首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
考研
Just giving out cash to poor people is a pretty good way to make them less poor. That might seem obvious, but it wasn’t a common
Just giving out cash to poor people is a pretty good way to make them less poor. That might seem obvious, but it wasn’t a common
admin
2020-08-17
43
问题
Just giving out cash to poor people is a pretty good way to make them less poor. That might seem obvious, but it wasn’t a commonly held viewpoint in development charities until relatively recently. Jacquelline Fuller, who runs Google’s philanthropic arm, has said that when she first pitched one of her bosses on supporting GiveDirectly (a charity doing unrestricted cash transfers), he replied, "You must be smoking crack. "
But in part due to groups like GiveDirectly, and in even larger part due to the success of government programs like Brazil’s Bolsa Familia and Kenya’s cash program for orphans and vulnerable children, that stigma has dissipated. Cash is cool now, at least in some corners.
And for good reason. The most common arguments against giving out cash—that it’s wasted on drugs and alcohol, or makes recipients stop working—have been debunked in repeated studies, and a review of hundreds of studies measuring dozens of different outcomes suggests that cash programs can increase food consumption, boost school attendance, and improve nutrition. If nothing else, cash just mechanically makes people less poor. It’s not a cure-all and has real limitations, but it’s pretty good, and "pretty good" can be hard to find in international development.
One advantage of having a pretty good rough-and-ready way to help poor people abroad is that it gives you something to test against. This is called
"cash benchmarking",
and it’s something that cash fans, like GiveDirectly’s co-founder Paul Niehaus, have promoted for years. The idea is that because cash works reasonably well, respects the independence of recipients, and is relatively easy to hand out at minimal administrative expense, aid agencies should test programs to see if they meet their objectives better than cash would. If they don’t, that’s a pretty good argument to either improve the program or switch to cash.
USAID, the American foreign aid agency, made news in October by testing a nutrition program a-gainst cash. The two performed about equally well, with maybe a slight advantage to the cost-equivalent cash program; a much bigger cash program had really outstanding impacts.
But as a number of development professionals pointed out after I profiled the USAID program, that’s not the full story. At least two other studies have compared complex non-cash aid programs to cash—and beat cash.
Both studies invoke programs commonly known in the development word as " ultra-poor graduation" programs, as they’re meant to
"graduate"
beneficiaries out of extreme poverty.
Graduation programs try to target the very poorest people in already very poor countries. Instead of only giving cash, they give valuable assets (which could be money but could also be an animal like a goat or cow, or equipment like a bicycle or sewing machine) as well as training, mentoring, and ongoing support (and sometimes some cash too, to buy food and keep people going). The hope is that giving some start-up capital and some business skills helps recipients build a small ongoing enterprise-—a small vegetable or dairy farming operation, say, or a bicycle messenger service, or a seamstress shop. That, in turn, is meant to enable a durable escape from poverty.
But recent research has suggested the graduation approach is promising. A massive randomized study published in 2015 by a murderer’s row of prominent development economists—including Northwestern’s Dean Karlan and MT’s Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo, among others—found that a graduation program tested in Ethiopia, Ghana, Honduras, India, Pakistan, and Peru significantly increased income and savings, reduced hunger and missed meal, and improved mental health, on average. It worked in every country but Honduras, where people fell behind when the chickens they were given died of disease.
Giving out cash directly may NOT help________.
选项
A、increase food consumption
B、boost school attendance
C、improve nutrition
D、fight the use of drugs and alcohol
答案
D
解析
事实细节题。第四段第二句后半句提到,直接进行现金资助可以增加食物消费、提高就学率、改善人们的营养状况。A项、B项和C项都是直接进行现金资助的好处,D项未提及。本题为选非题,故答案为D项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/WNra777K
本试题收录于:
翻译硕士(翻译硕士英语)题库专业硕士分类
0
翻译硕士(翻译硕士英语)
专业硕士
相关试题推荐
OfallthecatastrophesthatcouldbefallAmericaincomingyears,abigterroristattack,perhapsevenbiggerthanthoseonSep
TheactorwithwhomIplayedthescene______formebeautifully,whisperingtheopeningwordsofeachofmylines,asdidother
Agedjustfour,JosephineHawkinsisalreadyateasewithhercomputerandtheinternet,______clickinghermouseonDisneysit
Afewyearsago,attheheightofthedotcomboom,itwaswidelyassumedthatapublishingrevolution,inwhichtheprintedword
Despitetheirnames,satinandsomanareexceptionallyuglysisters.Theyareorganophosphorousnervegases.Theyarecheapand
Manypoliticalproblemsaresocomplicatedthatthelaymancannotseethewood______thetrees.
Jeandoesn’twanttoworkrightawaybecauseshethinksthatifshe______ajobsheprobablywouldn’tbeabletoseeherfriends
Indevelopingamodelofcognition,wemustrecognizethatperceptionoftheexternalworlddoesnotalwaysremainindependento
AlexisdeTocqueville,theFrenchpoliticalscientist,historian,philosopherandpolitician,ismostfamousforafour-volumeb
Inthe19thcentury,itwascommontohearpeopleinEuropeandAmericasaythattheresourcesoftheseawereunlimited.Forex
随机试题
试述影响儿童心理发展的各种因素及其影响。
下列属于寒湿腰痛的症状是
A.蜗管B.椭圆囊C.咽鼓管D.膜半规管E.球囊属于中耳的是
陈某到一饭店就餐,饭店服务人韩某在给卡式煤气炉点火时,煤气炉突然爆炸,陈某、韩某及邻座顾客杜某均被炸伤。经查,煤气炉系甲厂生产,质量存在严重缺陷。则下列有关表述中不正确的是()。
为了模板与混凝土顺利隔离可以在模板上刷废机油。()
甲、乙、丙、丁、戊于2010年共同出资设立了A有限责任公司(下称A公司),出资比例为22%、30%、20%、20%、8%。2014年A公司发生有关事项如下:(1)3月,甲向银行申请贷款时请求A公司为其提供担保。为此甲提议召开临时股东会,董事会按期召集了股东
于老师决定在班上组织一次全员参与的特长展示活动,学生们陆续在报名表上写上自己的“拿手好戏”:手工、书法、弹琴、乒乓球……于老师发现,除了小伟,其他学生都报了项目。小伟刚从外地转来,学习成绩很差,很少参加集体活动,在班上也没有什么朋友。于老师把小伟
网上爆料某公司因从2013年1月份开始业务一直下滑,公司领导请来一位道长在公司院内做法事,认为业务发展上不去是办公大楼存在风水问题。从哲学的角度看,上述做法()。
在全国人大常委会会议期间,常委会组成人员()以上联名,可以向国务院及其各部委、最高人民法院、最高人民检察院提出书面质询案。
Shewas________tiredthatshecouldn’tgetoutofbed.
最新回复
(
0
)