Unprecedented growth in rice production in Bangladesh over the last four decades has outpaced the capacity of post-harvest operations, resulting in substantial grain losses. While production technology has changed dramatically over time, there has been relatively little private investment in transforming storage capacity in the country. This paper explores the lack of widespread private investment in improved grain storage and examines the potential for public support to stimulate greater private sector investment in modern storage. We calculate the returns to investment in bulk grain silos and hermetic cocoons that could upgrade warehouse storage, and calculate the grain loss that conversion to those technologies would prevent. We then assess the public support that would be required to trigger private investment in modern storage systems. Our analysis shows that storage in jute bags in warehouses or homes outperforms the modern technologies in terms of financial returns at observed prices. Our analysis further shows that given the observed price changes during the harvest and post-harvest periods from 2008 to 2018, cocoon and silo storage as well as conventional warehouse storage were unprofitable in most years and on average overall. Although seasonal variation in market prices for paddy is sometimes pronounced, the pattern of the variation is not sufficiently large or consistent to make paddy storage reliably profitable. Conventional warehouse storage implied an average loss of BDT 2,877/MT/season over the 20 seasons considered. Use of modern storage methods would have implied average losses of BDT 3,200/MT/season to BDT 4,950/MT/season, depending on technology used. These results imply that a public sector co-investment on the order of BDT 300/MT would be required to trigger a shift from conventional to modern storage by traders or millers. This shift would imply a reduction in grain loss of 30kg to 80kg per MT stored for a public cost of BDT 3.75 to BDT 10.00 per kilogram of loss avoided. To make it profitable for intermediaries to provide commercial storage services to farmers who currently store on-farm would require a much larger co-investment of about BDT 3,200/MT stored, implying BDT 40 to BDT 106 per kilogram of loss avoided. Removal of import tariffs on storage technologies or realization of a price premium for silo-stored or hermetically stored grain could be sufficient to encourage millers to adopt modern storage, but would be inadequate to trigger increased off-farm storage as an independent activity. There is anecdotal evidence of a price premium for paddy that has been stored using improved technology. Existence of such a premium could significantly reduce public support needed to trigger private investment in improved storage.

Unprecedented growth in rice production in Bangladesh over the last four decades has outpaced the capacity of post-harvest operations, resulting in substantial grain losses. While production technology has changed dramatically over time, there has been relatively little private investment in transforming storage capacity in the country. This paper explores the lack of widespread private investment in improved grain storage and examines the potential for public support to stimulate greater private sector investment in modern storage. We calculate the returns to investment in bulk grain silos and hermetic cocoons that could upgrade warehouse storage, and calculate the grain loss that conversion to those technologies would prevent. We then assess the public support that would be required to trigger private investment in modern storage systems.

The State of Economic Inclusion Report 2021 sheds light on one of the most intractable challenges faced by development policy makers and practitioners: transforming the economic lives of the world's poorest and most vulnerable people. Economic inclusion programs are a bundle of coordinated, multidimensional interventions that support individuals, households, and communities so they can raise their incomes and build their assets. Programs targeting the extreme poor and vulnerable groups are now under way in 75 countries. This report presents data and evidence from 219 of these programs, which are reaching over 90 million beneficiaries. Governments now lead the scale-up of economic inclusion interventions, often building on preexisting national programs such as safety nets, livelihoods and jobs, and financial inclusion, and 93 percent of the total beneficiaries are covered by government programs. The report offers four important contributions: -- A detailed analysis of the nature of these programs, the people living in extreme poverty and vulnerability whom they support, and the organizational challenges and opportunities inherent in designing and leading them. -- An evidence review of 80 quantitative and qualitative evaluations of economic inclusion programs in 37 countries. -- The first multicountry costing study including both government-led and other economic inclusion programs, indicating that programs show potential for cost efficiencies when integrated into national systems. -- Four detailed case studies featuring programs under way in Bangladesh, India, Peru, and the Sahel, which highlight the programmatic and institutional adaptations required to scale in quite diverse contexts. Data from the report are available on the PEI Data Portal (http://www.peiglobal.org), where users can explore and submit data to build on this baseline.

The World Bank Group has two overarching goals: End extreme poverty by 2030 and promote shared prosperity by boosting the incomes of the bottom 40 percent of the population in each economy. As this year’s Poverty and Shared Prosperity report documents, the world continues to make progress toward these goals. In 2015, approximately one-tenth of the world’s population lived in extreme poverty, and the incomes of the bottom 40 percent rose in 77 percent of economies studied. But success cannot be taken for granted. Poverty remains high in Sub- Saharan Africa, as well as in fragile and conflict-affected states. At the same time, most of the world’s poor now live in middle-income countries, which tend to have higher national poverty lines. This year’s report tracks poverty comparisons at two higher poverty thresholds—$3.20 and $5.50 per day—which are typical of standards in lower- and upper-middle-income countries. In addition, the report introduces a societal poverty line based on each economy’s median income or consumption. Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2018: Piecing Together the Poverty Puzzle also recognizes that poverty is not only about income and consumption—and it introduces a multidimensional poverty measure that adds other factors, such as access to education, electricity, drinking water, and sanitation. It also explores how inequality within households could affect the global profile of the poor. All these additional pieces enrich our understanding of the poverty puzzle, bringing us closer to solving it. For more information, please visit worldbank.org/PSP

This paper examines gender inequality in the context of structural transformation and rebalancing in China. We document declining women's relative wages and labor force participation in China during the last two decades, despite rapid growth and expansion of the service sector. Using household data, we provide evidence consistent with a U-shaped relationship between economic development and women's labor market outcomes. Using a model of structural transformation, we show that labor market barriers for women have increased over time. Model counterfactuals suggest that removing these barriers and increasing service sector productivity can boost both gender equality and economic growth in China.

