« DO COUNTRIES BOX AT, ABOVE OR BELOW THEIR WEIGHT? Contextually-fitted outcome measures to drive thinking about governance | Main | Governance, outcomes and context: What we learn from boxing »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Matt - I think that this is a very helpful next step in the process. I hadn't seen you come up with a "single indicator of governance quality".

However, to be picky ... I think where you're going with this is very promising and controlling for income levels to see whether a country boxes above its weight in a particular sector is a much much better way to begin to assess governance than the standard approach.

But, at the moment what the single indicator measures is outcomes controlled for income isn't it? That is, you've taken out one aspect of income but only one aspect. So, to say that you've controlled for context and to imply that the rest of the variation is due to "governance" is a bit strong isn't it? It leaves a lot of things in the "governance" category?

I guess I am just impatient for your next step - how are you going to explore "governance" in those countries whether the "boxing above weight?" analysis suggests you should look?

I'll do my best to be patient.



Ooops, "you've taken out one aspect of income" should read "you've taken out one aspect of context".

and "whether" in the penultimate para should be "where".

Will preview in future :-)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Most Recent Photos

  • Screen Shot 2019-10-29 at 4.14.24 PM
  • Slide1
  • Slide1
  • Slide1
  • Slide1
  • Slide1
  • Slide1
  • Slide1
  • Image
  • Culture, signaling and the transparency fad
  • Limits getting good reviews: not quite the RedSox, but...
  • Hirschman told us that implementation involves a journey