Jeffrey has his heart in the right place, a great job, and a $2 million condo in NYC, but he clearly has failed to consider the microeconomics of aid, farming, finance, corruption, etc. It’s sad that he may actually get people to contribute to his program — and make things worse. [Sachs has a macro background — and you can tell.]
I’ve only recently started reading David Zetland’s Aguanomics blog. Of course I agree with him. But that’s no reason not to link to him. This time, he’s taken on a Godlike directive from one J. Sachs: “The world should set as a practical goal of doubling grain yields in low-income Africa and similar regions (such as Haiti) during the next five years.”
Hop to it, World!
It’s easy to scoff at, but is increasing grain yield in Africa such a terrible goal? Through some relatively simple strategies like drip irrigation and locally sourced fertilizer (such as the creative use of human urine), yields would be quickly boosted.
I suppose it all depends on where the money goes – I’d personally like to see some Ag Extension offices spring up all over.
I’m not scoffing at the idea of increasing grain yields. I’m scoffing at the lack of practical solutions. Yours — urine — is a good one, though I think it might be better used as a nitrogenous activator for composting carbon-rich materials. Drip irrigation I really think is not an answer, partly because it is expensive, partly because of the saline build-up that will accompany it.
I totally agree with you about ag extension. Home-grown advisors is what Africa desperately needs.
Sachs wouldn’t be such a nice target for superficial critique if he didn’t matter. The five year period Sachs mentions is the time frame set for the Millennium Villages Project (an initiative led by Sachs). The point is that much can be achieved in a relatively short time. Africa is not a millennium behind.
The MVP, with all its shortcomings, attempts to give a practical demonstration of that. To me the issue of farmer access to credit that Sachs mentions in his article seems at least as important and practical as a “nitrogenous activator for composting carbon-rich materials”. So what is the problem exactly?
The key problem is the one identified by David Zetland: who exactly is Sachs tasking with the job(s)?
If the Millennium Villages cannot organize access to credit for the few farmers that are involved, who can?
And what if the MVP can?
I don’t share Zetland’s radical anti-government sentiment. Governments play an important role (positive or negative) in making the sort of solutions you propose viable in the long term. That’s why heaping coals of fire on the heads of government leaders is a better strategy than simply writing them off.
And why not provide a less superficial critique of Sachs and his MVP, for instance by writing a post on the project’s intellectual output?