Securing Food for All in Bangladesh presents an array of research that collectively address four broad issues: (1) agricultural technology adoption; (2) input use and agricultural productivity; (3) food security and output market; and (4) poverty, food security, and women’s empowerment. The fifteen chapters of the book address diverse aspects within these four themes. Access to sufficient food by all people at all times to meet their dietary needs is a matter of critical importance. Despite declining arable agricultural land, Bangladesh has made commendable progress in boosting domestic food production. The growth in overall food production has been keeping ahead of population growth, resulting in higher per capita availability of food over time. In the early 1970s, Bangladesh was a food-deficit country with a population of about 75 million. Today, the population is 165 million, and the country is now self-sufficient in rice production, which has tripled over the past three decades. Along with enhanced food production, increased income has improved people’s access to food. Furthermore, nutritional outcomes have improved significantly. Nevertheless, the challenges to food and nutrition security remain formidable. Future agricultural growth and food and nutrition security are threatened by population growth, worsening soil fertility, diminishing access to land and other scarce natural resources, increasing vulnerability of crop varieties to pests and diseases, and persistent poverty leading to poor access to food. In addition, the impacts of climate change—an increase in the incidence of natural disasters, sea intrusion, and salinity—will exacerbate food and nutrition insecurity in the coming decades if corrective measures are not taken. Aligned with this context, the authors of the book explore policy options and strategies for developing agriculture and improving food security in Bangladesh. Securing Food for All in Bangladesh, with its breadth and scope, will be an invaluable resource for policymakers, researchers, and students dedicated to improving people’s livelihoods in Bangladesh.

Extremes in income and wealth inequality are leading us closer to a highly insecure and unstable economy. Neoclassical, monetarist, Keynesian, and other economic paradigms have proven inadequate to explain this phenomenon. ​While many books promote redistribution as an issue of fairness, Lawrence C. Marsh’s Optimal Money Flow explicitly sets aside the fairness issue to argue instead that redistribution is imperative for economic efficiency, stability, and maximum economic growth. Marsh introduces his unique money flow paradigm as the replacement for other economic paradigms that have failed at addressing the situation we face today. Marsh’s money flow paradigm views the flow of money to the top of the wealth pyramid as inherent, inevitable, and inexorable to the free enterprise system. This new paradigm requires that government assume its rightful responsibility to direct sufficient money flow from the top to the bottom (like a heart pumping blood throughout the body) in order to maximize employment, economic growth, and efficient resource allocation. In a healthy economy, the money then flows naturally back up to the top in a circulatory flow. Optimal Money Flow provides an abundance of stimulating, original ideas for readers who appreciate books at the intersection of economics and politics. One such idea is Marsh’s "My America" personal accounts. This new policy tool would serve as an alternative to the Fed buying US Treasury securities in New York financial markets, which just lowers interest rates and boosts stock and bond prices. Instead, a "My America" Federal Reserve bank account would be created for every American, into which money could be injected directly to provide consumers with cash to stimulate demand when the economy slows. Conservatives will appreciate two aspects of this approach: The people, not the government, decide how to spend the money, and it does not increase taxes or add to the national debt, while it simultaneously avoids excessive inflation through prudent monetary management. It also uses less money and has a more direct and immediate impact on consumer demand than the purchase of US Treasury securities. Lawrence Marsh sees government as the heart of the free enterprise system—where it does and should play an active part in maintaining and ensuring efficient and equitable resource allocation in an economy. Previous economic paradigms viewed government as an external, alien force outside the system, but Marsh promotes a very different approach. While he acknowledges there is efficiency in the market for ordinary goods and services, he sees contagion effects and inefficiency in many financial markets. With higher levels of globalization, low levels of unionization, and more rapid technological change, a new type of business cycle has emerged—one in which rising middle-class debt and stock market bubbles have replaced price and wage inflation as the source of economic instability. Marsh believes government can contribute to the efficiency of the free enterprise system by better aligning marginal costs and marginal benefits, and that in the long run, government can greatly enhance efficiency, productivity, and economic growth. Marsh also takes on the commonly held notion of a static fight over a fixed economic pie with the assertion that this view must be replaced with one of a dynamic process that maximizes the growth rate of the economic pie for everyone—by keeping the money flowing to all parts of the economy. Optimal Money Flow’s important message and unique proposals deliver a fresh view of the interconnectedness of the globe and an updated understanding of the underlying economic forces that shape our lives today—including international trade and how one country's decisions now impact the rest of the world. Readers will rethink their basic assumptions about the nature of economics and the role of government.

Using a new daily index of social unrest, we provide systematic evidence on the negative impact of social unrest on stock market performance. An average social unrest episode in an typical country causes a 1.4 percentage point drop in cumulative abnormal returns over a two-week event window. This drop is more pronounced for events that last longer and for events that happen in emerging markets. Stronger institutions, particularly better governance and more democratic systems, mitigate the adverse impact of social unrest on stock market returns.