION is 1m more than 999 MILLION dollars. There are people out there begging for change, alright? Like half the world lives on 2 dollars a day...Ugh)
Sorry.

Sidenote: As the scientologists say, aren't we being REACTIVE? Iraq and the bailout are Responses to problems that could have been prevented earlier. We need to do the right thing now, to prevent big problems in the future. We need to be PROACTIVE.
Good job, FBI, on the Blagojevich thing, I think. (pronounced Blah-goy-uh-vitch)
In any case, bribery is estimated to cost 3% of world income a year (that 1T I mentioned). This doesn't measure the total impact of corruption, however. The costs "may be many orders of magnitude higher than the volume of bribes themselves."

Ms. Ackerman differentiates between the low-level corruption of opportunistic payoffs and the systemic corruption which implicates an entire bureaucratic hierarchy, electoral system, or governmental structure from top to bottom. She says, "corruption is a symptom of dysfunctionl state-society relations."

Low-level corruption has 5 generic situations:
1. a scarce benefit, where officials have discretion to assign it to applicants.
2. officials selecting only qualified applicants.
3. a difficult to evaluate benefit, such as substandard pharmaceuticals
4. bureaucratic process as a source of delay, creating corrupt incentives
5. costs imposed by government programs, (such as the possibility of arrest or tax and customs collection).
Grand corruption has 3 varieties:
1. A branch of the public sector may be organized around bribe-generating.
2. A nominal democracy may have a corrupt electoral system.
3. Influence of the award of contracts (for construction projects, the allocation of natural resource concessions, and the privatization of state-owned firms).

Specific examples of the above are (LL1-5 &G1-3):
ll1) Despite the obvious solution of simply selling the benefit legally, officials may pocket the pocket (some or all of) the proceeds, or steal the goods outright. In Brazil, for example, federal police authorities estimate that embezzlement in the pharmaceutical sector totals $637 million/year (Colitt 2004).
ll2) officials frequently collect bribes from both the qualified and unqualified. Publicly-provided healthcare, supposedly free to the needy, may be rationed by ability to pay. Theft, too. 43% of food aid rice disappeared in one-third of Indonesian villages in one program.
ll3) Those in charge of distribution may provide substandard goods, and keep the higher quality for themselves or resale. 25% of pharmaceuticals, according to one estimate, consumed in poor countries are counterfeit or substandard.
ll4) delay may be created as a means of extracting more bribes. Survey evidence shows that businesses spend more, not less, time dealing with gvt. officials when corruption is common.
ll5) Officials get paid in return for tolerating illegal activities; at least half of tax collections are lost to corruption in some countries. As an example of reform, in Angola, reform cost $84 million over 2 years, and revenues increased from $230million to $345 million.
g1) Top police officials may organize corrupt syustems in collaboration with corrupt crime groups. Gvt. positions can be sold. Those "employed" may never show up and simply collect paychecks. In education, this can be harmful: teacher absenteism rates are high in some countries.
g2) spending limits can be undermined, the limits on types of spending permitted can be undermined, and controls on the sources of funds can be subverted. (from where, on what, and how much).
g3) The World Bank estimates, for example, that in the forestry sector, illegal logging costs at least 10B a year, mostly facilitated by corruption.

Cause: greed
Consequences
-The author considers it likely that corruption is both a cause and a consequence of lower levels of investment, income, and growth. "The causal arrow probably runs both ways, creating vicious and virtuous spirals."
(Speaking of virtuous spirals, my mother-in-law has a postcard of a church in x that has a spiral wooden staircase built without the use of nails in x, by an itinerant carpenter, reputed to have been the living Jesus himself).

Facts
Investment, as I said, is affected by corruption-both domestic and foreign. It -corruption- is associated with lower levels of direct foreign investment and capital inflows. Comparing a relatively clean Singapore to a relatively corrupt Mexico is the equivalent of adding 20 percentage points to the tax rate. It lowers productivity, reduces the effectiveness of policies, and encourages businesses to operate in the unofficial sector. Highly corrupt countries tend to spend less on education, to over-invest in public infrastructure, and to have lower environmental quality levels. Income inequality is produced by corruption, perhaps making the rich richer...and corruption may undermine programs designed to help the poor. Inequality has a negative effect on growth, which may be the result of its impact on corruption. What is inequality's effect on corruption? She doesn't say. Corrupt links between wealthy elites and the state may perpetuate an unequal system. Corrupt gvts. lack legitimacy. Tax evasion is associated with high levels of perceived corruption. Trade openness appears to reduce corruption, and weak law and order and insecure property rights increase it.

