Podcasts about Development economics

The Highest Exam: How the Gaokao Shapes China (Harvard UP, 2025), provides a detailed, research-driven survey of the gaokao, China's high-stakes college entrance exam. Authors Ruixue Jia and Hongbin Li--past test-takers themselves--show how the exam system shapes schooling, serves state interests, inspires individualistic attitudes, and has lately become a touchstone in US education debates.   Ruixue Jia is a professor of economics at the School of Global Policy and Strategy at UC San Diego. She also serves as co-director of the China Data Lab, executive secretary of the Association of Comparative Economic Studies (ACES) and co-chair of the China Economic Summer Institute (CESI). Hongbin Li is the James Liang Chair, Faculty Co-director of the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions, a Senior Fellow of Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), Stanford University.  Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The Highest Exam: How the Gaokao Shapes China (Harvard UP, 2025), provides a detailed, research-driven survey of the gaokao, China's high-stakes college entrance exam. Authors Ruixue Jia and Hongbin Li--past test-takers themselves--show how the exam system shapes schooling, serves state interests, inspires individualistic attitudes, and has lately become a touchstone in US education debates.   Ruixue Jia is a professor of economics at the School of Global Policy and Strategy at UC San Diego. She also serves as co-director of the China Data Lab, executive secretary of the Association of Comparative Economic Studies (ACES) and co-chair of the China Economic Summer Institute (CESI). Hongbin Li is the James Liang Chair, Faculty Co-director of the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions, a Senior Fellow of Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), Stanford University.  Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/chinese-studies

The Highest Exam: How the Gaokao Shapes China (Harvard UP, 2025), provides a detailed, research-driven survey of the gaokao, China's high-stakes college entrance exam. Authors Ruixue Jia and Hongbin Li--past test-takers themselves--show how the exam system shapes schooling, serves state interests, inspires individualistic attitudes, and has lately become a touchstone in US education debates.   Ruixue Jia is a professor of economics at the School of Global Policy and Strategy at UC San Diego. She also serves as co-director of the China Data Lab, executive secretary of the Association of Comparative Economic Studies (ACES) and co-chair of the China Economic Summer Institute (CESI). Hongbin Li is the James Liang Chair, Faculty Co-director of the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions, a Senior Fellow of Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), Stanford University.  Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/education

The Highest Exam: How the Gaokao Shapes China (Harvard UP, 2025), provides a detailed, research-driven survey of the gaokao, China's high-stakes college entrance exam. Authors Ruixue Jia and Hongbin Li--past test-takers themselves--show how the exam system shapes schooling, serves state interests, inspires individualistic attitudes, and has lately become a touchstone in US education debates.   Ruixue Jia is a professor of economics at the School of Global Policy and Strategy at UC San Diego. She also serves as co-director of the China Data Lab, executive secretary of the Association of Comparative Economic Studies (ACES) and co-chair of the China Economic Summer Institute (CESI). Hongbin Li is the James Liang Chair, Faculty Co-director of the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions, a Senior Fellow of Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), Stanford University.  Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

The Highest Exam: How the Gaokao Shapes China (Harvard UP, 2025), provides a detailed, research-driven survey of the gaokao, China's high-stakes college entrance exam. Authors Ruixue Jia and Hongbin Li--past test-takers themselves--show how the exam system shapes schooling, serves state interests, inspires individualistic attitudes, and has lately become a touchstone in US education debates.   Ruixue Jia is a professor of economics at the School of Global Policy and Strategy at UC San Diego. She also serves as co-director of the China Data Lab, executive secretary of the Association of Comparative Economic Studies (ACES) and co-chair of the China Economic Summer Institute (CESI). Hongbin Li is the James Liang Chair, Faculty Co-director of the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions, a Senior Fellow of Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), Stanford University.  Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

China's approach to digital governance has gained global influence, often evoking Orwellian 'Big Brother' comparisons. Governing Digital China (Cambridge UP, 2025) challenges this perception, arguing that China's approach is radically different in practice. This book explores the logic of popular corporatism, highlighting the bottom-up influences of China's largest platform firms and its citizens. Drawing on extensive fieldwork and nationally representative surveys, the authors track governance of social media and commercial social credit ratings during both the Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping eras. Their findings reveal how Chinese tech companies such as Tencent, Sina, Baidu, and Alibaba, have become consultants and insiders to the state, thus forming a state-company partnership. Meanwhile, citizens voluntarily produce data, incentivizing platform firms to cater to their needs and motivating resistance by platforms. Authors Daniela Stockmann and Ting Luo unveil the intricate mechanisms linking the state, platform firms, and citizens in the digital governance of authoritarian states. Daniela Stockmann is Director of the Centre for Digital Governance and Professor of Digital Governance at the Hertie School. Ting Luo is an Associate Professor in Government and Artificial Intelligence at the University of Birmingham. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

China's approach to digital governance has gained global influence, often evoking Orwellian 'Big Brother' comparisons. Governing Digital China (Cambridge UP, 2025) challenges this perception, arguing that China's approach is radically different in practice. This book explores the logic of popular corporatism, highlighting the bottom-up influences of China's largest platform firms and its citizens. Drawing on extensive fieldwork and nationally representative surveys, the authors track governance of social media and commercial social credit ratings during both the Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping eras. Their findings reveal how Chinese tech companies such as Tencent, Sina, Baidu, and Alibaba, have become consultants and insiders to the state, thus forming a state-company partnership. Meanwhile, citizens voluntarily produce data, incentivizing platform firms to cater to their needs and motivating resistance by platforms. Authors Daniela Stockmann and Ting Luo unveil the intricate mechanisms linking the state, platform firms, and citizens in the digital governance of authoritarian states. Daniela Stockmann is Director of the Centre for Digital Governance and Professor of Digital Governance at the Hertie School. Ting Luo is an Associate Professor in Government and Artificial Intelligence at the University of Birmingham. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

China's approach to digital governance has gained global influence, often evoking Orwellian 'Big Brother' comparisons. Governing Digital China (Cambridge UP, 2025) challenges this perception, arguing that China's approach is radically different in practice. This book explores the logic of popular corporatism, highlighting the bottom-up influences of China's largest platform firms and its citizens. Drawing on extensive fieldwork and nationally representative surveys, the authors track governance of social media and commercial social credit ratings during both the Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping eras. Their findings reveal how Chinese tech companies such as Tencent, Sina, Baidu, and Alibaba, have become consultants and insiders to the state, thus forming a state-company partnership. Meanwhile, citizens voluntarily produce data, incentivizing platform firms to cater to their needs and motivating resistance by platforms. Authors Daniela Stockmann and Ting Luo unveil the intricate mechanisms linking the state, platform firms, and citizens in the digital governance of authoritarian states. Daniela Stockmann is Director of the Centre for Digital Governance and Professor of Digital Governance at the Hertie School. Ting Luo is an Associate Professor in Government and Artificial Intelligence at the University of Birmingham. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/chinese-studies

China's approach to digital governance has gained global influence, often evoking Orwellian 'Big Brother' comparisons. Governing Digital China (Cambridge UP, 2025) challenges this perception, arguing that China's approach is radically different in practice. This book explores the logic of popular corporatism, highlighting the bottom-up influences of China's largest platform firms and its citizens. Drawing on extensive fieldwork and nationally representative surveys, the authors track governance of social media and commercial social credit ratings during both the Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping eras. Their findings reveal how Chinese tech companies such as Tencent, Sina, Baidu, and Alibaba, have become consultants and insiders to the state, thus forming a state-company partnership. Meanwhile, citizens voluntarily produce data, incentivizing platform firms to cater to their needs and motivating resistance by platforms. Authors Daniela Stockmann and Ting Luo unveil the intricate mechanisms linking the state, platform firms, and citizens in the digital governance of authoritarian states. Daniela Stockmann is Director of the Centre for Digital Governance and Professor of Digital Governance at the Hertie School. Ting Luo is an Associate Professor in Government and Artificial Intelligence at the University of Birmingham. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

China's approach to digital governance has gained global influence, often evoking Orwellian 'Big Brother' comparisons. Governing Digital China (Cambridge UP, 2025) challenges this perception, arguing that China's approach is radically different in practice. This book explores the logic of popular corporatism, highlighting the bottom-up influences of China's largest platform firms and its citizens. Drawing on extensive fieldwork and nationally representative surveys, the authors track governance of social media and commercial social credit ratings during both the Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping eras. Their findings reveal how Chinese tech companies such as Tencent, Sina, Baidu, and Alibaba, have become consultants and insiders to the state, thus forming a state-company partnership. Meanwhile, citizens voluntarily produce data, incentivizing platform firms to cater to their needs and motivating resistance by platforms. Authors Daniela Stockmann and Ting Luo unveil the intricate mechanisms linking the state, platform firms, and citizens in the digital governance of authoritarian states. Daniela Stockmann is Director of the Centre for Digital Governance and Professor of Digital Governance at the Hertie School. Ting Luo is an Associate Professor in Government and Artificial Intelligence at the University of Birmingham. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

