Every two weeks I have a conference call with a group of friends to discuss a new and creative design of an ideal political economy in today’s day and age. There are four of us: one in New York, one in San Francisco, one in Atlanta, and myself in Columbus. We give ourselves some homework between each call so that we’re able to come armed with a few thoughts on a topic of our choosing. It’s totally fascinating each time we talk, as is the build-up to the conversation, which includes some writing by each of us on the topic at hand.
So far we’ve done about 6 book reports and had focused discussions on spirituality, education, tax structure, and monetary policy. Next discussion is on energy.
As with everything else in my life, I find that my experiences with Nuru deeply inform every contribution I make to these discussions. It doesn’t hurt that Matt Stillman is one of our team-mates in the discussion. He knows a ton and can talk and talk about the end of extreme poverty from a policy perspective, which is a pretty important perspective.
Today’s discussion about monetary policy had me thinking, as usual, about the folks in Kuria whom Nuru works for. We were discussing the nature of wealth and how wealth is is different from currency is. It was kind of blowing my mind on both ends.
See, wealth, as Matt was defining it, is access to resources. It’s not currency. It’s much easier to understand if you think of the folks in Kuria. A couple of years ago, essentially no amount of paper money, for the average farmer in Kuria, would have given him or her access to high yields of maize. This is because the community members lacked the training and access to the resources of good seeds and fertilizer. So, wealth is access. By increasing the access in the community, it has increased its own wealth.
On the other end, what is currency? Well, currency is paper money, or at least it was few decades ago. Before that it was coins, but now, in developed countries, it’s pretty much a list of numbers on a screen. I, as a citizen in a developed country, rarely see any of the currency that is supposedly in my possession. I see numbers on a screen. Mifos and M-PESA and the work of our CED and Agriculture programs are helping to facilitate this evolution from paper money to numbers on a screen for the folks in Kuria.
When transactions are easy, secure, automatic, and technologically advanced, more exchanges can occur, markets can grow, access to resources can grow, and well, so can wealth! Exciting.
Oh, here’s a great video on M-PESA and it’s growing influence in Kenya (h/t: Stephanie Jayne (ha! That’s my first use of “h/t” , I feel like a real blogger)): CGAP
Alright, my blog post is essentially one big long side-note today. Next week, I’ll update you on what’s happening on the Research Team! You’ll get two weeks worth of news.

Gaby,
Very interesting. I’m working on a grant for public policy and trying to see if Nuru will fit into the scope. Maybe we should discuss?
Also, I really look forward to hearing about your discussion on energy…and I know someone else who will also be interested to see what you post on it. :)
Best,
Carey
Gaby, I am so grateful to be referenced here and so sad to miss the energy call but I wanted to mention one part of your equation here.
“When transactions are easy, secure, automatic, and technologically advanced, more exchanges can occur, markets can grow, access to resources can grow, and well, so can wealth! Exciting. ”
I think it is a little more complicated. You certainly want transactions to be easy, secure and automatic. And the automatic part almost certainly requires technology. But as “the system” currently works the technology requires, for instance, rare metals that are mined from a place like Tanzania. In Tanzania local miners are forced out of business and multi-nationals are given sweetheart deals for large-scale access to those resources. In many cases people in rural areas are wholly displaced/dispossessed from their land (read: access to resources/wealth).
In the work of moving towards this fairer world we must be attentive that we are not continually shifting the cost to the least of us.
To that end the statement about “markets can grow”…truthfully, markets can grow – especially in the “developing world” where they haven’t been allowed to do so. But three other things need to happen (no small things either)
1. Switch the notion that a growing economy is a healthy economy.
2. Likely reduce the “market” size in the West.
3. Have a full accounting of cost for all materials used in production. So that means that person X in Tanzania with a rightful land claim needs to be paid fairly by multinational Y for access to the coltan on their land as well the costs of pollution et al. Suddenly the cost of coltan goes up – and rightfully so. Because at the moment kicking people off their land, taking their stuff and dumping toxic waste is essentially free but we all end up paying anyway.
Gaby and Matt, I am going to have to agree with both of you to some extent. While the transactions, described above, offer less friction to growth, I am not sure that growth then becomes the winner-by-default path of least resistance. Technology, in this case M-PESA, is not a panacea. It is a tool, which can provide less resistance to growth if used properly and when combined with the skills, capital, ambition, etc…
Matt is definitely speaking to this at a policy level (as Gaby mentioned), which is far different from my day-to-day development work. It is definitely a healthy exercise for me to think about these things, but life on the ground is pretty prohibitive to idealism. I rely more on realism powered by idealist views.
I think that Matt’s third point is the most interesting. The legacy of colonialism is part of everyday life in the Developing World. Empowering communities and leaders in an effort to overcome poverty reinforced by this legacy is part of my job every day. I have a lot to learn about where we are and where we want to go as a society.
Love seeing this dialogue! Nuru’s work is definitely from the bottom-up. We are working to ensure options for people. Solving global problems from either direction alone — the policy direction or the grassroots direction — ends up with a proverbial brick wall at some point or another. There has to be some work from both ends in my opinion.
There are important issues of justice that must be dealt with and I’m glad for the work of people like Matt.
The “growth” that I’m excited about isn’t some nebulous thing, or something that I have any ethical qualms about whatsoever. It’s the increased number of welders working on the street of Isibania. It’s the farmers who can feed their families. It’s the old women who can store and send cash securely by M-PESA, safe from husbands, relatives and robbers.
At the policy level, maybe the invention and propagation of cell phones is ultimately a destructive thing. The question that Nuru must answer is this: how can the present realities be used to improve the lives of the poor right now. The same is true of the average Kenyan, and even the Kenyan government: Nokia may be evil, but how do we develop in spite of it?
David, thanks for your kind words. If you know anyone who want to employ me writing/talking about them please send them my way!
I am with you on the growth you are talking about but bad models produce bad results so I pray that the growth that the “developing world” needs to have is not powered the same way the “old growth” was. Dangerous, wasteful, destructive. But you are right, doubtless, people working is growth we can be grateful for. But my little caveat – I don’t want the only option people have is to sell their labor. They should be able to subsist and provide through access to resources as well if they so desire. Often people are displaced and then can only get a job in a plantation where wages and job capacity is fixed by weather and/or design.
I hear your question about Nokia/cell phones. It may be that just not innovation has happened yet. Tantalum is great stuff no doubt but part of why we use it is that “we” can get it cheap. Maybe there is a better material. For example a thorium nuclear reactor has none of the problems with stability, waste or amount of fissionable material that a uranium/plutonium one does. Thorium is abundant, cheap, easily and non-destructively mined and literally nobody would be displaced to get it. But the chemistry of it is a bit weirder – but that is just about resolved at this point.
Maybe their are cell alternatives? Maybe its recycling old phones instead of making demand for new ones.
So my neighbor has a Masters in Horticulture and is looking at how she can use it since she got laid off. she would love to help make a difference in developing countries with crop out puts based on soil chemistry etc. Not sure how she could get connected.
Becca,
Please do have your neighbor contact me. It would be a great pleasure to speak with her. My email: [email protected]