Encouraging immunization has long been a major focus for development organizations working to improve conditions in poor regions. But for households in many communities, a lack of time and money can pose major obstacles, making it difficult for families to send their children to health clinics.
In an effort to combat this trend, economists are testing incentive programs to see whether or not communities can be encouraged to immunize on a larger scale.
Across the Indian subcontinent, scientists and economists are using randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as part of a massive trial, testing whether incentives such as food can increase the “stubbornly low” immunization rates for children in impoverished areas. As part of the experiment, 70 local health clinics in the Indian state of Haryana provide parents with a free kilogram of sugar if a child begins a standard series of vaccinations and a free liter of cooking oil if they complete it.
Researchers randomly assigned clinics in the seven Haryana districts with the lowest immunization rates to either provide incentives or not. While initial results of the experiment are not expected until next year, similar experiments suggest that results are likely to be positive. In a study conducted in India and published in 2010, monthly medical camps caused vaccination rates to triple, and offering incentives increased the rate of vaccination by six times.
“We have learned something about why immunization rates are low,” said Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist Esther Duflo, who notes that for families in poor communities, sending their children on a trek to a faraway clinic can carry high opportunity costs. “And you can balance that difficulty with a little incentive.”
According to a 2011 study on vaccination rates in India, the country is home to one-third of the world’s unimmunized children, despite being a leading producer and exporter of vaccines. Nearly half of Indian children do not receive the full schedule of immunizations.
Among the leading causes of the vaccine deficit are “little investment by the government; a focus on polio eradication at the expense of other immunizations; and low demand as a consequence of a poorly educated population and the presence of anti-vaccine advocates.”
The implementation of RCTs has come at a time when people are raising doubts as to the efficacy of foreign development aid provided by countries like the United States. While some $16 trillion of aid has flowed to the developing world since World War II, there is little empirical data as to whether, and to what extent, that money has improved recipients’ lives. Scientists see these tests as the answer to that question and hold that such studies will help development organizations better target areas of need in developing countries.
Research organizations are primarily interested in implementing tangible policy changes and hope to do so by demonstrating empirical research regarding development aid. Such is the aim of the Global Innovation Fund, which offers funding for organizations looking to conduct similar tests.
The fund has received nearly 2,000 applications for projects in 110 countries, and it will announce the first wave of grant recipients later this year. The amount of funding provided by such organizations, however, is tiny, and even at major lending institutions, the portion of investments backed by rigorous and empirical research is small.
The World Bank started a Development Impact Evaluation division in 2005, and the number of projects receiving “formal impact evaluations”—by means of RCTs, for example—increased from 20 in 2003 to nearly 200 in 2014. But that only accounts for 15 percent of the bank’s projects. This is largely because of the up-front costs of such evaluations, which carry average funding requirements of nearly $500,000.
While expensive and time-consuming, the more empirical research is conducted on social programs and development aid, the more effective those initiatives will become in remedying the conditions that drive global poverty rates. As this information is presented to donor governments in the developed world, and as aid allocation becomes more transparent, development experts will be better able to target areas of need in poor and developing countries.
– Zach VeShancey
Earlier this month, football clubs from Gaza and the West Bank traveled to face one another in the Palestine Cup for the first time in more than 15 years. Shijaiyah United of Gaza faced West Bank’s Al-Ahly squad, and more than 2,000 fans of both teams alike were in full attendance at Gaza’s al-Yarmouk stadium.
Everyone knows that education plays a critical role in unlocking a successful future, but that education does not need to be earned in a schoolhouse. Especially if the closest schoolhouse is several miles away and lacking pencils and paper. Online classes are not particularly new; online degrees became available in the United States in the mid-’90s however as technology began to flourish so did the popularity of distant learning programs.
Through innovation and funding, Kenyan bitcoin startup Bitsoko promises to revamp the way commerce is conducted in bustling markets in Nairobi and cities across Africa. The company has invented a digital wallet that employs blockchain technology to allow a smoother, cheaper transfer of funds between individuals.
Using local talent and resources, Explore Corps is able to change the future of developing communities by working with youth to grow up to be leaders, conservationists and to practice sustainability. Explore Corps helps youth gain knowledge, mature and develop on their terms while working on projects that are community driven, culturally sensitive and environmentally friendly.
Long idolized were the Millennium Development Goals, a set of eight targets created and adopted by the United Nations in 2000. Central to their aim was the eradication of global poverty by improving maternal health and access to clean water, food and education while reducing the number of people living on under $1.25 a day across the developing world.
Charities all work to accomplish different goals and, while their goals are all admirable, some seem to stand out a little more than others. The traditional philanthropic method typically involves collecting donations to be spent on aiding a group or cause either by giving away the raised funds or purchasing specific goods to give to those in need. While this charity formula is not wrong, there are other non-traditional ways to do good. Take a look at these five organizations that make a different kind of difference with your donation.
“Together let’s vaccinate all of the world’s children,” reads the website for Alma Sana, a nonprofit organization started by Lauren Braun.
Oral healthcare is something severely lacking in the developing world. The World Health Organization published that approximately 60-90% of school children have dental cavities. However, there is only 1 dentist for every 150,000 people in Africa.
What do chickens and goats have in common? Well, chickens and goats live on farms, and both can help end child marriage.