China's approach to digital governance has gained global influence, often evoking Orwellian 'Big Brother' comparisons. Governing Digital China (Cambridge UP, 2025) challenges this perception, arguing that China's approach is radically different in practice. This book explores the logic of popular corporatism, highlighting the bottom-up influences of China's largest platform firms and its citizens. Drawing on extensive fieldwork and nationally representative surveys, the authors track governance of social media and commercial social credit ratings during both the Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping eras. Their findings reveal how Chinese tech companies such as Tencent, Sina, Baidu, and Alibaba, have become consultants and insiders to the state, thus forming a state-company partnership. Meanwhile, citizens voluntarily produce data, incentivizing platform firms to cater to their needs and motivating resistance by platforms. Authors Daniela Stockmann and Ting Luo unveil the intricate mechanisms linking the state, platform firms, and citizens in the digital governance of authoritarian states. Daniela Stockmann is Director of the Centre for Digital Governance and Professor of Digital Governance at the Hertie School. Ting Luo is an Associate Professor in Government and Artificial Intelligence at the University of Birmingham. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/technology

China's approach to digital governance has gained global influence, often evoking Orwellian 'Big Brother' comparisons. Governing Digital China (Cambridge UP, 2025) challenges this perception, arguing that China's approach is radically different in practice. This book explores the logic of popular corporatism, highlighting the bottom-up influences of China's largest platform firms and its citizens. Drawing on extensive fieldwork and nationally representative surveys, the authors track governance of social media and commercial social credit ratings during both the Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping eras. Their findings reveal how Chinese tech companies such as Tencent, Sina, Baidu, and Alibaba, have become consultants and insiders to the state, thus forming a state-company partnership. Meanwhile, citizens voluntarily produce data, incentivizing platform firms to cater to their needs and motivating resistance by platforms. Authors Daniela Stockmann and Ting Luo unveil the intricate mechanisms linking the state, platform firms, and citizens in the digital governance of authoritarian states. Daniela Stockmann is Director of the Centre for Digital Governance and Professor of Digital Governance at the Hertie School. Ting Luo is an Associate Professor in Government and Artificial Intelligence at the University of Birmingham. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics.

China's approach to digital governance has gained global influence, often evoking Orwellian 'Big Brother' comparisons. Governing Digital China (Cambridge UP, 2025) challenges this perception, arguing that China's approach is radically different in practice. This book explores the logic of popular corporatism, highlighting the bottom-up influences of China's largest platform firms and its citizens. Drawing on extensive fieldwork and nationally representative surveys, the authors track governance of social media and commercial social credit ratings during both the Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping eras. Their findings reveal how Chinese tech companies such as Tencent, Sina, Baidu, and Alibaba, have become consultants and insiders to the state, thus forming a state-company partnership. Meanwhile, citizens voluntarily produce data, incentivizing platform firms to cater to their needs and motivating resistance by platforms. Authors Daniela Stockmann and Ting Luo unveil the intricate mechanisms linking the state, platform firms, and citizens in the digital governance of authoritarian states. Daniela Stockmann is Director of the Centre for Digital Governance and Professor of Digital Governance at the Hertie School. Ting Luo is an Associate Professor in Government and Artificial Intelligence at the University of Birmingham. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an associate professor of economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

In her new book, Politicizing Business: How Firms Are Made to Serve the Party-State in China (Cambridge, 2025), Ning Leng shows how Chinese officials systematically treat formally private firms as political instruments, extracting services that advance careers and maintain social control—often at the expense of business interests, economic efficiency and sustainable development. Ning Leng is an Assistant Professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco and is the Director of USF's Master's Program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In her new book, Politicizing Business: How Firms Are Made to Serve the Party-State in China (Cambridge, 2025), Ning Leng shows how Chinese officials systematically treat formally private firms as political instruments, extracting services that advance careers and maintain social control—often at the expense of business interests, economic efficiency and sustainable development. Ning Leng is an Assistant Professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco and is the Director of USF's Master's Program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

In her new book, Politicizing Business: How Firms Are Made to Serve the Party-State in China (Cambridge, 2025), Ning Leng shows how Chinese officials systematically treat formally private firms as political instruments, extracting services that advance careers and maintain social control—often at the expense of business interests, economic efficiency and sustainable development. Ning Leng is an Assistant Professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco and is the Director of USF's Master's Program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/chinese-studies

In her new book, Politicizing Business: How Firms Are Made to Serve the Party-State in China (Cambridge, 2025), Ning Leng shows how Chinese officials systematically treat formally private firms as political instruments, extracting services that advance careers and maintain social control—often at the expense of business interests, economic efficiency and sustainable development. Ning Leng is an Assistant Professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco and is the Director of USF's Master's Program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

In her new book, Politicizing Business: How Firms Are Made to Serve the Party-State in China (Cambridge, 2025), Ning Leng shows how Chinese officials systematically treat formally private firms as political instruments, extracting services that advance careers and maintain social control—often at the expense of business interests, economic efficiency and sustainable development. Ning Leng is an Assistant Professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco and is the Director of USF's Master's Program in International and Development Economics. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

In her new book, Politicizing Business: How Firms Are Made to Serve the Party-State in China (Cambridge, 2025), Ning Leng shows how Chinese officials systematically treat formally private firms as political instruments, extracting services that advance careers and maintain social control—often at the expense of business interests, economic efficiency and sustainable development. Ning Leng is an Assistant Professor at the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco and is the Director of USF's Master's Program in International and Development Economics.

In this week's Ohio Ag Net podcast, we recap the incredible career of Dale Minyo. Dale will be retiring at the end of the year, and he shares some of his memorable moments with Ty Higgins, including an interview at a county fair that will forever be etched in his mind. Ty also talks with Dr. Leah Dorman to get the details on the newly created Protect OHIO initiative, which will deliver meaningful, measurable impact across our state by educating more veterinarians with a specific focus on enrolling more students from Ohio's rural communities, mentoring large animal and rural veterinarians, and expanding risk assessment and surveillance programs to protect Ohio's agricultural economy. Then, Joel Penhorwood visits with Dr. Margaret Jodlowski, Assistant Professor in the Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics at Ohio State's College of Food, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences to get her outlook for farm labor in 2026 and beyond that was shared at Ohio State's recent Ag Policy Outlook Conference.

Originating in the Nineteenth Century, the European idea of development was shaped around the premise that the West possessed progressive characteristics that the East lacked. As a result of this perspective, many alternative development discourses originating in the East were often overlooked and forgotten. Indian Economics is but one example. By recovering thought from the margins, Relocating Development Economics: The First Generation of Modern Indian Economists (Cambridge UP, 2024) exposes useful new ways of viewing development. It looks at how an Indian tradition in economic thought emerged from a group of Indian economists in the late Nineteenth Century who questioned dominant European economic ideas on development and agricultural economics. This book shows how the first generation of modern Indian economists pushed at the boundaries of existing theories to produce reformulations that better fit their subcontinent and opens up discursive space to find new ways of thinking about regress, progress, and development. Soumyadeep Guha is a fourth-year PhD student in the History Department at Binghamton University, New York. He is interested in historical research focusing on themes such as Agrarian/Environmental History, History of Science and Tech, Global History, and their intersections. His prospective dissertation questions are on the pre-history of the ‘Green Revolution' in Eastern India. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Originating in the Nineteenth Century, the European idea of development was shaped around the premise that the West possessed progressive characteristics that the East lacked. As a result of this perspective, many alternative development discourses originating in the East were often overlooked and forgotten. Indian Economics is but one example. By recovering thought from the margins, Relocating Development Economics: The First Generation of Modern Indian Economists (Cambridge UP, 2024) exposes useful new ways of viewing development. It looks at how an Indian tradition in economic thought emerged from a group of Indian economists in the late Nineteenth Century who questioned dominant European economic ideas on development and agricultural economics. This book shows how the first generation of modern Indian economists pushed at the boundaries of existing theories to produce reformulations that better fit their subcontinent and opens up discursive space to find new ways of thinking about regress, progress, and development. Soumyadeep Guha is a fourth-year PhD student in the History Department at Binghamton University, New York. He is interested in historical research focusing on themes such as Agrarian/Environmental History, History of Science and Tech, Global History, and their intersections. His prospective dissertation questions are on the pre-history of the ‘Green Revolution' in Eastern India. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Originating in the Nineteenth Century, the European idea of development was shaped around the premise that the West possessed progressive characteristics that the East lacked. As a result of this perspective, many alternative development discourses originating in the East were often overlooked and forgotten. Indian Economics is but one example. By recovering thought from the margins, Relocating Development Economics: The First Generation of Modern Indian Economists (Cambridge UP, 2024) exposes useful new ways of viewing development. It looks at how an Indian tradition in economic thought emerged from a group of Indian economists in the late Nineteenth Century who questioned dominant European economic ideas on development and agricultural economics. This book shows how the first generation of modern Indian economists pushed at the boundaries of existing theories to produce reformulations that better fit their subcontinent and opens up discursive space to find new ways of thinking about regress, progress, and development. Soumyadeep Guha is a fourth-year PhD student in the History Department at Binghamton University, New York. He is interested in historical research focusing on themes such as Agrarian/Environmental History, History of Science and Tech, Global History, and their intersections. His prospective dissertation questions are on the pre-history of the ‘Green Revolution' in Eastern India. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

Originating in the Nineteenth Century, the European idea of development was shaped around the premise that the West possessed progressive characteristics that the East lacked. As a result of this perspective, many alternative development discourses originating in the East were often overlooked and forgotten. Indian Economics is but one example. By recovering thought from the margins, Relocating Development Economics: The First Generation of Modern Indian Economists (Cambridge UP, 2024) exposes useful new ways of viewing development. It looks at how an Indian tradition in economic thought emerged from a group of Indian economists in the late Nineteenth Century who questioned dominant European economic ideas on development and agricultural economics. This book shows how the first generation of modern Indian economists pushed at the boundaries of existing theories to produce reformulations that better fit their subcontinent and opens up discursive space to find new ways of thinking about regress, progress, and development. Soumyadeep Guha is a fourth-year PhD student in the History Department at Binghamton University, New York. He is interested in historical research focusing on themes such as Agrarian/Environmental History, History of Science and Tech, Global History, and their intersections. His prospective dissertation questions are on the pre-history of the ‘Green Revolution' in Eastern India. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Originating in the Nineteenth Century, the European idea of development was shaped around the premise that the West possessed progressive characteristics that the East lacked. As a result of this perspective, many alternative development discourses originating in the East were often overlooked and forgotten. Indian Economics is but one example. By recovering thought from the margins, Relocating Development Economics: The First Generation of Modern Indian Economists (Cambridge UP, 2024) exposes useful new ways of viewing development. It looks at how an Indian tradition in economic thought emerged from a group of Indian economists in the late Nineteenth Century who questioned dominant European economic ideas on development and agricultural economics. This book shows how the first generation of modern Indian economists pushed at the boundaries of existing theories to produce reformulations that better fit their subcontinent and opens up discursive space to find new ways of thinking about regress, progress, and development. Soumyadeep Guha is a fourth-year PhD student in the History Department at Binghamton University, New York. He is interested in historical research focusing on themes such as Agrarian/Environmental History, History of Science and Tech, Global History, and their intersections. His prospective dissertation questions are on the pre-history of the ‘Green Revolution' in Eastern India.

In this episode, we explore how game theory and network effects intersect to inform optimal incentive structures in organizations. Pau Milán walks us through his recent research, co-authored with Nicolás Oviedo-Davila and Marc Claveria, which uses a novel game-theoretic model to show how the productivity of one employee can amplify the output of others in their network—and how firms can leverage this to design smarter compensation schemes. Drawing on real-world examples and his theoretical work, Pau offers practical insights for employers and economists alike.   Pau Milán is an Associate Professor of Economics at Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB) and an Affiliated Professor at the Barcelona School of Economics (BSE). His research interests include Social and Economic Networks, Information Economics, Development Economics, Organisations, and Applied Game Theory. You can find the working paper "Incentive Contracts and Peer Effects in the Workplace" here.

On this episode of the Ohio Farm Bureau Podcast, we talk with Nationwide's Commercial Agribusiness team and the Hummel Group about how they support today's farms and agribusinesses. We also chat with Dr. Ian Sheldon, professor and Andersons chair of agricultural marketing, trade and policy at Ohio State's Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics about the 2025 Agricultural Outlook and Policy Conference. 

Alex Imas is the Roger L. and Rachel M. Goetz Professor of Behavioral Science, Economics and Applied AI and a Vasilou Faculty Scholar at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, where he has taught Negotiations and Behavioral Economics. He is a Faculty Affiliate of the Center for Applied AI and the Human Capital & Economic Opportunity, an NBER Faculty Research Associate, and a CESifo Research Network Fellow. He is also an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex studies behavioral economics with a focus on how people understand and mentally represent the choices they are facing. His research explores topics related to how people learn and make choices in settings with risk and uncertainty. He also studies the economics of artificial intelligence and discrimination. Alex's work utilizes a variety of methods, including controlled laboratory experiments, field experiments, analysis of observational data and theoretical modeling. Alex Imas is the recipient of the 2023 Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship, the Review of Financial Studies Rising Scholar Award, the New Investigator Award from the Behavioral Science and Policy Association, the Hillel Einhorn New Investigator Award from the Society of Judgment and Decision Making, the Distinguished CESifo Affiliate Award, and the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship. He is the co-author, with Richard Thaler, of The Winner's Curse: Behavioral Economics Anomalies, Then and Now (Simon and Schuster, 2025). He is an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex was born in Bender, Moldova. Previously, he was the William S. Dietrich II Assistant Professor of Behavioral Economics at Carnegie Mellon University, where he taught Behavioral Economics and Human Judgment and Decision Making. He did his PhD in economics at the University of California, San Diego and earned a BA from Northwestern University. Prior to graduate school, Imas helped found a startup and co-authored several patents as part of its intellectual property strategy. Teaching materials for The Winner's Curse can be found here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's Program in International and Development Economics at the University of San Francisco. He is also a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center and an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. He created the unique Master's of Science in Applied Economics at the University of San Francisco, which teaches the conceptual frameworks and practical data analytics skills needed to succeed in the digital economy. Guest interviewer Robizon Khubulashvili is an Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco. His research is at the intersection of theoretical, behavioral, and experimental microeconomics. A common question in his research is, how can we use a user's revealed preferences to improve the performance of online platforms? Robizon has studied this question in two settings: when monetary incentives are missing (an online gaming platform) and when monetary incentives are present (an online gambling platform). His work suggests that heterogeneity among users is an essential consideration in designing better online platforms; that is, a policy benefiting one type of user might harm the other. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Alex Imas is the Roger L. and Rachel M. Goetz Professor of Behavioral Science, Economics and Applied AI and a Vasilou Faculty Scholar at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, where he has taught Negotiations and Behavioral Economics. He is a Faculty Affiliate of the Center for Applied AI and the Human Capital & Economic Opportunity, an NBER Faculty Research Associate, and a CESifo Research Network Fellow. He is also an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex studies behavioral economics with a focus on how people understand and mentally represent the choices they are facing. His research explores topics related to how people learn and make choices in settings with risk and uncertainty. He also studies the economics of artificial intelligence and discrimination. Alex's work utilizes a variety of methods, including controlled laboratory experiments, field experiments, analysis of observational data and theoretical modeling. Alex Imas is the recipient of the 2023 Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship, the Review of Financial Studies Rising Scholar Award, the New Investigator Award from the Behavioral Science and Policy Association, the Hillel Einhorn New Investigator Award from the Society of Judgment and Decision Making, the Distinguished CESifo Affiliate Award, and the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship. He is the co-author, with Richard Thaler, of The Winner's Curse: Behavioral Economics Anomalies, Then and Now (Simon and Schuster, 2025). He is an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex was born in Bender, Moldova. Previously, he was the William S. Dietrich II Assistant Professor of Behavioral Economics at Carnegie Mellon University, where he taught Behavioral Economics and Human Judgment and Decision Making. He did his PhD in economics at the University of California, San Diego and earned a BA from Northwestern University. Prior to graduate school, Imas helped found a startup and co-authored several patents as part of its intellectual property strategy. Teaching materials for The Winner's Curse can be found here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's Program in International and Development Economics at the University of San Francisco. He is also a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center and an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. He created the unique Master's of Science in Applied Economics at the University of San Francisco, which teaches the conceptual frameworks and practical data analytics skills needed to succeed in the digital economy. Guest interviewer Robizon Khubulashvili is an Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco. His research is at the intersection of theoretical, behavioral, and experimental microeconomics. A common question in his research is, how can we use a user's revealed preferences to improve the performance of online platforms? Robizon has studied this question in two settings: when monetary incentives are missing (an online gaming platform) and when monetary incentives are present (an online gambling platform). His work suggests that heterogeneity among users is an essential consideration in designing better online platforms; that is, a policy benefiting one type of user might harm the other. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychology

Alex Imas is the Roger L. and Rachel M. Goetz Professor of Behavioral Science, Economics and Applied AI and a Vasilou Faculty Scholar at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, where he has taught Negotiations and Behavioral Economics. He is a Faculty Affiliate of the Center for Applied AI and the Human Capital & Economic Opportunity, an NBER Faculty Research Associate, and a CESifo Research Network Fellow. He is also an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex studies behavioral economics with a focus on how people understand and mentally represent the choices they are facing. His research explores topics related to how people learn and make choices in settings with risk and uncertainty. He also studies the economics of artificial intelligence and discrimination. Alex's work utilizes a variety of methods, including controlled laboratory experiments, field experiments, analysis of observational data and theoretical modeling. Alex Imas is the recipient of the 2023 Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship, the Review of Financial Studies Rising Scholar Award, the New Investigator Award from the Behavioral Science and Policy Association, the Hillel Einhorn New Investigator Award from the Society of Judgment and Decision Making, the Distinguished CESifo Affiliate Award, and the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship. He is the co-author, with Richard Thaler, of The Winner's Curse: Behavioral Economics Anomalies, Then and Now (Simon and Schuster, 2025). He is an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex was born in Bender, Moldova. Previously, he was the William S. Dietrich II Assistant Professor of Behavioral Economics at Carnegie Mellon University, where he taught Behavioral Economics and Human Judgment and Decision Making. He did his PhD in economics at the University of California, San Diego and earned a BA from Northwestern University. Prior to graduate school, Imas helped found a startup and co-authored several patents as part of its intellectual property strategy. Teaching materials for The Winner's Curse can be found here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's Program in International and Development Economics at the University of San Francisco. He is also a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center and an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. He created the unique Master's of Science in Applied Economics at the University of San Francisco, which teaches the conceptual frameworks and practical data analytics skills needed to succeed in the digital economy. Guest interviewer Robizon Khubulashvili is an Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco. His research is at the intersection of theoretical, behavioral, and experimental microeconomics. A common question in his research is, how can we use a user's revealed preferences to improve the performance of online platforms? Robizon has studied this question in two settings: when monetary incentives are missing (an online gaming platform) and when monetary incentives are present (an online gambling platform). His work suggests that heterogeneity among users is an essential consideration in designing better online platforms; that is, a policy benefiting one type of user might harm the other. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

Alex Imas is the Roger L. and Rachel M. Goetz Professor of Behavioral Science, Economics and Applied AI and a Vasilou Faculty Scholar at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, where he has taught Negotiations and Behavioral Economics. He is a Faculty Affiliate of the Center for Applied AI and the Human Capital & Economic Opportunity, an NBER Faculty Research Associate, and a CESifo Research Network Fellow. He is also an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex studies behavioral economics with a focus on how people understand and mentally represent the choices they are facing. His research explores topics related to how people learn and make choices in settings with risk and uncertainty. He also studies the economics of artificial intelligence and discrimination. Alex's work utilizes a variety of methods, including controlled laboratory experiments, field experiments, analysis of observational data and theoretical modeling. Alex Imas is the recipient of the 2023 Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship, the Review of Financial Studies Rising Scholar Award, the New Investigator Award from the Behavioral Science and Policy Association, the Hillel Einhorn New Investigator Award from the Society of Judgment and Decision Making, the Distinguished CESifo Affiliate Award, and the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship. He is the co-author, with Richard Thaler, of The Winner's Curse: Behavioral Economics Anomalies, Then and Now (Simon and Schuster, 2025). He is an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex was born in Bender, Moldova. Previously, he was the William S. Dietrich II Assistant Professor of Behavioral Economics at Carnegie Mellon University, where he taught Behavioral Economics and Human Judgment and Decision Making. He did his PhD in economics at the University of California, San Diego and earned a BA from Northwestern University. Prior to graduate school, Imas helped found a startup and co-authored several patents as part of its intellectual property strategy. Teaching materials for The Winner's Curse can be found here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's Program in International and Development Economics at the University of San Francisco. He is also a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center and an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. He created the unique Master's of Science in Applied Economics at the University of San Francisco, which teaches the conceptual frameworks and practical data analytics skills needed to succeed in the digital economy. Guest interviewer Robizon Khubulashvili is an Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco. His research is at the intersection of theoretical, behavioral, and experimental microeconomics. A common question in his research is, how can we use a user's revealed preferences to improve the performance of online platforms? Robizon has studied this question in two settings: when monetary incentives are missing (an online gaming platform) and when monetary incentives are present (an online gambling platform). His work suggests that heterogeneity among users is an essential consideration in designing better online platforms; that is, a policy benefiting one type of user might harm the other. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alex Imas is the Roger L. and Rachel M. Goetz Professor of Behavioral Science, Economics and Applied AI and a Vasilou Faculty Scholar at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, where he has taught Negotiations and Behavioral Economics. He is a Faculty Affiliate of the Center for Applied AI and the Human Capital & Economic Opportunity, an NBER Faculty Research Associate, and a CESifo Research Network Fellow. He is also an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex studies behavioral economics with a focus on how people understand and mentally represent the choices they are facing. His research explores topics related to how people learn and make choices in settings with risk and uncertainty. He also studies the economics of artificial intelligence and discrimination. Alex's work utilizes a variety of methods, including controlled laboratory experiments, field experiments, analysis of observational data and theoretical modeling. Alex Imas is the recipient of the 2023 Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship, the Review of Financial Studies Rising Scholar Award, the New Investigator Award from the Behavioral Science and Policy Association, the Hillel Einhorn New Investigator Award from the Society of Judgment and Decision Making, the Distinguished CESifo Affiliate Award, and the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship. He is the co-author, with Richard Thaler, of The Winner's Curse: Behavioral Economics Anomalies, Then and Now (Simon and Schuster, 2025). He is an Associate Editor at the Journal of the European Economic Association and on the editorial board of Psychological Science. Alex was born in Bender, Moldova. Previously, he was the William S. Dietrich II Assistant Professor of Behavioral Economics at Carnegie Mellon University, where he taught Behavioral Economics and Human Judgment and Decision Making. He did his PhD in economics at the University of California, San Diego and earned a BA from Northwestern University. Prior to graduate school, Imas helped found a startup and co-authored several patents as part of its intellectual property strategy. Teaching materials for The Winner's Curse can be found here. Interviewer Peter Lorentzen is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco, where he leads the Master's Program in International and Development Economics at the University of San Francisco. He is also a nonresident scholar at the UCSD 21st Century China Center and an alumnus of the Public Intellectuals Program of the National Committee on US-China Relations. His research focuses on the economics of information, incentives, and institutions, primarily as applied to the development and governance of China. He created the unique Master's of Science in Applied Economics at the University of San Francisco, which teaches the conceptual frameworks and practical data analytics skills needed to succeed in the digital economy. Guest interviewer Robizon Khubulashvili is an Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of San Francisco. His research is at the intersection of theoretical, behavioral, and experimental microeconomics. A common question in his research is, how can we use a user's revealed preferences to improve the performance of online platforms? Robizon has studied this question in two settings: when monetary incentives are missing (an online gaming platform) and when monetary incentives are present (an online gambling platform). His work suggests that heterogeneity among users is an essential consideration in designing better online platforms; that is, a policy benefiting one type of user might harm the other. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/finance

Martín A. Rossi is Professor of Economics and Vice Rector at San Andrés University, with a PhD from Oxford. His work has been published in in leading academic journals such as Quarterly Journal of Economics, Review of Economic Studies, American Economic Review: Insights, Economic Journal, Review of Economics and Statistics, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, Journal of Public Economics, and Journal of Development Economics. Beyond academia, Martín served as Secretary of Deregulation in Argentina's Ministry of Deregulation and State Transformation under President Javier Milei, contributing to efforts to reduce bureaucracy and promote economic freedom. A competitive tennis player in his youth, he brings personal insights from the sport to discussions on discipline and motivation. As a father of two daughters, Martín balances his high-profile career with family life, offering grounded perspectives on raising resilient children in a challenging economic landscape. As an advisor to governments in Latin America and Africa, as well as international organizations like the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, and UNICEF, Martín contributes to evidence-based policies on education, health, and youth development, emphasizing incentives, family involvement, and public interventions for positive outcomes.ParentShift course 30% OFF with the code "TRIBE". Link below: ParentShift (English): https://www.hernanchousa.com/courses/parentshift?ref=c23daa Entrena Tu Legado (Spanish): https://www.hernanchousa.com/courses/entrenatulegado?ref=c23daaTake a look at Martin's work on his website  https://sites.google.com/a/udesa.edu.ar/mrossi/home?authuser=0You can explore more of Hernan's work on his website, https://www.hernanchousa.com/Music Production by Sebastian Klauer

