Agricultural R&D is.a really interesting one. Some of the most impactful interventions in history (Haber’s Nitrogen, Borlaug’s supercrops, Dryland rice etc.) have been achieved this way, and there’s so much room for improvement with sub-saharan Africa’s ongoing frustratingly low crop yields)
E-procurement is super interesting, on the surface it seems like a relatively straightforward intervention that could have huge impact. Its hard to see a downside. I’ve seen it first hand—here in Uganda the moment they changed Visas to online, everything became so much easier and the opportunities for corruption melted away. Obviously the resistance to this from corrupt leadership will be immense, but even at tiny chances of success, the EV for successful implementation could be super high—I can see CE having a really close look at that.
Land tenure on the other hand is so multifacited and tricky. The problem is clear but the solution certaintly isn’t, at least here in Uganda. Even in one region of one country like Northern Uganda. My wife works in this field, with different scholars and different local leaders having.a wide range of opinions on the best way forward to fixc the problem. Its certainly not as simple as dividing up the land and giving everyone titles, the complexity and power dynamics around land are pretty mind boggling.
Lastly I think it is interesting that “education” only gets one entry even with the incredible 600 billion dollar figure, while global health gets 5 specific diseases. Why is that?
I agree with your points about R&D and E-procurement, (and some are mentioned in the report), thanks for your input.
It’s really cool that your wife works in land tenure! The philosophical framework I have in mind for land tenure reminds me of the one for other estimates. As Scott Alexander put it—IF IT’S WORTH DOING, IT’S WORTH DOING WITH MADE-UP STATISTICS. Essentially, it’s better to at least have some information in your land registration system, even if not very accurate, than none. What do you think about this?
Unfortunately in Uganda, the registration system heavily favors the rich and connected. It may well be doing more harm than good at the moment, because rich people can try and swipe land from under people’s noses by getting land titles and leases, which the more “rightful” owners have no access to.
So as of now in Uganda, perhaps the land insecure poor might be better off of there was no formal system.
Obviously if the registration system was fairer it might be very different.
And some people may disagree too. It’s complicated.
My wife just said that many scholars consider that all titling processes are a redistributive process with winners and losers, and more often than not the poor are the losers.
As a philosophical framework I think you are right, perhaps not always as a practical framework. Unfortunately.
Thanks this is super interesting love it.
Agricultural R&D is.a really interesting one. Some of the most impactful interventions in history (Haber’s Nitrogen, Borlaug’s supercrops, Dryland rice etc.) have been achieved this way, and there’s so much room for improvement with sub-saharan Africa’s ongoing frustratingly low crop yields)
E-procurement is super interesting, on the surface it seems like a relatively straightforward intervention that could have huge impact. Its hard to see a downside. I’ve seen it first hand—here in Uganda the moment they changed Visas to online, everything became so much easier and the opportunities for corruption melted away. Obviously the resistance to this from corrupt leadership will be immense, but even at tiny chances of success, the EV for successful implementation could be super high—I can see CE having a really close look at that.
Land tenure on the other hand is so multifacited and tricky. The problem is clear but the solution certaintly isn’t, at least here in Uganda. Even in one region of one country like Northern Uganda. My wife works in this field, with different scholars and different local leaders having.a wide range of opinions on the best way forward to fixc the problem. Its certainly not as simple as dividing up the land and giving everyone titles, the complexity and power dynamics around land are pretty mind boggling.
Lastly I think it is interesting that “education” only gets one entry even with the incredible 600 billion dollar figure, while global health gets 5 specific diseases. Why is that?
I agree with your points about R&D and E-procurement, (and some are mentioned in the report), thanks for your input.
It’s really cool that your wife works in land tenure! The philosophical framework I have in mind for land tenure reminds me of the one for other estimates. As Scott Alexander put it—IF IT’S WORTH DOING, IT’S WORTH DOING WITH MADE-UP STATISTICS. Essentially, it’s better to at least have some information in your land registration system, even if not very accurate, than none. What do you think about this?
As for education, I don’t know.
Thanks Almo.
Unfortunately in Uganda, the registration system heavily favors the rich and connected. It may well be doing more harm than good at the moment, because rich people can try and swipe land from under people’s noses by getting land titles and leases, which the more “rightful” owners have no access to.
So as of now in Uganda, perhaps the land insecure poor might be better off of there was no formal system.
Obviously if the registration system was fairer it might be very different.
And some people may disagree too. It’s complicated.
My wife just said that many scholars consider that all titling processes are a redistributive process with winners and losers, and more often than not the poor are the losers.
As a philosophical framework I think you are right, perhaps not always as a practical framework. Unfortunately.
Interesting. I’m sorry to hear that the system is so fucked up. I really hope you’ll be able to improve it.