Angus Deaton writes that in academia and policy circles, “Past development practice is seen as a succession of fads, with one supposed magic bullet replacing another—from planning to infrastructure to human capital to structural adjustment to health and social capital to the environment and back to infrastructure—a process that seems not to be guided by progressive learning.”
This framing is weird. Obviously these factors have a positive causal effect on growth. But why would you expect a silver bullet? Conditions change over time, so the constraints on growth will change as well.
Tweet-thread promoting Rotblat Day on Aug. 31, to commemorate the spirit of questioning whether a dangerous project should be continued.
Should you "trust literatures, not papers"?
I replicated the literature on meritocratic promotion in China, and found that the evidence is not robust.
https://twitter.com/michael_wiebe/status/1750572525439062384