Help me welcome back Marcel Gautreau who will be discussing his work on the economic factors that contributed to Syria's failure in its attempt to be a "developing nation"...it's an insightful question and he has incisive answers! Marcel Dumas Gautreau is an Economics PhD Graduate from George Mason University. His fields are Austrian Economics, Public Choice Economics, and Development Economics. His research primarily revolves around authoritarian regimes, particularly "developmental states" like Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan. Find Marcel: Website: ⁠⁠https://mgautreau.com/⁠⁠ X: ⁠⁠https://x.com/anarchyinblack/⁠⁠ Substack: ⁠⁠https://mgautreau.substack.com/⁠⁠B Book Club: ⁠⁠https://discord.gg/3AwBkQrCuC⁠⁠ Exclusive Content and Ways to Support: Support me on Substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes and exclusive content! True Hemp Science: ⁠⁠https://truehempscience.com/⁠⁠ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... Website: ⁠⁠https://monicaperezshow.com/⁠⁠ Substack: ⁠⁠https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow⁠⁠ Rumble: ⁠⁠https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow⁠⁠ Youtube: ⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez⁠⁠ Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

China has wrapped up its National Day and Mid-Autumn Festival holidays with impressive numbers. During the eight-day holiday break, 888 million trips were made, marking a 16% increase compared to the previous year. Domestic tourism revenue reached over 800 billion yuan, approximately $113 billion, a 15% year-on-year growth. What do these figures reveal about China's booming holiday economy? And how are technology, culture, and policy working together to drive tourism and consumer spending? The sit-in host Xu Yawen is joined by John Gong, Professor at the University of International Business and Economics; Subramania Bhatt, Founder and CEO of China Trading Desk (CTD); and Dai Li, Associate Professor in Development Economics at Hunan University.

Help me welcome back Marcel Gautreau who will be discussing his work on the economic factors that contributed to Syria's failure in its attempt to be a "developing nation"...it's an insightful question and he has incisive answers! Marcel Dumas Gautreau is an Economics PhD Graduate from George Mason University. His fields are Austrian Economics, Public Choice Economics, and Development Economics. His research primarily revolves around authoritarian regimes, particularly "developmental states" like Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan. Find Marcel: Website: ⁠https://mgautreau.com/⁠ X: ⁠https://x.com/anarchyinblack/⁠ Substack: ⁠https://mgautreau.substack.com/⁠B Book Club: ⁠https://discord.gg/3AwBkQrCuC⁠ Exclusive Content and Ways to Support: Support me on Substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes and exclusive content! True Hemp Science: ⁠https://truehempscience.com/⁠ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... Website: ⁠https://monicaperezshow.com/⁠ Substack: ⁠https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow⁠ Rumble: ⁠https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow⁠ Youtube: ⁠https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez⁠ Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join myself and the Mises Institute's own, Marcel Gautreau, for a most enlightening conversation on Murray Rothbard, Leo Strauss and how their ideas influence (or don't) the current pillars of power. Marcel Dumas Gautreau is an Economics PhD Graduate from George Mason University. His fields are Austrian Economics, Public Choice Economics, and Development Economics. His research primarily revolves around authoritarian regimes, particularly "developmental states" like Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan. Find Marcel: Website: ⁠https://mgautreau.com/⁠ X: ⁠https://x.com/anarchyinblack/⁠ Substack: ⁠https://mgautreau.substack.com/⁠B Book Club: ⁠https://discord.gg/3AwBkQrCuC⁠ Books Mentioned:  The Mystery of Banking, by Murray Rothbard (Right Wing Reading Rainbow Review: ⁠https://mgautreau.substack.com/p/right-wing-reading-rainbow-ii-the⁠) Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War, by Pat Buchanan (RWRR: ⁠https://mgautreau.substack.com/p/right-wing-reading-rainbow-iii-churchill⁠) Reclaiming the American Right, by Justin Raimondo (RWRR: ⁠https://mgautreau.substack.com/p/right-wing-reading-rainbow-v-reclaiming⁠) The Ten Thousand Year Explosion, by Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending (RWRR: ⁠https://mgautreau.substack.com/p/right-wing-reading-rainbow-viii-the⁠) Blacklisted by History, by M. Stnaton EvansThe Radio Right, by Paul Matzko Poisoner in Chief, by Stephen KinzerRise Kill First, by Ronen Bergman Cronyism, by Patrick Newman The Great Napoleon for Children, by J. de Marthold Videos Mentioned: Joe McCarthy: Martyred by Marxism | Razorfist: ⁠https://youtu.be/BgUVL5v1aAc⁠ A Rothbardian Analysis of the Constitutional Convention | Patrick Newman: ⁠https://youtu.be/ap3A8Wo9mNQ⁠ Exclusive Content and Ways to Support: Support me on Substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes and exclusive content! True Hemp Science: ⁠https://truehempscience.com/⁠ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... Website: ⁠https://monicaperezshow.com/⁠ Substack: ⁠https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow⁠ Rumble: ⁠https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow⁠ Youtube: ⁠https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez⁠ Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join myself and the Mises Institute's own, Marcel Gautreau, for a most enlightening conversation on Murray Rothbard, Leo Strauss and how their ideas influence (or don't) the current pillars of power. Marcel Dumas Gautreau is an Economics PhD Graduate from George Mason University. His fields are Austrian Economics, Public Choice Economics, and Development Economics. His research primarily revolves around authoritarian regimes, particularly "developmental states" like Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan. Find Marcel: Website: https://mgautreau.com/ X: https://x.com/anarchyinblack/ Substack: https://mgautreau.substack.com/B Book Club: https://discord.gg/3AwBkQrCuC Books Mentioned:  The Mystery of Banking, by Murray Rothbard (Right Wing Reading Rainbow Review: https://mgautreau.substack.com/p/right-wing-reading-rainbow-ii-the) Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War, by Pat Buchanan (RWRR: https://mgautreau.substack.com/p/right-wing-reading-rainbow-iii-churchill) Reclaiming the American Right, by Justin Raimondo (RWRR: https://mgautreau.substack.com/p/right-wing-reading-rainbow-v-reclaiming) The Ten Thousand Year Explosion, by Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending (RWRR: https://mgautreau.substack.com/p/right-wing-reading-rainbow-viii-the) Blacklisted by History, by M. Stnaton EvansThe Radio Right, by Paul Matzko Poisoner in Chief, by Stephen KinzerRise Kill First, by Ronen Bergman Cronyism, by Patrick Newman The Great Napoleon for Children, by J. de Marthold Videos Mentioned: Joe McCarthy: Martyred by Marxism | Razorfist: https://youtu.be/BgUVL5v1aAc A Rothbardian Analysis of the Constitutional Convention | Patrick Newman: https://youtu.be/ap3A8Wo9mNQ Exclusive Content and Ways to Support: Support me on Substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes and exclusive content! True Hemp Science: https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... Website: https://monicaperezshow.com/ Substack: https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

https://a16z.com/the-techno-optimist-manifesto/ " Techno-optimism is the belief that rapid technological progress is the main driver of human prosperity and should be pursued as a moral imperative. It argues that: Growth = Good: Innovation creates abundance, longer lives, and better living standards. Barriers = Bad: Regulation, caution, and pessimism slow down progress and should be resisted. Technology as Solution: Challenges like poverty, disease, and climate change are best solved by accelerating science and technology rather than restricting them. In short: Techno-optimism sees faster innovation as the surest path to human flourishing — and treats resistance to technological progress as harmful. " Here's a structured overview of the major schools of economic thought, mapped across time, followed by an estimate of which views dominate public and policy thinking today.

