Microfinance institutions are often assumed to be socially oriented, but as the industry expands and more institutions enter, it becomes increasingly important to verify these claims. Donors and social investors should require more than a mission statement and a few anecdotes to know whether an MFI is really reaching the poor.
Interesting example of the endowment effect from New York Times restaurant critic Frank Bruni: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/19/dining/19note.html?8dpc
Summing up the quirky behaviors of his dining companions over his tenure as restaurant critic for the NY Times, Bruni describes the way his fellow diners--to whom he had randomly assigned dishes to be sampled--would become protective of "their" choices, defending their quality.
I need to give props to the Kiva Fellows, who work with many of the same microfinance institutions that partner with IPA in the field.
How has Michael Jackson's death helped advance the cause of IPA? I've just come back from rural Cusco, Perú, where we were training credit officers for our newest project, where we use video and radio to help teach village bank clients concepts related to financial literacy. Earlier, I had talked to the credit officers about the importance of randomized trials, mentioned results from previous studies, outlined the indicators we were thinking of measuring, and explained relevant details about the assignment of treatment and control banks.
This month's Atlantic Monthly has a controversial article about breastfeeding, specifically making arguments against breastfeeding. The arguments are of two types. One is social and normative, and the other is on the evidence. My thoughts, naturally, are on the evidence. The journalist makes a classic error in understanding and interpreting "treatment effects." Here is a clip: