Jeremy Springman
University of Pennsylvania
Global Development: Intermediate Topics in Politics, Policy, and Data
PSCI 3200 - Spring 2025
Before January, how many of you planned to pursue careers in international development?
I used to think there was such a thing as development economics. There are still richer and poorer countries, of course, but is there a “development economics,” a special type of economics for poor countries? I don’t think so.
- Alex Tabarrok
Two misunderstandings:
The credibility revolution unambiguously improved research in the social sciences. However… a yawning gap has developed between rigorous academic social scientific research and policymaking…
It goes without saying that policy research can benefit from academic research and… should deploy cutting edge tools and methods used by academics. However, the two are completely different endeavors with different incentive structures.
Standardized global approaches have made policy recommendations far removed from local economies’ ability to support them; not to mention the entrenchment of a paradigm that views development work as … implementing anti-poverty programs instead of making policies to unleash commercial revolutions and broad-based economic transformation.
[The knowledge production paradigm] conceptualizes the problem of under-development to be principally driven by ignorance (if only we knew whether it’s good to feed kids!) and poor policy implementation (largely due to “lack of political will”).
Never mind interest groups and distributive politics. Never mind trying to figure out how to squeeze good learning outcomes within a country’s budget envelope. Never mind figuring out how countries should manage their macro policy.
Policy directions in major sectors like agriculture, education, and healthcare have since become dominated by global expertise and rendered technical problems that are, for all practical purposes, been divorced from domestic political policymaking processes.
Political policymaking processes
The ultimate goal should be to cultivate country-based cadres of policymakers who understand the economics and politics of policymaking (i.e., appreciate the contextual variables highlighted above) while also being conversant with the good research being produced by academics.
Importantly, policy researchers should understand that the fundamental challenge facing low-income countries engaged in catch-up development is rarely what to do, but rather how to do.
While there are exceptions to the rule, a good heuristic for knowing whether policymakers in low-income countries lack ambition is the frequency with which they mention the MDGs/SDGs.
[Policymakers] should understand that what they hope to achieve has been done before; and that all they have to do is learn the right lessons from those who came before them.
Nobody should have any illusions of rebuilding what existed before — it achieved some good outcomes (notably in health and humanitarian relief), but was ultimately not good enough to help low-income countries grow and achieve structural economic change.
Furthermore, a good share of ongoing aid cuts will be permanent, with donor countries intensifying their use of whatever aid is left (both bilateral & multilateral) to more nakedly advance their narrow foreign policy goals.
The chasm between the policy needs of low-income countries and the projects/policies that get foisted onto them will likely grow wider
It follows that anyone who builds their professional careers in service to the old model of aid dependency will struggle as aid becomes ever more nakedly associated with undue foreign interference, the coddling of unambitious leaders, and the facilitation of economic pillaging in low-income countries.
Were any of the 9 points interesting or helpful?
Given everything, has anyone updated their plans?
jrspringman.github.io/psci3200-globaldev/