If 30 percent of the funds allocated to fulfill the MDG's in water and sanitation in Sub-Saharan Africa in the next decade, the excess costs would total $20B. Other interventions, with lower cost:benefit ratios, such as reducing low birthweight babies, can only be "worthwhile" if corruption can be controlled.

Solutions
caveat: "reforms must be accomplished inside particular countries, each with its own economic, political, and social realities."
She recommends 4 policies:
1. An international effort to help countries streamline gvt. operations.
-Excess regulation, which requires the tedium and expense of complying with the law, push people into corruption, she says. For example, if (over-regulated, presumably) Calcutta had the investment climate of Shanghai, the share of firms exporting would nearly double from 24% to 47% and the share of foreign-invested firms would increase frm 2.5 to 3.9%.
2. Efforts to encourage the ratification and enforcement of international treaties.
-Several treaties exist, such as at the OECD and UN, reflecting the salience of the issue. Getting ratification would change the discourse, but only have an impact to the extent that it changes behavior. Monitoring and compliance should get more resources, she says. "Transparency International is engaged in this effort, but more should be done."
caveat: the treaties won't solve the problem, but an effort to publicize them could bring benefits with little expenditure.
3. Multinational investments to control corruption
-An investment of 1.25B might mean that just 10% of the $200B in oil and gas exploration receipts expected to accrue to the the handful of states, many poor and with weak gvts., over the next decade, would flow to the poor citizens of those countries. This $20B is a likely underestimation, she says. The Chad-Cameroon pipeline, construction funds for which were negotiated in a World Bank agreement, requires 70% of revenues to go to poverty reduction, and should be studied for lessons, she says.
-Also, export credits, such as those in the OECD, can be awarded or limited on the basis of agreeing with (anti-)corruption rules. For example, member countries can impose and exercise "due diligence" when dealing with exporters who are on a debarment list of a multilateral financial institution (I admit I don't know what this means), under charge in a national court, or convicted for violation of laws against bribery of foreign public official within the last 5 years.
4. Controlling money-laundering
-The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has 49 recommendations, adopted by over 100 countries in '89. In 2000, The Wolfsberg Principles were developed. More study is necesssary (for example, on the impact of different anti-money laundering systems on the amount of funds laundered, or on the link between money-laundering and the level of predicate offenses, such as corruption), and cross-border cooperation is necessary, and protection of reporters and investigators. Both the formal law and its enforcement need to be strengthened.

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

SWBP: Conflicts

SWBP: Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems
a book I'm reading, 2007, edited by Bjorn Lomborg,
Director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center,
Chapter 12, Conflicts, by Paul Collier, Oxford University
Summary and Commentary
You wanna that I should whack the guy, boss?
Motivated! Dedicated! Ooh Rah!
Rich countries and poor countries face differing security challenges. This chapter deals with poor countries (whose challenges are low-pro). Poor countries mainly face civil wars and coups. Security has received less attention than health and education, for these countries. The risks and responses to civil wars and coups are highly costly. New advances in 'defense economics' , employing cost-benefit analysis, offer promise to organizations like the permanent UN Peacebuilding Commission. Cost-effective international interventions could have enormous payoffs.

The author recommends 5 interventions:
1. increasing aid
2. making aid conditional upon limits to military spending
3. expanding peacekeeping forces &
4. guaranteeing security using 'over the horizon' measures
5. all of the above (packages of some or all of 1-4 -as reinforcing complementarities- to meet the specific needs of countries)

as solutions to the 3 'scourges' faced by poor countries experiencing conflict:
1.civil war
2.coups
3.military spending

1.Civil War
In poor countries, as I said, civil war is more likely. They also last longer and are more likely to recur. The economy can be devastated and large populations displaced. A typical civil war in a poor country costs around $64B USD.

3 recent developments have raised the risk for new outbreaks of civil war:
1. the discovery of oil in fragile states (like Chad)
2. the high price of primary commodities, and
3. fragile settlements that ended a number of recent civil wars

Mineral/oil resources may not benefit the local population, or primarily anyway, and add ethnic differences to the mix, and militias or guerilla groups secede from the state or try to take over.

Fragile settlements need real incentives for the combatants to maintain the peace, and effective sanctions against those who break agreements. Basic carrot and stick stuff. The continued presence of poor and brutalized sectors, inured to violence, in conditions that led to the conflict which are rarely more than suppressed by one side's victory, requires the building of a prosperous and stable state.

