Richard Nerland

Great news on @malengo.org: With a new large investment from The Shapiro Foundation (theshapirofoundation.org), we'll be able to bring several hundred vocational training and university students from Kenya, Uganda, and Rwanda to Europe over the coming years!

More here: malengo.org/malengo-secu...

Tariffs go to near 0? Yes

50% confidence intervals

China 45 to 100 years
EU 4 to 16 years
Canada 1 month to 4 years

As we know now, with a near collapse of many INGOs occurring.

This was actually massively effective and very smart systems level thinking.

It could be better, but I was *almost always* impressed when I interacted with professionals.

Honestly, I'm pretty surly.

The Backbone of Impact: How USAID and Global Institutions Empower Top Charities A Case Study In Philanthropy's Role in Global Health and Why Waivers Aren't Working

Pretty obviously have to shill.

It wasn't clear to me how much NGOs were extensions of aid organizations. Using them for the less "impact" part. Hence, gaining impact per unit.

While gov't does the opposite.

So you get "ineffective" infrastructure.

open.substack.com/pub/flavorye...

As of Feb 9, less than 10% of PEPFAR contractors surveyed had restarted any activities. It's not their fault: They need to get explicit program-level waivers and that's a bottleneck. Plus, even with a waiver, USG owes them heaps of $ and they have no cash.

It would be ideal if everyone thought of democracy mostly as rules/process PLUS a people-centered collective pursuit of material outcomes; as opposed to democracy as just rules and process.

The latter model leads people to think they can fact check their way out of autocracy.

Quick 🧵 on American aid spending, to accompany my new Substack (link below)

US aid obligations have remained remarkably steady in real terms since WWII, rarely exiting a band of $20-60 billion in 2023 dollars. Surprisingly, the year with the most aid obligations was... 1948!

Where are my newsmax readers at?

www.newsmax.com/politics/grp...

Despite calls for reform, USAID’s ability to mobilize vast resources and elite expertise remains essential. When failure isn’t an option, only large‑scale, coordinated action can meet the complex challenges of global development.

Scaling pilot projects into nationwide programs is notoriously difficult—short-term funding and fragmented efforts often stall progress. USAID’s sustained, multi-year commitment is key to turning promising ideas into lasting solutions.

Yet, USAID’s track record speaks volumes. Initiatives like PEPFAR have saved millions of lives, while programs like Development Innovation Ventures and Power Africa demonstrate how bold, well-funded strategies can drive transformative change.

Critics highlight USAID’s bureaucratic inefficiencies, heavy reliance on a few large contractors, and tied-aid rules that hike costs. Such challenges can slow progress and sometimes hinder cost-effective impact.

Unlike many NGOs tied to short-term, fragmented funding, USAID’s long-term, government-backed support enables transformative interventions. Its strategic oversight paired with on-the-ground NGO innovation creates a powerful, symbiotic partnership.

USAID embodies scale: operating in 130+ countries with over 10,000 staff, disbursing billions annually. Its massive reach in health, humanitarian aid, and economic development makes it a global powerhouse.

USAID Served Health At Scale Overcoming Complexity with Strategic Funding and Unyielding Institutional Resolve

I think USAID was underrated because it served something that is habitually underrated: scale

flavoryeagle.substack.com/p/usaid-serv...

Yes! I think we are on the same page. That literature is exactly what I was thinking about.

Seeing your papers made me think about how to create measurements around it since the framework looks like portfolio optimization to me.

Anything that isn't a single large transfer reads as conditional to me!

We could just take NPV of all your expected giving and send it over once. That is minimum conditions afaict.

IMF arriving *if* crises ...
World Bank invests *if* program exists ...

Ah yes, agree with everything you say.

I was thinking that setting up the endowment/SWF would attempt to be pitched with fewer conditions. It's a single large transfer and then it can be spent as seen fit.

It removes the "overhead" from developed ledger to local.

In such a setup, even if some level of “optimal” corruption occurs (in the sense that it encourages growth through performance fees), the overall incentive would be to grow the endowment rather than deplete it.

End wild speculation triggered by thoughts of the dynamic allocation.

Where temporary aid (might?) leads to a spend-down mentality in expectation of additional aid or IMF bailouts—a permanent transfer that governs temporary transfers might not?

Ie by the possibility of linking endowment performance to reward structures analogous to performance fees for GPs in private equity firms. By tying subsequent flows to improvements in absorption/ good returns, we could create an incentive scheme that aligns local behavior with donor objectives.

Some of which may directly reflect the parameters governing absorption.

Now allow me to wildly speculate with an analogy to private sector that probably doesn't fit.

Then measuring the subsequent growth of that endowment over time?
This approach might offer a data-driven estimate of the local return, essentially capturing local absorption capacity. With panel data on such endowments, one could analyze the raw returns collectively and extract a series of factors

I was wondering how these models might inform a program of aid localization. Rather than a series of dynamic transfers, could we conceptualize program effectiveness by providing a single, large endowment transfer, basically a corner case of the dynamic sol'n.

mitxela.com/projects/pol...

Regarding the ongoing moral circle debate:

Simply asking people who they care about is cheap talk. In my book, I find that when their own interests are at stake, most prioritize themselves and family over the country, and the country over foreigners. Notably, the nation ranks above the local.

Trade policies seem like they should be more unambiguous helpful in the new, higher income countries?

MCC has a scorecard that allows you to qualify for loans right?

I was wondering if they used the same scorecard for other forms of promoting economic growth.

Legitimate question. Is there any public equivalent scorecard that leads to lower barriers to trade or other market integration?