A new Ag Economist's Monthly Monitor has been released and we have Professor Emeritus Carl Zulauf from OSU's Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics join us to share his perspective on the results. This week's Farmer Forum is with Luke Lauritsen of Nebraska and Nick Ehlers of Iowa. Topics include crop progress reports and the EPA announcement that relates to DEF.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

ICF has its international awards program for which it is famous.  But that does it take to become one of America's ”Most Dynamic Metro Areas?” and where are they located? Heartland Forward's Chief Reseach Officer discusses the results of the ”think and do tank's” long-awaited report and drops facts behind the reason that, despite the fact it has 39% of the national population, this vast American expanse of talent, resources and states, from North Dakota to Texas, only attracted 10% of investment - until recently.  But things are changing, as Lou learns in part 2 of his conversation with Dave Shideler. David Shideler serves as the chief research officer for Heartland Forward's research team which includes visiting senior fellows Richard Florida and Maryann Feldman. With a mission to help improve the economic performance in the heartland and change the narrative of the middle of the country, the original research efforts focus on four key pillars: innovation and entrepreneurship, human capital, health and wellness and regional competitiveness. Shideler joined Heartland Forward after more than a decade at Oklahoma State University, serving as a professor and Community and Economic Development Specialist in the Department of Agricultural Economics. In these roles, he oversaw projects in community and rural development and small business development, and published peer-reviewed research articles on the economic impacts of internet access, incentive programs, and local food production. Shideler holds a Ph.D. in Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics and an M.A. in Economics from the Ohio State University, an M.S. in Agricultural Economics from the Pennsylvania State University, and a B.S. in Community and Rural Development from Clemson University.

In the second of our two podcasts with Francis Annan of UC Berkeley on his research on mobile money first in Ghana, then beyond, Tim Phillips discusses how he worked with commercial providers, not just to set up the RCTs designed to investigate the extent and reduce financial fraud, but to ensure that the insights could be scaled up.  While contacting sceptical commercial providers can often meet with little or no response, he says, the ability to frame research in a way that makes them realise the commercial value as well as the social value can get, and keep, their attention – and lead to a long-run partnership that achieves more than working independently or through regulators. 

ICF has its international awards program for which it is famous.  But that does it take to become one of America's ”Most Dynamic Metro Areas?” and where are they located? Heartland Forward's Chief Reseach Officer discusses the results of the ”think and do tank's” long-awaited report and drops facts behind the reason that, despite the fact it has 39% of the national population, this vast American expanse of talent, resources and states, from North Dakota to Texas, only attracted 10% of investment - until recently.  But things are changing, as Lou learns. David Shideler serves as the chief research officer for Heartland Forward's research team which includes visiting senior fellows Richard Florida and Maryann Feldman. With a mission to help improve the economic performance in the heartland and change the narrative of the middle of the country, the original research efforts focus on four key pillars: innovation and entrepreneurship, human capital, health and wellness and regional competitiveness. Shideler joined Heartland Forward after more than a decade at Oklahoma State University, serving as a professor and Community and Economic Development Specialist in the Department of Agricultural Economics. In these roles, he oversaw projects in community and rural development and small business development, and published peer-reviewed research articles on the economic impacts of internet access, incentive programs, and local food production. Shideler holds a Ph.D. in Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics and an M.A. in Economics from the Ohio State University, an M.S. in Agricultural Economics from the Pennsylvania State University, and a B.S. in Community and Rural Development from Clemson University.

In this episode, host Sambhav Choudhury speaks with Ariel Zucker, Assistant Professor of Economics at UC Santa Cruz. Ariel discusses her journey from an early interest in global health disparities to becoming a development economist specializing in experimental approaches. She shares insights from her research on health interventions for diabetes patients and groundwater conservation in India, highlighting how she balances theoretical frameworks with practical field realities to create meaningful, scalable solutions.

In this episode of The Evidence Effect, host Sambhav Choudhury speaks with Shobhini Mukerji, Executive Director of J-PAL South Asia. From her transformative summer internship with education nonprofit Pratham to becoming a principal investigator on groundbreaking research, Shobhini shares her journey into development economics and experimental approaches.

Season 2 of the J-PAL Voices podcast brings together researchers reflecting on their experiences conducting impact evaluations in India. From working in diverse local contexts to engaging with government and civil society, each episode offers a window into the realities of producing policy-relevant evidence on the ground. 

Economics is seeing an upsurge in the importance of controlled, reproducible empirical studies. One area where this has had a great impact is on development economics, which studies the economies of low- and middle-income societies. Edward Miguel has been at the forefront of both the revolution in empirical methods, and in applying those techniques to alleviating poverty in sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere.Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2025/06/16/318-edward-miguel-on-the-developing-practice-of-development-economics/Support Mindscape on Patreon.Edward Miguel received his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard university. He is currently Distinguished Professor of Economics and Oxfam Professor in Environmental and Resource Economics at the University of California, Berkeley. He is also Faculty co-Director of the Center for Effective Global Action and a Faculty Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. Among his awards are the Frisch Medal of the Econometric Society, the Kenneth Arrow Prize of the International Health Economics Association, and multiple teaching awards.Web siteBerkeley web pageGoogle Scholar publicationsWikipediaSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Indermit Gill is the Chief Economist of the World Bank and Senior Vice President for Development Economics. Let's start from there, proud as we are to have hosted his keynote at this year's e-Governance Conference. Known for his pioneering research and policy influence, Gill introduced the idea of the "middle-income trap" – a concept that continues to shape how nations approach economic transformation in the digital era. Something that strongly resonated with many of the conference participants, who felt it captured the challenges and hopes facing countries transitioning through digitalisation (as they made sure to let us know). And just after his speech set the tone and the tempo for the entire event to follow, we sat down with him for a conversation about the hard realities of long-term reform and the public role in innovation. Throughout, Gill was clear: getting out of the middle-income trap isn't about copying past models, but making digital transformation serve people. And enable institutions to keep pace with ambition. Country representatives are grappling with how to turn digital transformation into genuine development. Their questions echo the message that digital tools alone are not enough. Dig in to find out, in this XL-sized episode, why meaningful change requires building the institutional capacity to integrate, govern, and innovate. 

Do you pay attention to information printed on food labels? From eye-catching designs companies use to entice you to buy a product to nutrition facts panels to the tiny dates printed on packages. There's a lot going on to be sure. For policymakers, they hope that refining date labels on food packaging will help reduce the amount of uneaten food ending up in landfills. Food Waste is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. The Food and Drug Administration and the Food Safety and Inspection Service recently asked for public input on food date labels. So, we decided to gather some experts together to talk about this important policy tool. Roni Neff is a professor in the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Senior Advisor at the School's Center for a Livable Future. Her research looks at the intersection of food waste policy, climate change, and food system resilience. Brian Roe is a professor at the Ohio State University Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Developmental Economics. His work focuses on issues including agricultural marketing, information policy, behavioral economics, and product quality. Ruiqing Miao is an associate professor of agricultural economics and rural sociology at Auburn University's College of Agriculture. His research emphasizes sustainability, innovation, and decision making. Interview Summary Brian, let's begin with you and let's make sure everyone's on the same page. Can you talk to us a little bit about what date labels are and where they are on packaging. And what is industry required to include in terms of these date labels? Yes, so date labels, we see them anytime we pick up a food package. Most packages are going to have some type of date label on them. Oddly, federal law doesn't regulate these or really require these other than the exception of infant formula, which is the only federal requirement domain out there. But in the absence of federal regulation, states have kind of done their own thing. About 40 different states require date labels on at least some food products. And about 20 states prohibit or restrict the sale or donation of food past the label date. And even though states that require date labels, manufacturers can still choose the dates. There are no real regulations on them. So, recognizing that confusion over date labels can lead to unnecessary food waste, Government and industry actors have made, you know, some efforts to try to standardize date labeling language. But nothing terribly authoritative. Now, some states have introduced bills that seek to standardize date labels, with the motivation to try to get rid of and reduce food waste. California being perhaps the most recent of these. In 2024, they passed a bill that prohibits the use of any date label other than 'Best if Used By,' the phrase that goes along with foods where the date represents kind of a quality indicator. And then the phrase 'Use By,", if that date has some implications for product safety. The bill doesn't go into effect until July of '26, so we're going to see if this is going to create a domino effect across other states, across the food manufacturing center or even bubble up and be dealt with at the federal legislation level. Now, industries tried to do things before. Back in 2017, the Food Marketing Institute and the Grocers Manufacturers Association had a standardized date labeling suggestion that some firms bought into. FDA has given out some guidance about preferring 'Best if Used By' on certain food products to indicate quality. But again, we're all kind of waiting to see if there might be a federal legislation that kind of brings these state labels into check. Thanks, Brian. And it's really important to know about the policy landscape and the fact that there hasn't been a federal policy across all foods. And it's interesting to see the efforts of, say, in California. I think this begs the question; how do consumers actually process the information of date labels? This fascinated us too. A very clever person at Ohio State that I work with, Dr. Aishwarya Badiger, led a study I was part of. We enlisted consumers to come into the Consumer Evaluation Lab that we have here on campus and evaluate samples of milk. They were presented with the label of each milk. We gave them a little glass with a nose full of the milk that they could sniff. So, they're looking at the date label, they're given the sample they could smell, and then we kind of asked them, Hey, if this were in your fridge, would you keep it or toss it? But the entire time we actually had them fitted with special glasses that precisely track their eye movements so we could understand kind of which information they were looking at while they went through the whole process of evaluating and then making their decision. Consumers overwhelmingly looked at the date itself on the package and largely ignored the phrase or the words that go along with the date. In fact, for more than half of the evaluations, the consumer's eyes never went anywhere near the phrase. This is important. And actually, we'll talk about that a little bit more with some of our other guests. So, what are the implications of date label policies? So the eye tracking research really drove home to me that dates are much more salient than phrases. Although all the policies largely deal with the phrases. Dates give you actionable information. People can look at the date on the label, look at the calendar, and man, that's something they can do something about. They can act based upon that. The phrases are a little bit more ambiguous as Roni will talk about later. I think that people have a hard time interpreting what those phrases really mean. That doesn't mean we should not try to unify those phrases, but rather this is going to be a longer-term investment in educational infrastructure that until those phrases really become salient and actionable to consumers. And then become more of a critical component of the policies. But right now, policies are generally silent on dates. And dates seem to be the real action mover. Yeah. So why don't we just get rid of all of this? What would be the implications? Yes. We did this experiment too. Same kind of setup. Had people come in, they had the jug of the milk in front of them. They had a glass of milk that they could sniff. Same thing. And we had a bunch of different milks. We had some that were only like 15 days post pasteurization. Some that went out to like 40 days past pasteurization. So, the youngest or the freshest had about three days, quote unquote, left on its date label. The 40-day old milk was like two or three weeks past the date. And we did two things. We had them evaluate the milk with the dates on the jugs, and then we had ones where we took the dates and the labels off the milk. Not surprisingly, when they did not have the dates on the milk, they were much more likely to say that they would keep the milk. Even that 40-day old milk, about half of them said, yeah, I'd drink this. I'd keep this if it were in my fridge. But it wasn't a slam dunk. So, our youngest and freshest milk had an odd flavor note. You know, sometimes as the seasons change, feed sources change for cattle, you get an odd flavor note. It's not spoilage, it's just a slightly different note. And when people have the date label, they were much more willing to give that milk a second chance and say that they would keep it. But if the date label wasn't on there, they took that odd flavor note and said, I'm going to toss this milk. So, it's really kind of a nuanced thing. And if you would take those off, I think you're going to get some consumers who are going to kind of freak out without any guidance. And they might have kind of an itchy trigger finger when it comes to throwing away that milk or other products. So, it's compelling. We've seen England, the UK, do this; take dates off of certain products. But I would probably want to see a little more example of how consumers are responding to that before I fully endorse that as kind of a policy movement forward. Brian, thank you for that. And I have got to say, I was not expecting to have a conversation about the bouquet of a glass of milk. But this is really an interesting finding, and it does help us understand some other things that we're going to talk about. Roni, I want to turn our attention to you. And I know you are someone who's been involved in understanding date labels for a while. And I really appreciate it and I've said it before, but you're the reason I got into this work. I want to understand a little bit more about what are important things to understand about the misconceptions that consumers may have about food date labels? And why does it matter for policymakers? Well, I'll start with just saying that conceptions are what we know rationally. And it's not the whole picture because as Brian was alluding to a lot of our decision making is going on in our emotions. And like I can tell my son all day long the fact that that milk is okay, he's going to toss it because he doesn't trust it. There's a lot more going on than conceptions. But I want to talk about two misconceptions. The first one is that despite what Brian just said about the fact that these date labels other than infant formula aren't federally regulated, about two in five people think that they are. We just did a national consumer survey in January 2025, and this is one of the findings. And I did that along with Emily Broad Lieb from the Harvard Food Law and Policy Project and Akif Khan also from there, and then Dana Gunders from ReFED. And in addition to this idea that they're federally regulated, I'll say that these kinds of beliefs were most common among those who were 18 to 34, parents with children under age 18, and black and Hispanic consumers. Our earlier work also found that those who think that food date labels are federally regulated are more likely to discard food based on them. All this speaks to a real challenge. And, you know, it kind of makes sense, like if you see something and you trust it, that it's from the federal government. And of course, we all trust the federal government these days. If you trust it, then you're going to respond to it. So that's an implication for food policy. And then the next thing we did also is that we tested understanding of five different food date label phrases: a date with no text, and then two of those phrases accompanied by icon images. And since none of these actually have a federally recognized meaning the correct answer for all of them in terms of the meaning is like other. But we also accepted answers that were aligned with that voluntary industry standard, just to kind of see how people were perceiving it. And, across all of these labels, only an average of 53% of people answered correctly about what these labels meant. Now, consumers were pretty good at identifying 'Best if Used By' as a quality label. But the real challenge comes in with 'Use By' which under the voluntary industry standards should be a safety label. And more people thought it was a quality label than thought it was a safety label; 44% versus 49%. And so, we need to clear up these misconceptions in support of food safety, in support of food waste prevention. But in order to do that, we need to be able to tell people clearly what the labels mean. And we can't really do that if there's no standardized meaning of what they mean. So, we really need a national standard, and that is the policy implication. Thank you for that. And I know Ruiqing and I have done some work in this space and in part learning from what you all have done. I'm interested because you mentioned the 2025 survey, but of course you also mentioned the 2016 survey. Are there any big shifts or anything that you want to tell us about changes that you see from those two different surveys? We asked a number of the same or almost identical questions in those two surveys. And since that time, we've adopted a voluntary industry standard and there's been a lot of education and communication about wasted food. And yet in our survey we actually found that things were going in the wrong direction. Consumer misunderstandings of date labels increased. Those who quote always or usually discard food based on the label: in 2016, that was 37%, and this year it was 43%. And then in terms of belief that these are federally regulated: in 2016 it was 36% and now it's 44%. We're going in the wrong direction despite all these activities, and I don't know why. I think for those who are looking for future research questions, this would be a really interesting one. This is really disturbing because all of the information that's come out about date labels. I thought people would understand this. And that this is where we would be in a different place. So, this work is really important. So, how did people's response to date labels vary by food item? Did you see any differences? Because this is something that comes up often that people may be more responsive to some food products versus others? Yeah, indeed. We asked about five different foods, and we showed a bunch of different labels for each food. And the responses did vary both based on the item and based on what label was on it. And I'll start with where caution is needed. Deli meats are one example of where we really want people to pay attention to that label. And while there's no federal standard that label's the best piece of information people has, so they should use it. And we found that only 65% would throw out the deli meat before, on, or just after the 'Use By' label. And the number of people that would respond to it reduced with other labels that were used, and older adults were most likely to disregard those labels. And they may be particularly vulnerable in terms of foodborne illness. So that's when lack of caution leads to risk. On the other hand, when caution leads to waste, we looked at raw chicken, pasteurized milk, lettuce, and breakfast cereal. And for all of those there, like the label is really only telling you about quality, and consumers should use their senses to decide, and knowledge of how that was, stored to decide whether to eat it. And so, the most common out of all five foods, including the deli, the one that they responded the strongest to was raw chicken. And that chicken can be contaminated as we know, but if you cook it, you're killing those bacteria, so it's okay. And averaging across all those different date labels, we found 54% would discard these four foods based on the date. And the piece that was most striking to me was that for breakfast cereal, 43% said they were discarded based on the date. So, we've got some education to do. Yeah. In the earlier paper I did with colleagues at Cornell, we used breakfast cereal and we were surprised to see how much people willing to throw away breakfast cereal if it were passed to date. There is confirmation and we see this happen in many other products. And we'll definitely talk about some of those product differences with Ruiqing. The last question I'd like to ask you is you found that many consumers thought they knew the meanings of the various food date labels, but they were incorrect. And in some of the work that you've done in the past, you found that many people answered incorrectly even after viewing information about the labels. So even when you educated folks or gave people information, they still made incorrect choices. Why do you think this is, and what should we do about it? And some people's responses do improve when you show them the information, but it was striking in that study that seconds after having read the definition, according to the voluntary industry standard, people were giving the wrong answer. Even though they had previously said that they thought they understood it. So, to me, this suggests that they already think they know the answer and so they're not tuning in. And this speaks to a real challenge that we're going to have when we do standardize these date labels. How are we going to reach people and capture their attention. Like, if we just change the policy, that does nothing. We've got to reach people and we've got to do it in a sophisticated and well-planned way. And I think the education should also emphasize that misunderstandings are common because that might be something that would help wake people up. But beyond that, we've got to capture their attention. So, you know, dancing clowns, whatever it is that wakes people up. I have a fear of clowns, so I'm not sure if I want that as a policy recommendation. However... For the deli meats we want you to be afraid, so it's okay. Yes, I agree. I agree. One of the things that this conversation has helped us see is that there's some real concerns around whether or not people are paying attention to the label. Or there may be paying more attention to the dates. And even when people are taught or encouraged to think about the dates, there seems to be a mismatch. And Ruiqing, I want to now turn to you because one of the things in the study that we were a part of, there's some questions about differences among people. So, in the paper that we recently published on the relationship between date labels and anticipated food waste, and people's individual orientation to risk and loss, can you tell us a little bit about what some of the key findings of that paper are? Right. So, the paper is published recently in Applied Economics Perspective Policy. It's one of the official journals of Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (AAEA). Norbert is the leading author. So, this paper built on the framework of prospect theory and is based on the data from a series of experiments we conducted in Alabama and also the state of New York. We find that consumers do adjust their anticipated food waste by date labels and by how much they tolerate risk and losses. In the experiment, we particularly measured their tolerance to risk and losses. We found that the 'Use By' date labels tend to lead to more anticipated food waste than 'Best Buy'. Maybe this echo what Roni has said. So, people may tend to link 'Use By' with quality and food safety. We also found that the consumers with low tolerance to losses and are associated with higher anticipated foot waste regardless of date labels and the products. So, we can see a heterogeneity of the responses of different consumers to date labels and food items based on their tolerance to losses and risks. Thank you for that. And I think this is a really important aspect of looking at this set of studies because we see that people are different. They respond differently. And they have different ideas about how they handle losses. This idea that it can be worse to lose a hundred dollars versus to gain a hundred dollars. Or the way we understand how we'll negatively respond versus how positively we respond. Using this economic framework of prospect theory, something that is drawn from actually the psychology literature to better understand how people react to food labels while shopping. What are some key features of this approach to explaining people's behaviors and why do you think it's a good choice? Why do you think it's important to do this? One of the key features of prospect theory is it divides the possible outcomes of a risky event into two domains. One is a gain domain and one is a loss domain. So, in terms of the food consumption, probably the most likely status quo is do not eat the food items. So, the gain domain might be gaining nutrition from the food item. The loss domain might be the loss of health if the food item is bad. So, I think this framework fits particularly well to describe the consumer's trade off in their mind when they face a food item with a date label that is maybe one day or two days past the expiration date. So, one possibility is you consume this food. If it is good, you get nutrition and if it is bad, you potentially get lost health or lose one day of work or so on. So, I think this model can capture the trade off or the decision-making procedure in a consumer's mind pretty well. And experiments data support the theoretical prediction that loss aversion may affect people's food waste decisions. Thank you for that. And I think what's one of the sort of take home messages that I've learned out of this process is this heterogeneity, the fact that people are different and may respond differently to these date labels, really does put the onus upon policymakers to think critically what date labels, if we were to use them, or if we think they have an effect, which are the right ones. And so I actually want to open up the question to all of you. In your view, what next steps make sense for date labels to help address the food waste challenges that we see in this country? Let's start with you, Brian. Ooh, yeah. So, to me a compelling issue that needs to be addressed is how do we get 'Use By' to really translate to be people to be about safety? Is it a different color? I know we don't want to mess with the phrases, but do we just call this safety date and put it in red or put a clown by it if that scares you. Something along those lines to make that stand out. And then on the relevance side, I think it might be out of policy, but perhaps, industry collaboration to really push printed dates to the end of that quality horizon. So that everybody has confidence that they're not going to get undercut by somebody else having an earlier date printed for cereals or for canned goods or something like that. To have a kind of a truce among commercial interests to say, okay, typically canned beans, has this type of 180 days or 360 days. Let's push it to the end of that acceptable horizon so that we don't have unwarranted waste happening as often. Those are two ideas that I've kind of chewed on a lot and think could be positive steps forward. But I'm fascinated to hear what others think. Thank you, Brian and I really don't like the idea of putting clowns anywhere near this. I want to go to you, Roni. All right, well first, I'll a thousand percent echo everything that Brian just said. And I'll note also in terms of the 'Use By' date, the label that was most commonly associated with food safety was 'Expires On' by consumers. But that isn't part of what has been under [policy] discussion. But anyway, in addition to echoing that, I'll just say we do need a standardized policy and it has to be accompanied by a well-designed education campaign. And this policy change, it's just a no-brainer. It's not controversial. It's fairly minimal cost. And given the high food prices and the struggles that consumers are having right now, they need every tool that they can to save money and food, and this is one of them. Great. Thank you, Roni. I'll give the last word to you, Ruiqing. Yeah. I will echo what Brian and Roni said. So, a well-designed policy and public education campaign. Particularly for the education campaign. I think regardless of if there is a policy change or not, I think it is time to do a public education campaign. Norbert, we have done the research on food waste for almost nine years, right? So, I learned a little bit about the date label's meaning. But still, I cannot change my wife's opinion. When she sees sell by yesterday for the milk, she would suggest we throw it away. But I said this is not for us, this is for sellers. But she wouldn't believe so because I cannot persuade her. But maybe an education campaign from more authoritative institutional federal government can change people's mind as a researcher or like even husband cannot change. Roni - And can I just add to that, just please. I think that the economics and psychology expertise that all of you have can really contribute to that. Because I think that's a really important point that you're making. And it's not just factual, it's emotional too. And so how do we, you know, get in there and change what people do beyond their knowledge? Bios Roni Neff is a Professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health's Department of Environmental Health & Engineering and the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, an academic center focused on food systems and public health. Her research focuses on wasted food through the lens of equity and public health. She is a co-Director of the RECIPES national food waste research network, and she recently served on the National Academies of Science and Medicine consensus panel on consumer food waste. Brian Roe is the Van Buren Professor in the Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics at Ohio State University. Roe has worked broadly in the areas of agricultural and environmental economics focusing on issues including agricultural marketing, information policy, behavioral economics and product quality. He was recently named as a fellow of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association and has previously served as an editor for the Association's flagship journal, the American Journal of Agricultural Economics. He currently leads the Ohio State Food Waste Collaborative, a collection of researchers, practitioners, and students working together to promote the reduction and redirection of food waste as an integral part of a healthy and sustainable food system, and co-leads the RECIPES Network, a National Science Foundation Sustainable Regional System's Research Network focused on increasing food system sustainability, resilience and equity by addressing the issue of food waste.  In addition to research on food waste, his other recent research includes a USDA funded project focused on local foods and school lunch programs and participation in an NSF-funded multidisciplinary team seeking to understand human-ecosystem feedbacks in the Western Lake Erie basin, including understanding how farms and agribusinesses respond to voluntary environmental programs and how Ohio residents respond to different options to manage Lake Erie water quality. Ruiqing Miao is an agricultural economist at Auburn University. Miao is interested in sustainability, innovation, and decision-making. His research focuses on the interaction between agricultural production and its environment, aiming to understand and quantify 1) agriculture's impact on land use, water use, water quality, and biodiversity, and 2) how agricultural production is affected by farmers' behaviors, public policies, agricultural innovation, technology adoption, and climate change.

The Indus Valley Annual Report, published by Blume Ventures, is an annual deep-dive into the Indian macroeconomy, the Indian consumer, and the innovation ecosystem in India. The report has become one of the most highly anticipated reports on the economy—pored over by policy wonks, economic analysts, and India watchers.The lead author of the report is Sajith Pai. Sajith is a partner at Blume Ventures, an early stage venture firm with offices in Mumbai, Bangalore, Delhi, and San Francisco. Sajith oversees consumer and India B2B investing at Blume. Prior to joining Blume, Sajith had a two-decade career in various corporate strategy roles with the Times of India Group.To talk more about this year's report, Sajith joins Milan from his office in Noida. The two discuss the origins and objectives of the Indus Valley Annual Report, India's post-pandemic recovery trajectory, and India's low (and declining) savings rate. Plus, the two discuss the trials and tribulations of India's manufacturing sector and whether India can become an artificial intelligence (AI) powerhouse.Episode notes:1. Abhishek Anand et al., “How quality control orders are crippling India's trade competitiveness,” Business Standard, March 4, 2025.2. Abhishek Anand et al., “Multiplying multi-plants: A new and consequential phenomenon,” Journal of Development Economics 174 (May 2025).3. “Sajith Pai Unpacks the 2024 Indus Valley Annual Report and the Changing Indian Consumer,” Ides of India (podcast), July 4, 2024.4. “Will India's Budget 2025 Turn the Economic Tide? (with Sukumar Ranganathan),” Grand Tamasha, February 5, 2025.