On VoxDev, Tanguy Bernard and co-authors on an experiment that provided quality certification for onions in Senegal, causing farmers to invest more in quality and raising farmer incomes...but with the sad post-note “In this particular case, the reform was discontinued under pressure from the long-distance middlemen who gain from the lack of transparency on markets.” ...
David McKenzie considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Tony Yates writes Legitimacy somersaults
Dayle Littlejohn writes SNB leave interest rates on hold, what next for GBP/CHF rates?
European Central Bank writes Mario Draghi: Europe and the euro 20 years on
IMFBlog writes Five Actions to Strengthen the Euro Area Banking Union
- On VoxDev, Tanguy Bernard and co-authors on an experiment that provided quality certification for onions in Senegal, causing farmers to invest more in quality and raising farmer incomes...but with the sad post-note “In this particular case, the reform was discontinued under pressure from the long-distance middlemen who gain from the lack of transparency on markets.”
- Following on the heels of Berk’s post, Science has a story “researchers debate whether journals should publish signed peer reviews” which discusses how this debate is also taking place in other fields.
- Stephanie Lee’s Buzzfeed article “sliced and diced” describes how Cornell’s Brian Wansink generated so many headline-ready studies on healthy eating, with lots of emphasis on p-hacking and multiple testing. Andrew Gelman makes an important point in his discussion “Good research often involves the unexpected; indeed, that’s kinda why we do most of our research in the first place, because we don’t already know the answers. Like Brian Wansink, I gather and analyze data because I want to learn, not because I’m trying to prove something I already know... In her article, Lee wrote: “Ideally, statisticians say, researchers should set out to prove a specific hypothesis before a study begins.” ...I’m a statistician, and I disagree with the above quoted statement for two reasons: 1. I don’t think it’s generally good practice for a researcher to “set out to prove” anything. Once you start a project with the goal of proving something, you’ve already put a direction on your goals, and there’s a risk of closing your mind. So I’d rather say that researchers can set out to investigate a hypothesis, rather than saying they’re setting out to prove it. 2. Some of the best and most important research is done in a spirit of exploration”.... here I think the problem is not in the data exploration (that is, in considering many comparisons) but rather in the reporting. I’d have no problem if Wansink etc. were to perform a thousand analyses on their data, if they’d just report everything they’d done”
- On the World Bank Jobs blog, David Robalino on how much does it cost to create a job?
- On the Development Policy job, Stephen Howe on the expensive Pacific – small Pacific islands are huge outliers to Balassa-Samuelson.
- Job opportunity: The World Bank’s Africa Region Gender Innovation Lab (GIL) seeks a Short-Term Consultant (STC) to provide partner coordination and evaluation design support for gender-informed impact evaluations (IE) and quantitative analytical projects in Nigeria. The STC will work mainly on the IE of a component of the Agro-Processing, Productivity Enhancement and Livelihood Improvement Support (APPEALS) Project’s Women & Youth Empowerment Program (W&YEP) in Nigeria. The STC will also provide support to the development of further IEs.