Researchers find a bias in World Bank reports - by Rajesh Sinha
NEW DELHI: A little publicised World Bank report released in December 2006 has found serious shortcomings in the studies published by the organisation. The study was conducted by a panel of 24 researchers led by Professors Abhijit Banerjee (MIT), Angus Deaton (Princeton University), Nora Lustig (UNDP) and Ken Rogoff (Harvard University). The evaluators have analysed some high-profile researches conducted by the Bank over the past decade. Of Dollar and Burnside's paper, "Aid, policies and growth," which the Bank has cited repeatedly to argue for increased support for countries with 'good policies', they say, "We think that the Bank was unwise to place so much weight on one paper whose evidence is so unconvincing." The implications for the Bank, according to the evaluators, are alarming.
"Once the evidence is chosen selectively without supporting argument, and empirical scepticism selectively suspended, the credibility and utility of the Bank's research is threatened," they opine. On Dollar and Kraay's research providing support to the Bank's arguments that trade liberalising countries show greater poverty reduction, they say, "Much of this line of research appears to have such deep flaws that, at present, the results cannot be regarded as remotely reliable."
No comments:
Post a Comment