Lời khuyên dành cho Ajay Banga

-----

First, contrary to the prevailing wisdom, the World Bank should not make climate change (biến đổi khí hậu) more of a priority (ưu tiên). Climate-change issues are more closely associated with rich and middle-income countries than with the poorest countries. The very poorest countries, because they have small economies, do not as a rule emit much carbon. Indoor air pollution, such as burning wood or fuel for heat or cooking, is usually more of a problem. Those emissions can be toxic, and the World Bank should try to help reduce them. But that won't do much to cut carbon emissions (phát thải các bon).

The World Health Organization estimates that about seven million people die each year from the direct effects of air pollution. For poorer countries, alleviating that problem should be a greater priority than fighting global climate change.

The reality is that if the World Bank can help elevate some very poor countries into middle-income countries, climate-change problems will become somewhat worse — at least in the short to medium run. "We make climate-change problems worse" is not a marketable slogan. But it is selfish to try to get the World Bank to do more good for the wealthiest nations and less good for the poorest nations, which is essentially what prioritizing climate change would do. And of course the world's wealthier nations are broadly coincidental with the major shareholders of the World Bank…

If there is any area where the World Bank should double down, it is in public-health interventions. Over the last several decades, the successes have been extraordinary. In Africa, for instance, child mortality rates have plummeted, and many public-health indicators have improved considerably, especially outside of major conflict zones. Why not invest more in what is working?

Bài trước: Nhà vệ sinh hai giá là đúng rồi