By Ingrid Harvold Kvangraven
Last week, the 鈥淪ustainable Development Goals鈥� (SDGs) were launched at the UN in New York. This is the outcome of two years of consultations, lobbying, and debate about what the should look like. The assumption has been that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were a huge success and that we, therefore, must proceed with a new round. Unfortunately, this assumption is not backed by empirical evidence.
By Ingrid Harvold Kvangraven
Being an Economics PhD student in a gives me the privilege of taking courses in a range of different schools of thought within the discipline. In the Economics department, most of us take the stance that it is imperative to understand the mainstream in order to criticize them effectively. We go to great lengths to learn about the nuances of Neo-classical Economics, general equilibrium theory, and New-Keynesian Economics. Meanwhile, we also have full courses devoted to non-mainstream approaches, such as Post-Keynesian and Marxian Economics. We are aware of the ideological underpinnings of a lot of mainstream theory, and many of us see this as a motivation to challenge the discipline.
This blog post from was one of the few critical reviews written on Bill Easterly’s book . Thus, it ended up being picked up by Al Jazeera and the author debated Easterly on .
黑料社区 