Gvt. expenditure, after war, becomes skewed toward military spending. This is in a context of many lives lost, disease, and population movements which can have a destabilizing effect on neighbors.

Internationally, civil wars can influence drugs, AIDS, and terrorism, too. There is credible though not decisive evidence that AIDS originated in an African civil war due to the dangerous conjunction of mass rape and mass migration.

2.Coups
They are far more likely in poor countries. In the past 30 years, there have been over 200 coup attempts (in Africa alone). Quantitative economic research has been done. Coups reduce growth by around 3% of GDP during the first year of the coup, and it lasts awhile, so they're costly. The mere threat of a coup inflicts costs, with gvts. pre-emptively making military expenditures. And get this: aid 'significantly and substantially' increases the risk of one taking place.

The root causes are similar to civil war: instability, poverty, and disaffection (plus arms). And they can lead to continuing conflict; still, there's quite a difference between a drawn-out civil war and a (mere, relatively speaking) coup.

3. Military Spending
Also the subject of quantitative research (and thus meriting mention in this mighty book), military spending does not reduce the risk of civil war, AND, in post-conflict situations, sharply increases the risk. Spending by one country results in spending by neigbors, which spreads to entire regions. About 11% of aid 'inadvertently leaks' into military budgets, which makes aid interventions problematic. Aid, military spending, coups, and civil wars are thus interconnected.

I'm going to quote an entire paragraph:
"Military spending in countries where civil war has broken out is typically increased by 1.8% of GDP. At the end of the war, expenditure drops in general by only 0.5%. At a time when a country needs all possible resources to rebuild itself, an increased proportion of the national income is spent in ways that do nothing to raise the welfare level of the population. Since poor countries are far more prone to civil conflict than rich ones, anything that depresses development and income becomes a risk factor for further violence. Little wonder, then, that in post-conflict nations, there is a much greater risk of a new war breaking out."

INTERVENTIONS
1.Increasing aid
Economic recovery is the surest way of reducing the risk of further conflict. Aid, unfortunately, finances additional military spending and increases the threat of a coup (unless it is made conditional, or paired with other interventions). Beyond the early post-conflict years, when institutions are weak and money is likely to go to unintended purposes (requiring oversight), post-conflict aid is normally unusually productive.

2. Introducing new conditions for aid
Conditions, such as not exceeding a particular level of military spending, or allowing practical intervention to maintain stability. The cost:benefit ration is estimated at better than 1:2 for eliminating increased military spending, and it's associated reduction in security risk.

3. Expanding the role of peacekeeping forces
An international peacekeeping force is the most useful replacement for increased military spending. Professional soldiers, with no allegiance to any warring faction, bring stability without the destabilizing downside of armed partisans. The more that is spent on peacekeeping forces, the lower the risk of further conflict, the Copenhagen Consensus is proud to be the first to report. The numbers? Doubling expenditure per inhabitant per year over a decade from 5 to 10 bucks reduces the risk/likelihood/probability of conflict by around 15 percentage points. The cost of a typical post-conflict civil war is $8B USD, but the cost of peacekeeping is 1.1B, so the ratio is around 1:7. Wars make the news more than successful peacekeeping, but the investment is easily justifiable. Peacekeepers must be of sufficient size and capability.

4. Security-Guarantees: Guaranteeing security (from 'over-the-horizon')
Okay, this phrase is a bit weird. It's troops at the ready in their home countries for rapid intervention, should there be any flare-ups. France did this for it's territories in Africa between 1965-2005. Their risk of conflict was only one quarter what it would have been otherwise.This reduction in risk was worth about 5 billion, across 13 countries, for a cost-benefit ratio of about 1:5. Let's hear it for the bean-counting statisticians and economists who calculated this stuff!
(To tell you the truth, I don't actually understand it, but I'm taking P.C.'s word for it) It worked for the UK in Sierra Leone, too.

5. Packages
Hopefully war torn countries will say, "I like your package!", lol. Sorry, couldn't resist. Anyway, -peacekeeping and aid complement each other.
-Aid and ceilings on military spending complement each other.
-Security guarantees and aid complement each other. (Complement is different from compliment). Security guarantees eventually replace peacekeeping, for less money.
-Peacekeeping + security guarantees complement ceilings.

These complementarities can be quantified and subjected to CBA (cost benefit analysis). He says there is a strong economic case for them. (Nike says Just Do It)