by Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo. In Poor Economics, Abhijit V. Banerjee and Esther Duflo, two award-winning MIT professors, answer these questions based on years of field research from around the world. Poor Economics shows that creating a world without poverty begins with. Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty by Abhijit Banerjee. Read online. In Poor Economics, Abhijit V. Banerjee and Esther Duflo, two award-winning MIT professors, answer these questions based on years of field research from around the world. Called "marvelous, rewarding" by the Wall Street Journal, the book offers a radical rethinking of the economics.

Poor Economics Ebook

Language:English, Japanese, Portuguese
Published (Last):05.08.2015
ePub File Size:15.56 MB
PDF File Size:17.57 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Sign up for free]
Uploaded by: ALVIN

Editorial Reviews. Review.. Amartya Sen A marvellously insightful book by two download a site site eBooks site Unlimited Prime Reading Best Sellers & More site Book Deals Free Reading Apps site Singles Newsstand. Poor Economics is a book about the very rich eco- nomics that emerges from understanding the eco- nomic lives of the poor. It is a book about the kinds. Two practical visionaries upend the most common assumptions about how economics works in this gripping and disruptive portrait of how poor.

It has been years since I read a book that taught me so much. Instead they appeal to many local observations and experiments to explore how poor people in poor countries actually cope with their poverty: what they know, what they seem or don't seem to want, what they expect of themselves and others, and how they make the choices that they can make.

Table of Content

Apparently there are plenty of small but meaningful victories to be won, some through private and some through public action, that together could add up to a large gains for the world's poor, and might even start a ball rolling.

I was fascinated and convinced. An important perspective on fighting poverty.

As they admit, randomistas cannot answer some big questions -- how to tackle food prices, for instance. But through lots of microstudies, they make a subtle case for one big argument: aid really can help poor people, provided the money follows the evidence. The book is unusual, perhaps unique, in that the authors took a lot of time to talk to poor people about what they think and what they want.

They offer five key lessons. First: the poor lack critical pieces of information and thus do not make right decisions; second: the poor bear responsibility for too many aspects of their lives; third: markets are missing for the poor; four: governments start policies without understanding the reality within which these are supposed to succeed; and five: negative expectations of what people can do can be self-fulfilling prophecies. Modest suggestions?

Yes, but this is part of the charm of the book. It is engaging and informative -- which is more than can be said for many books of this genre. Their work reads like a version of Freakonomics for the poor. There are insights into fighting global poverty from the remarkable and vital perspective of those whom we profess to serve They remind us, I think, of our shared humanity and how at some fundamental levels we really do think alike.

There are splendid chapters on a variety of topics that affect the poor: food, health, education, savings, micro-credit, insurance, risk and even some cursory observations on political behaviour.

But the real surprise in this book is its humility. Both the authors and the material they pull from are truly formidable, yet Banerjee and Duflo are not really out to make a hard pitch, least of all to die-hard Big Idealists who disagree with them.

Review Essay: Poor Economics (Banerjee/Duflo)

As such, there is nothing directly confrontational about Poor Economics. They are peeling the onion, not hacking it to pieces.

Beyond the strong focus on randomised control trials, the book distinguishes itself by wading into issues on which the development community has often ignored or made uninformed guesses.

Christopher Chabris.

Hillbilly Elegy. The Quants. Scott Patterson.

The Hate U Give. Angie Thomas.

The Little Book of Talent. Daniel Coyle.

Poor Economics

Handbook of Field Experiments. Esther Duflo. Good Economics, Bad Economics. Abhijit V. November How to write a great review.

The review must be at least 50 characters long. The title should be at least 4 characters long. Your display name should be at least 2 characters long. At Kobo, we try to ensure that published reviews do not contain rude or profane language, spoilers, or any of our reviewer's personal information.

You submitted the following rating and review. A conclusion 4. According to them, this can be drastically changed and the conditions of the poor understood through effective interventions that were tested on the ground.

Their approach can be summarized in that they want to a try to stay out of the mainstream aid debate between Sachs and Easterly, b understand the life, situation, behavior and constraints of the poor and c create and test innovative interventions. Easterly But most of the time, there is only enough money to apply the intervention for a portion of the population anyway. Other criticism focuses on the hype of RCTs and their increasingly preferred use over other methods of gaining knowledge of the poor see Easterly , Deaton Abhijit V.

Reviews Editorial reviews Publisher Synopsis Financial Times, April 30, "The ingenuity of these experiments aside, it is the rich and humane portrayal of the lives of the very poor that most impresses. Abhijit V Banerjee Esther Duflo. The title should be at least 4 characters long. PublicAffairs Edition Type: An important perspective on fighting poverty.

Browse menu

Much of it is new. For one thing, it contains some well-observed reporting. This essay is structured in the following way: After an introduction to the analysis 2.

JESSENIA from Plano
I relish reading books stealthily . Review my other posts. I take pleasure in extreme ironing.