1 / 13

LATIN American governments at a glance: Goals and knowledge gaps

LATIN American governments at a glance: Goals and knowledge gaps. Jeffrey Rinne June 2009. A hot topic. Tremendous promise... . [Note the elegant simplicity of “cold fusion”]. But as it turns out, it’s not that simple. Presentation outline. Our challenges Theory Contestability

kami
Download Presentation

LATIN American governments at a glance: Goals and knowledge gaps

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LATIN American governments at a glance: Goals and knowledge gaps Jeffrey Rinne June 2009

  2. A hot topic

  3. Tremendous promise... [Note the elegant simplicity of “cold fusion”] But as it turns out, it’s not that simple

  4. Presentation outline • Our challenges • Theory • Contestability • Conceptual categories • All is not lost: Positive incremental steps • SNA and the Public Domain • The LAGG initiative • How does it attempt to incorporate these lessons? • Where do we stand?

  5. Our challenges • Theoretical: rational actors have choices • Metrics can be powerful tools for: a) learning, and b) motivation • But there’s a “motivational problem” too: the many faces of “gaming” • Contestability: no agreed Platonic ideal in goals or their measurement • This means trouble for cross-national metrics • And for tracking metrics over time • Operational categories for common understanding

  6. All is not lost • Main messages: • Accept the first two challenges (theory and contestability). Incorporate them; do not dismiss them. • THERE IS COMMON GROUND: New institutionalism, policy issues that resonate across countries • Continue the hard work to develop a more robust common language of operational categories to underpin our metrics

  7. (a) Operational categories: SNA • A major strength of the SNA is the ability to compile accounts for whole sectors, individual units, or some intermediate levels and to aggregate the accounts in different ways. • But it’s tricky • e.g., some non profit institutions are part of “general government” while others are not • How to account for “joint ventures” • You can build it up and also take it apart. • How many layers of the onion should be unraveled? • That depends on the question or issue of concern • Is it a mammal? Dogs vs. cats; hound vs. non-sporting, terrier …

  8. An illustration

  9. (b) Operational categories: The “Public Domain” • ORCHESTRATION • Governments use their powers to pass laws affecting the behavior of other economic units. • They redistribute income and wealth by means of taxes and social benefits. • PRODUCTION FACTORY *

  10. The Public Domain

  11. The LAGG initiative www.lagovglance.org

  12. The LAGG Initiative (incorporating lessons) • Indicators are (inevitably) both descriptive and prescriptive … but put the weight on description • Why we’re leery of rankings. • Metrics work better when their the products and tools of a Policy Community: donors and governments alike, civil society & researchers • Use extreme caution with perceptions-based and composite indicators • Embrace the need for redundancy and multiple assessments

More Related