Poor Economics

Abhijit Banerjee

出版社

PublicAffairs

出版时间

2011-04-25

ISBN

9781586487980

评分

★★★★★

标签

经济

书籍介绍

Winner of the 2011 Financial Times/Goldman Sachs Best Business Book of the Year Award

Billions of government dollars, and thousands of charitable organizations and NGOs, are dedicated to helping the world's poor. But much of their work is based on assumptions that are untested generalizations at best, harmful misperceptions at worst.

Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo have pioneered the use of randomized control trials in development economics. Work based on these principles, supervised by the Poverty Action Lab, is being carried out in dozens of countries. Drawing on this and their 15 years of research from Chile to India, Kenya to Indonesia, they have identified wholly new aspects of the behavior of poor people, their needs, and the way that aid or financial investment can affect their lives. Their work defies certain presumptions: that microfinance is a cure-all, that schooling equals learning, that poverty at the level of 99 cents a day is just a more extreme version of the experience any of us have when our income falls uncomfortably low.

This important book illuminates how the poor live, and offers all of us an opportunity to think of a world beyond poverty.

Learn more at www.pooreconomics.com

AI导读
核心看点
  • 基于随机对照试验,用数据打破对穷人的刻板印象
  • 揭示信息缺失与认知偏差如何导致贫困陷阱
  • 从医疗教育等微观视角剖析扶贫政策的实际效果
适合谁读
  • 对发展经济学及扶贫政策感兴趣的专业人士
  • 希望理解贫困本质并反思自身决策的普通读者
  • 从事公益慈善或国际发展工作的实践者
读前提醒
  • 建议搭配中文版阅读,英文原版术语较多
  • 书中案例丰富,可结合具体国家背景理解
  • 注意区分作者实证结论与不同学派的争议
读者共识
  • 诺奖得主著作,视角独特且极具启发性
  • 打破宏大叙事,用严谨实验还原穷人真实处境
  • 虽部分方法存争议,但仍是了解贫穷的最佳入门书

本导读基于书籍简介、目录、原文摘录、短评和书评生成,不等同于全文精读。

精彩摘录
  • "穷人所陷入的困境与我们其他人的困扰似乎是一样的——缺乏信息、信念不坚定、拖延。的确,我们并不贫穷,受过良好的教育,见多识广,但我们与穷人的差别其实很小,因为我们的认识比我们想象中要小得多。 我们的真正优势在于,很多东西是我们在不知不觉中得到的。我们住在有自来水的房子里,不用想着每天早晨往水里加消毒剂。下水道自行运转,我们甚至不知道是怎样运转的。我们大都相信医生会尽力为我们服务的,公立医院会告诉我们该做什么不该做什么。我们别无选择,只能让孩子接种疫苗(公立学校不接收未接种疫苗的孩子)。即使我们处于某种原因没给孩子接种疫苗,他们可能安全无恙,因为其他所有人都接种过了。如果我们去健身房,我们的保险公"
  • "大多数人的贫穷状态,并非是由他们吃不饱饭造成的。"
  • "他总是提前购买化肥,因为他知道,钱放在家里根本存不住。他说,只要钱一放在家里,就总会有事情发生,钱就会被花掉。"
  • "问题并不在于穷人为健康花了多少钱,而是他们的钱究竟花到哪儿去了。他们常常把钱花在昂贵的治疗上,而不是廉价的预防上。"
  • "第一,穷人通常缺少信息来源,相信那些错误的事情。"
  • "总体来说,穷人的首要选择显然是,让自己的生活少一点儿乏味。 人类对于美好生活的基本需求,或许可以解释为什么印度的食品消费一直都在下降。"
  • "纯净水、蚊帐、抗蠕虫药片或强化面粉,尽管这些东西会给人们的健康带来很大好处,但人们似乎不愿为此花太多的金钱或时间。"
  • "贫穷并不仅仅意味着缺钱,它会使人丧失挖掘自身潜力的能力。"
作者简介
Abhijit Vinayak Banerjee is the Ford Foundation International Professor of Economics at MIT. He is the recipient of many honors and awards, including most recently the inaugural Infosys Prize in 2009, and has been an honorary advisor to many organizations including the World Bank and the Government of India. Esther Duflo is the Abdul Latif Jameel Professor of Poverty Alleviation and Development Economics at MIT. She is a recipient of the MacArthur “genius” award (2009) and the John Bates Clark medal awarded annually to the best American economist under forty (2012). In 2003, Banerjee and Duflo cofounded the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL), which they continue to direct.
目录
Foreword vii
1 Think Again, Again 1
Part I Private Lives
2 A Billion Hungry People? 19
3 Low-Hanging Fruit for Better (Global) Health? 41

显示全部
用户评论
最大的遗憾是作者没有仔细研究中国扶贫。不过依旧有很多有意义的理论。1. 穷人与普通人一样,有惰性、爱享受,所以tackle贫困问题是要充分考虑人性。2. 授人以渔:教育、稳定工作、贷款、保险等。送鱼是没有用的,直接给钱会被花在别的地方,给东西人家未必用。3. 许多政策都是过于理想主义。做什么事情需要站在穷人角度理解他们的想法。比如,穷人为啥不把钱花在可能可以提高生产率的东西上。
其实呢,飞机上没有小电视,也是有好处的…
Time inconsistency
本书的最大贡献在于帮助我们了解穷人的心理,为政策的失败提供了本土化的心理路径解释。两位实验经济学家今年喜提诺奖,让人为这一方法感到振奋。但是这可能导致发展心理学领域非实验文章不能发表,客观上增加了经费支出,也夸大了这一方法实际适用的问题范畴。实际上,RCT方法只能解释某一有限群体的决策,重复性也不高,更难说应用到国家层面的决策。本书对于贫穷对于疾病、教育等等方面的影响都有故事样的论述,既显示出这个议题的复杂,也难免让人疑惑:经济学真的抓住了表面数据和结论之下的重点吗?
a very intriguing and insightful read that challenges the common narrative of the poor and how policies/politics work in the developing country. It's the lazy and formulaic thinking that stops us nurturing tangible progress and making a difference, as gradual and slow as they may be
有声书大概听了三遍,除了每次介绍poor people的心态我都很有共鸣之外,记忆就像被洗过一样什么都没有留下。好书,就是不进我脑子
对两位经济学家表示肃然起敬
It’s amusing in an absurd way, as to watch a person waiting, devastatingly, for somebody dearly at a quay but facing the wrong direction.
我直接读了结论部分,对比了一下发现中文版的翻译从第一句开始就完全不对...虽然翻译有锅,但本文的很多论述都不大精炼,从结语部分大概就能看出很弱的逻辑组织能力,仅代表我个人观点...
很踏实的书,有观点的同时又是很好的literature review;btw,中英文版评论区反差很大,抛开翻译的质量,是不是也反映了某种区隔呢
收藏