Tina Rosenberg writes for The New York Times about a study by J-PAL researchers examining the effectiveness of a poverty intervention program. Researchers found that participants in the program, “ate more, were more certain about access to food, held more assets, had more income and savings, spent more time working, and enjoyed better mental and physical health.”
A new study by MIT researchers has found that anti-poverty intervention methods can be effective, reports Carolyn Johnson for The Boston Globe. Interventions resulted in “fewer skipped meals, more income from livestock and farming, and a durable, though small, increase in how much they consume each day.”
MIT researchers have released a report evaluating solar lanterns in Uganda, writes Nidhi Subbaraman for BetaBoston. The group is developing a model to assess products designed for the developing world with the goal of helping organizations “as they make purchases for relief efforts.”
In a piece for The Huffington Post about the problems associated with defining a poverty threshold, Murtaza Haider, an associate professor of management at Ryerson University, highlights Prof. Abhijit Banerjee and Prof. Esther Duflo’s book Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty.