and you saw the fear of mob mentality taking over. and people were looking for the any sign they could find of society breaking down, the looters coming in, and usually blowing it out of proportion because as there are isolated incidents here it wasn't a big deal. in katrina, that attitude had major implications. you have people who survived a disaster and are trying to stay alive and are getting shot to death by the police because the police assume they are stealing something they are not. so that is a long way of saying

that it would have been nice if there had been a period of reflection and new plans were made for disaster relief going forward so when the haitian earthquake hit at an hour of no one's choosing it could have been implemented. it is never too late and i think this would be a great time to have the reflection now. >> i have a three question for you. number one is what do you think of the current president? and what do you think should have happened to the previous president that returned to haiti? and what do you know about raw earth because i have heard there is discovery of gold and raw material in haiti. and third, what do you think are

some of the current solutions they have there with the un being there and stories of abduction. >> what do i think of the current president you asked me and i will dodge that. no i will tell you a little bit. what i think should have happened when they returned -- and what i know about the raw materials under the earth in haiti and what can be done to fix haiti. okay. easy. i have been waiting for this question. let me tell you the answer is one word: plastics. i have no idea, really. a couple things first of all. this ended up being one of the arks of this book. the president at the time of the

quake ends up being quite a major character into book probably to both our surprise. the ark of the book in many ways is what happened to his political trojectory and how that led to the elections which because every in haiti has to happen at the same time occurred the same year as the earthquake a couple months later in november of 2010 and the earthquake was in january. and that resulted into the election of sweet mickey who was best known before becoming president was a carnival singer and taking off his pants. usually in america we wait until they are president to be part of that. in haiti they reversed it. i like him because his slogan is bald head.

right on. he was really interesting because he came in as a political neo fight and was a musician and was seen as a haitian wycliff. he became a candidate people liked. and it surprised people he became president. many people cry conspiracy and many people would cry that no matter what the election was. while there was -- and you can read about the election, it was a mess. there were all kind of things going on. but he had a large amount of support especially in port of

prince. and people really did seem to like him and have high hopes. so far, what i can say is i think you know the safest answer is that it is little too soon to say what the results of his presidency are going to be. my friend in the press in haiti feel a little more restricted than the they did under the previous president. it isn't anything like what occurred during dictators of the pass. but he is likable and more willing to play ball with the united states states investment plans for haiti of which i am critical of many. but i gus we will see.

what is under the ground? there is gold, and minerals in haiti. in the dominican republican, same mounts with enormous amounts of gold so it want surprise me. there are many people that believe everything that is going on in haiti is a grand game to secure mineral rights for american and canadian companies. i could not prove that at the moment. the president has been willing to sign over the mineral exploration right tos to the pa of the country. open pit mining isn't pleasant if you live around one.

i spent two years being ap's correspondent in the dominican republic and reported from an open mine that was open and closed after the price of gold went down but it is going up and it was going to be reopened and there was a huge fight on cleaning up the mine areas. rivers running red with pollutants and dead fish and people who had lost their water sources and had to walk miles or were abandoned places where their family lived for generations because the land was ruined. if that is the future of haiti, then that is not good. it is not yuusually the host

country benefits. the key to everything is rather than plastics gold i am not sure. gold has been a big deal since christopher columbia stumbled upon haiti. i don't think there is one single answer that explains everything going on. and i will let someone else propose how to fix haiti. i will leave this up to you. >> was the impact of the earthquake largely in port of prince or outside of it? >> this is a fantastic question. it is hard to write about book

even. port of prince has stood in for haiti in the imagination of people outside. it is nice way to describe the country by the capital. but it isn't where most of the population lives. it you are trying to increase tourism, which many want to do, thinking outside of port of prince is important. because the odds of it becoming a tourist destination is strong, but the odds of port of prince becoming a tourist destination is nil.

it impacted on where people should send the aid. people in other parts of the county were dealing with problems that were emergency and they were angry the aid was going focused in port of prince. >> [ [inaudible conversation] >> on the one hand the impact of the earthquake was in southern haiti. port of prince was the largest center of mortality and homelessness and other needs. but it wasn't the only place impacted or the epicenter. it was nearby but in between

that there was an area that is the beginning of the country side and the name means cross road and that is why chapter four is called the cross roads. another beautiful city in southern haiti on the other side of the mountains was hard hit. so it was ironic because there was a concern that all of the aid was being focused on port of prince and the parts of the country that were not impack -- impacted by the earthquake were forgotten -- but areas not in port of prince, but on top of the epicenter and i can say, as the resident correspondent, they sent in a big team and many journalist came in and freed a lot of us up to do things and i

was the resident guy and spoke creole and i was happy to move around and looked like i needed a break from the city i was getting sent out to other places and even places outside of the quake zone. and i can tell you there were cities that were wiped out. there were levels of destruction, even surviving the earthquake in port of prince, lagon looked like a monster came out of the ocean and smashed the entire city. many people died. many people survived the collapse of the home.

this story isn't in the book so i will share it with you. i was sitting on the back of a pickup truck three or four days after the earthquake typing out my story because i had to file because you have to file. and i was sitting there and just typing what i saw. i think i typed jerry buck film into my mac book. and a group of guys from the united states came around and we were sitting next to the hull of what had been a hospital. everything was flat and this hospital was cracked and listing. and they came through and they said are you american and i said yes, i am. and they said is the hospital open and i said literally, but

clearly not operating. and what they said to me was they came from kansas city and they had raised money and bought pharmaceuticals and bandages and driven out to the city because they heard it was in dire straights and wanted to help and asked if i had seen any ngo's they could give the medicine to. and i said no. and they said are you an ngo and i said no. and then they thanked me and walked out into the the rebel field. this was like four days after the earthquake and the situation was like this for a while. it was like people, as i said, people were overly focused on port of prince they were not helping other places and that, not to run on too long, but i

will say briefly, was a major reason the was so much confusion during the cholera outbreak nine months after the earthquake. the rest of the world was paying to the attention to the news that it was a result of the earthquake. and one of the most important things we were doing in the stories at the beginning and we ended up breaking the story and showing the link between the un peace keepers bringing the cholera bacteria to the area. it started outside of here and port of prince is here. they are two different

populations. it was hard to explain this is outside of the quake zone and very unlikely this is a direct result of the earthquake. and i can talk more about that later. yes. sure. one fast one. >> johnathan, what do you see for the future of haiti? >> i don't know. i really don't know. i can say this. haiti as a country and port of prince as a city and the other cities of the quake zone and potential quake zone because there have been quakes in northern and northwestern haiti

which are hit by floods and tropical storms and hurricanes. those places are no better prepared for disaster than they were on the 12th of january. so if there is another disaster, and a storm that is a bump in the road for other places is devastating there, that is remaining high. there is a chance, and there could be optimism, and they don't need evidence for that, i share it, as long as people are alive there is hope. as long as, you know, people still have an opportunity to make choices they can make better choices. we in developed nations who are dealing with haiti, we are linked and we are all in one way or another because we are fully

invested in the country's past and we have literal investments in the future. it is more productive on their own. we can step back and allow haitians to lead the way and that applies to all kind of countries. we can decide to allow for the possibility that we have been wrong and made mistakes and we can try to do better for the future. if those are done it is going to be a slow process. things will not turn around immediately. but ten years from now thinks could be better. if we keep going down the road we are going and keep doing what we are doing and what we did before and immediately after the earthquake and what is happening

today ten years from now things will be worse. more disaster. put there is no reason that has to happen. i care about the country. i have a lot of friend there. it is wonderful place. i really think if there is some good that can come out of it is that we can look at the mistakes from the past and chose to make

eradicating poverty around the world. >> thanks. i have been a fan of these events that you have ran and i wrote him and asked him if he would allow me to present nina. i am glad to be here. and i am the economics and book review editor.

we have being tell reported by booktv and a reporter from bearings. so we're covered in two ways. >> everything is on the record. >> whatever you say can be used against you. jeffrey sacks told us this book isn't worth reading. they went on the record last week as declaring i cannot account for nina being so much c ci synanism. she has to confess she did write about jeffrey sacks

for vanity fair. and i think she said you don't have to read the book to blurb it. he said it is a commitment to the live of jeffrey sacks and how much can be achieved by the determination. and admirers will be encouraged to read the book and may have a rude shock when they do. and it was written the book is about a set of ideas that are intriguing and there is something important in there but it isn't clear what is about. we hit page part here. and another blurb and powerful expose of hubrick and running a

muck. that is accurate. but the professor from nyu wrote the following: the most readable account of foreign aid every written it is shown that nothing about foreign aid is easy. jeffrey sachs offered a message to westerners: that they could be the saver areas who could end poverty in south africa. and realizing it is never that easy. nina is the author of a previous book called "fools rush in" not a bad title for the current book

except fool would be change today the singular. she said the book was a different experience but in a way it was similar because they reminded her of jeffrey sachs. but i want to begin by quoting from her statement about sachs and anybody who reads the book they will realize she bends over backwards to be respectful and kind to do him justice. sachs presents with a choice that is no choice. you either leave people do decide or do something about it. who can resist his plan?

after all two million people are scraping by on less than a dollar or two a day. [ applause ] >> tell us for those watching booktv who have never heard of jeffrey sachs -- who was he, how did you meet him and why did you write a book about him? >> he is best known for the 2005-2006 book called the "the end of poverty" and it is a very hopefully book. i was immediately interested in this man who i read the book. he assured the readers we can

end poverty for the millions who live lives of deprivation. i met him in 2006 not long after the book came out. and i wrote a profile of him for vanity fair where i write. and that profile really convinced me this story required more research and was something i wanted to dedicate more time to. and it became a book and what started out as a six-month magazine project turned into a six or seven year book project. >> i will wrote from easterly's review. you were at ground level and

create vivid characters in the book. and it is said you chose two villages and with skills she tells the village's story from the point of view of the local man in charge of sach's project in the village. they come alive on the page. tack about what happened there and what you saw. >> jeffrey sachs decided for those who are not familiar to start an organization. ...

it's a truly desperate place, eric, populated, sparsely by camel, nomadic camel herders. it really i would say has no reason for being. there is no economy to speak of with the exception of gunrunning and cattle raiding and there is

an extraordinary amount of violence as you can imagine as a result of the civil war in somalia. guns pour across the porous border. there is no water and resources are very scarce. it's almost impossible to grow anything. when the rainy season does finally, and it comes with greater increasing -- increase it tends to drain and everything is washed away. one can sometimes go for years where there is no rain at all in everyone's camels died. there is no opportunity and there is no hope. it was in this village that jeffrey sachs proposed to demonstrate the poverty could be ended and in fact poverty could be ended and a place as desperate as their arguably poverty could be eliminated just about anywhere and if he could prove the experiment so-called worked in a place of such extreme misery, then we should

be able to make it work almost anywhere. >> you mentioned here too. talk a little bit more as well as europe. >> what was interesting about jeffrey sachs' ideas from the beginning as he recognized that he had to show that his experiments are his ideas branding poverty could work in various places. so he chose purposely villages that were in a variety of different kinds of agricultural environments. so by sharp contrast to this arid camel herding community on the border of somalia and kenya the other village i spent a great deal of time and was in the southwestern corner of uganda. it is hilly and the main crop is bananas. it's quite green as long as the soil isn't least of any new bird bird -- nutrients. they are christians as the post

to muslims in the somali communities. they are subtle farmers. i spent my time focusing on two communities that have absolutely nothing in common except for the intervention of jeffrey sachs and the millennium villages project. >> all right, oh yes. as another indication of nina munk's dedication she has -- we didn't always see eye-to-eye and he never asked for my manuscripts nor did he try to censor me. as nina points out all he did was try to deny her access to information whenever the information was unfortunate for his project rio as she writes in

her book herself, itself, that when the thing, that things are getting a little bit tough, she for internal purposes found the millennium villages commissioned to most -- postmortem reports to discover why so few farmers had upheld their side of the mutual accountability. when i asked "the new yorker" for copies of airports my request was dismissed. the reports were not rigorous. i was informed. the millennium had nothing to gain. tell us a vet about what that was in the mutual accountability bargain and what frustration she did experience after a while when these projects were continuing. >> i think jeffrey sachs is a

character who too many of us is recognizable. he is a monomaniacal, very brilliant man who set out to try to accomplish something enormous and really staked his career on the claim that he could end poverty and he could do it in our lifetime. and very graciously i think he allowed me to shadow him in a way that is terribly intrusive. anyone of you who have had a journalist like me cover you know that it's intrusive and it's not fun. i asked a lot of questions. i stick rhinos in everywhere and i demand to see every document in when things were going where, where -- well that was marvelous all-around. jeff sachs was vocal and i was hopeful that the outcome would be a positive one. who doesn't want properties to be ended and yet as the time went by and it's it became clear from the work that i was doing in the villages from the ground level that the hurdles forever

greater. i compared it to some people have asked me about the game where you keep trying to knock down the things that pop up. whack-a-mole, thank you, thank you. that's exactly what it is and this was very much sachs and his team would implement villages and make improvements and there would be improvements but as soon as they thought they have solved one problem there would be a host of unintended consequences that would pop up and then they would wind up having to whack all of these problems down. it was really heartbreaking to see what was happening. from a journalistic standpoint and from the perspective of someone who cares about the visibility and about transparency i suppose you could say as a journalist, what was equally heartbreaking was that jeffrey sachs and his team became ever more entrenched and the data that was coming out of the organization was

increasingly problematic. the numbers no longer matched up with what i was seeing and the end reports and the figures and the studies that were coming out were clearly misrepresented. there was a growing amount of august vacation and in so many ways it really mirrored what i think happens unfortunately in a large number of ngos of non-profits generally which is that people are under tremendous pressure to raise money for their donors and to satisfy their donors and to make sure that their donors don't feel that their money has been wasted. none of us wants to think when we get $100 to an organization that it's all gone missing or it has been stolen or it has just been wasted. and so it was very disheartening for me to see what actually happened. the disconnect between the reality on the ground and what was being told in the official publications and press releases

of the organization. >> thanks. i now again i'm going to quote from northern easterly. this is not working. sorry, sorry. excuse me. easterly was not interviewed for the book by nina munk but he is quoted briefly and mentions in his review the following. i quoted one point in "the idealist" as remarking that sachs has tried to create an island of success in a sea of failure and maybe he is duh but it doesn't address the see of failure. actually, i got that wrong he writes. munk raises doubts about the island of success but you also quote from nina's book in this way. i think a key point and this comes up several times in her book is the following on page

217. the director of u.k. institute of development studies asked the obvious question. who will pay for this once the donors leave? in other words, are we creating an internal dependency? aren't we doing these people a disservice by not providing them with the means for sustainability. nina? >> you know, i said this on a radio interview the other day. it does not give many me any pleasure to after reporting my book that jeffrey sachs' experiment is by any standards a disappointment certainly and arguably even a failure. i don't take any pleasure in that. and i have said many times and i will continue to say that when i began this project, i truly was

hopeful and i'm a great skeptic both by nature and by profession. that is what journalists do, but i was really hopeful that this project would turn out well. and i think they'll easterly who of course we do have to take his review with a grain of salt because he is very well-known as a great jeff sachs nemesis and he too is a brilliant man. when gene mentions i didn't interview easterly for the book i did that on purpose. i did anyone to be able to say or jeff sachs in particular to be able to say you were swept off your feet by my critics. i wanted to be clear that the it was i personally really is an outsider. i'm not a development expert. i'm not an economist. i'm simply a journalist. i went in there and watch what happened and i followed the story as it unfolded on the ground and frankly i'd spend a

lot more time in these villages than any other outsider has been certainly much more time than jeffrey sachs. and it is to migrate unhappiness to report that none of these experiments worked as intended. >> i want to quote one part of the book that william easterly actually criticizes. he said there should be no ad hominem attacks against jeffrey sachs and he interprets as to be an ad hominem attack. nina writes colon the university would have spent 8 million for townhouse. apart from its six bedrooms and working fireplace is what makes the house appealing is its south facing garden. the day we met the tulips in full bloom, he was grateful for that garden. >> it is a lovely house. [laughter] and i will say that built

easterly is an academic. i'm a journalist. i think the details about the kinds of homes people live in are fascinating. call me a voyeuristic you want, that's fine but also to my defense, i think it's important and i think, know that all of us in this room where the live in an 8 million-dollar townhouse for rent in 8000-dollar month studio, we can even begin to understand the gulf between the ways we live between the extraordinary lives that the lead just by having running water let alone a garden with tulips growing with ease. to me part of the reason why it was important to point out that jeffrey sachs lives in an exquisitely beautiful townhouse on the upper west side is to demonstrate again how difficult

it is for someone like jeffrey sachs to even begin to understand what it means to live the way people in the villages that he is trying to help live. i can tell you first-hand again that even in my case, and i spent a great deal of time in these villages. i slept in these huts with evil. i did to the best of my abilities, i attempted to empathize, to really understand how they lived. i don't even begin to scratch the surface. to be in a place where there is nothing as a reporter as an outsider always knowing that at any moment you can turn around and get the hell out and get on an airplane and go home. by definition it means you don't understand it and i can assure you as much as i don't ever really understand it, jeffrey sachs really really doesn't understand it. [laughter] >> another reason perhaps why jeffrey sachs has another quote

from the book. it's never easy to disagree with jeffrey sachs. you might trigger an argument. you might rebel his feathers. in all likelihood he will make you feel small. you may call you misguided or ill-informed are ignorant and millennium project meetings where everyone in the room depended on sachs for his or her paycheck for being a dissenter took courage. that is clearly not a good character reference for anyone to run such a project you might remark. let me finally lead off with a quote from easterly on the general subject of where he stands and heavy comment on it. it it's not that we choose aid or no aid is easterly's message. aid has had focused successes such as vaccination programs that aid can't achieve the end of poverty. only homegrown development based on the dynamism of individuals in free societies can do that.

just as it did for the lucky people of the world whose forebears climbed out of poverty. poor people are their own best resource in escaping poverty. conquering problems every day that are far greater than any you or i have to face. >> i couldn't agree more with that. i don't think that i agree entirely with dell easterly on all of this but arms but i agree with that. i feel strongly and i myself will leave deeply in charity and i believe in foreign aid but i think that it's very important to differentiate between charity, between doing good and so-called development. when i give money to an organization i adore called mary's meals that helps provide free lunches for school children in poverty-stricken areas, i don't imagine i'm changing the

world over the course of history. i'm not that arrogant. i just don't believe that that's possible. so yes. >> okay. we can leave it open for questions. a. >> this is great. thank you very much. two questions. the singer bono is very close to jeff sachs and he is in recent years and particularly a couple of weeks ago made an announcement about the virtues of free. and investment and lifting the developing world out of poverty. and he is moving more and more in that direction. i was wondering if you happen to interview him because of his closeness with jeff sachs and also when will the day of reckoning come for sachs and the millennial project? the proof is going to be in the pudding someday. it's going to be publicly known

and when will that day of reckoning, and when will the jury he in or out or whatever juries to? >> i did in fact interview bono. he was charming. he was one of the nicest people i have interviewed. he didn't hold me up for hours. that somehow it appears that celebrities due to poor journalist. i think bono is very much reflecting what the popular opinion is. when bono began with jeffrey sachs were my start working on the story it was very much that moment where people, the general public seemed to be behind a great surge in foreign aid that was a real belief i think still that or at least popular support for heavy influxes of foreign aid i think we have seen a dramatic shift and most recently with obama's visit to africa. i think it was made pointedly clear that the popular opinion is absolutely not to increase foreign aid. americans in survey after survey

are against that for better or worse that more and more there is an idea of what we should be doing is backing investment investment in african helping business development helping the economic growth that quite frankly it is happening in some countries rather vigorously. and i forget you're the question. oh yes, my book. read my book. [inaudible] >> very soon i am hopeful. >> to quote the great economist pt bauer that aid, foreign aid can actually do harm and it does harm simply by empowering and strengthening governments that suppress development in their own countries. the whole approach that all aid is good, sometimes no. sometimes a does harm by suppressing development.

don smith had a question. >> is there any indication that george soros or any of his staff is ready up look? >> i have a soft spot for george soros because to his great credit he was really, interviewed him very early on in this project and jeff sachs at the time. he is a cool customer and he said very casually, 50 million bucks. it might work, it might not work through the worst thing that happens is it doesn't work and i've just given away 50 million bucks for humanitarian cause and hey if it does work, well that's a bet i'm willing to take. as you know george soros is someone who likes high stake beds. >> rob milburn will you give george soros a call to find out if he read the book in what he

thinks now put his $50 million did and where else he might spend that money, maybe on real development. >> or on a honeymoon. he got married last week. i don't read your book and i have to say all the reviews i've read and what i've heard tonight am absolutely inclined to read it but what i don't understand from what i've read and heard so far as what were the methods employed? what was he doing with the money how is it being spent and what was the plan? >> that's a very good question and the fundamental question and apart from just telling you to read my book the truth of the matter is there's nothing about jeff sachs's prescriptions that are actually -- absolutely novel. what is prescribing is rather than just building a school in a poor community or just digging a well his idea was that people were trapped by poverty in way that if he just looked after one problem without solving all of them holistically as an academic

likes to say that there was no point. it was really a matter of a single-minded focus and doing a lot of things all at the same time, putting in the health care linick recruiting nurses, building wealth and bringing in diesel generators, solving the water problem in trying to hit everything in one -- a combination. some basic health services and schools and bringing in teacher, mosquito nets, sort of a packet of the dozen i would say a sick interventions. fertilizer and high-yield seeds and vaccinations for livestock. really a packet of fairly low-cost interventions that in his mind did them all at once had a sort of exponential impact.

>> hi. i have to confess nina munk is my friend and classmate from colombia but i will ask a legitimate question. i'm originally from uganda and i was in uganda within the ugandan who worked with jeffrey sachs on some of these programs and he said the key problem was that he didn't listen a lot. he wanted to for example talk to presidents and not secretaries of the ministries who actually knew what was happening on the ground. my question is, how much was it about jeffrey sachs caring about the people and the projects and how much was said about him trying to prove that jeffrey sachs could do this amazing thing that perhaps would never be duplicated again and be remembered her a long time? he wondered why with all these

these connections why did he have programs that could make capital available to african entrepreneurs. we know they're entrepreneurs who lacked access to capital my final question is do you think is the consequence of this whole experience with jeffrey sachs there's going to be some sort of a bat lash, people that might want to engage africa effectively will become a little reluctant now because of the experience with jeffrey sachs. >> milton is such an interesting question. i myself pondered often with jeffrey sachs, was he just deluded or was he actually conning himself? it was often difficult for me to understand why he didn't seem to be following the advice on the ground and why he didn't seem able to change course as i think

watching it from the outside it seemed that he should have. and i think in the end, i feel very strongly that he has some of you know and gene alluded to here has been sharply critical of me and my book sense that has come out. i think there's a real poignancy there is sadness because of course you have to wonder, is refusing to engage since some of the ideas might look in refusing to discuss openly some of the failures of the project, is that in the best interest of the poor people in rural africa orders that an invest -- invested -- of jeff sachs and that's something you alluded to. it's something i can only venture to guess that. i really don't know. i forget what your other question is. you mentioned about the under

secretaries and other people in the african ministries at lower levels. the truth of the matter is, there is i think in some way everything is in this together when it comes to not telling the truth about the failure of these programs. and i think not only the villagers whom i interviewed, not only the secretaries of different levels in the government and ministries in africa, not only the presidents, the last thing they want even if they know that jeff sachs broke limbs are ludicrous and is never going to work they are perfectly happy for obvious reasons to continue to encourage the infusion of this aid. the villagers themselves, i mean one of the astonishing discoveries when you spend enough time in these villages you discover how quickly these villagers realize that when the outsiders, when the white guys, the rich guys show up, how quickly they have to assume a certain persona, how quickly they have to assure that visitor

that his donations are going to good use. i think any of us will do that. that's called survival and you'd a stupid not to. there becomes a kind of interdependency that can be quite dangerous. at some point who is going to break the glass and pull that emergency trigger and say this is the bloody joke. very few people. excellent point and i raise that point. i allude to is certainly my book this is a terrible thing jeffrey sachs has accused me of cynicism. i'm not cynical. i'm skeptical but i'm someone who believes deeply that transparency is the way forward. the only way to make donors want to help us to be fully transparent and to reveal and to speak openly about not just the successes but also the failures. by speaking about the failures, you i think a cord more weight to the successes.

people are more likely to believe in the successes if you are honest about the failures. i think there could be a terrible backlash to this and that worries me deeply. >> thanks. that was really interesting. i used to work with jeffrey sachs and continue to work with the institute so it was really interesting to hear your perspective on that. i'm not sure i agree with everything but how complex development is and how difficult it is to do. one aspect of that is it's difficult to measure success and causality. i wonder if you could reflect a little red on what the villages would have been like, the state of the villages would have been like without the interventions and the millennium villages project. >> is such an important point because part of the difficulty with even a short talk like this

is that people talk of these projects very much in black and white. it's a success or failure and that's not a related case at all. there's simply no doubt in and make it patently there and might look that when you pour $10 million into a village or 5 million into village are frankly half a million dollars euro point to see magnificent success stories. you see the impact of foreign aid anywhere you go in africa. people's lives are saved and people are lifted out of poverty. people have the opportunity to go to schools who may never gone to schools. children are pulled out of malarial comas. it's extraordinary to witness and it will make everyone in this room willing to give money to africa when you see it first-hand, trust me. that however, that kind of success, that incremental personal success where you are talking about helping a single person or 100 individual people is something very different than

what jeffrey sachs promised us. i think jeffrey sachs in many people who stated this, jeffrey sachs great failing was to overpromise. the title of his book alone says it all. he promised is not that he was going to transform the lives of people in a dozen villages but that he was going to give us a model to end poverty in our lifetime. he was going to give us a model that could be scaled up and replicated in any environment. that is what to this day no one has figured out. none of us knows how to do it unfortunately. economists like dull easterly and jeffrey sachs can argue until the cows come home and they will not have a solution because we don't know how people are uplifted out of poverty. we have an inkling and we understand it's related to economic growth winter stand prosperity and wealth are related do we don't really know the drivers are and what exactly make it to happen. otherwise who defended it by now

his speech is one thing i want to add is a follow-up to that. i think one thing and i don't know if you have talked about in the book is the one thing that's interesting to mention is that jeffrey is working across scales so there is the millennial village project but i think for the maloney him sustainable goals that jeff is helping to lead with the secretary-general is also raising awareness at the high political levels as well. >> two chapters in my book are devoted to his really extraordinary work on malaria for example. he is done i think probably more than anyone in advancing some very practical ways to reduce malarial transmission in africa and he's been a bit of dissent dissent -- on that front. you should e-mail on -- me after you read the book and i'd be interested to know what you think.

>> i just wanted to know are you aware and the sachs is in effect that most african nations are at the bottom of the economic freedom indices? africa's most regulated country in the world. did that ever come up? >> is that a rhetorical question. one of the fascinating things about my book is the journey that i travel him i should say which a reporter might look is that jeffrey sachs himself progressed originally from thinking he could go in and provide water and better health care and better schools and at some point along the way realize very quick way and it strikes one is obvious in hindsight is things often do that in fact the key to this was providing some sort of this is infrastructure.

suddenly he began to old to figure out a way to get this is up and running. the only way to create long-term wealth as melton said earlier as well is to create businesses. for africa as you say as from many countries that remain poor and mired in poverty it's often one discovers there's enormous amount of regulation strangling places or the corruption is so intense you can start a business must you pay off 10 people or there are no roads to get your product out. naturally that's a terrible problem. >> in your book you document that early on jeffrey sachs wanted deregulation for russia. he wanted deregulation basically for capitalism for some of these other countries. he has been accused of being oddly inconsistent and he didn't

think the african should have deregulation. he didn't emphasize that the way he had for some of these others. >> i think to be fair, that was not where he began his quest to end poverty in africa. arguably he could've started from the pro-business route. he was opposed to it. that wasn't the way he went about it rightly or wrongly. >> next question. >> you address the corruption of the leadership in africa? steam my question is china's involvement, the chinese government involvement in the country for their self-interest. >> they're both such important issues of course for the continent. i do absolutely address corruption. i go out of my way in the look look -- my book i try hard and anyone who has read it can attest to this. i travel very lightly and i just

observe and let my reader reach his or her own conclusions. i think you see over and over again the fact that in the government clearly things go missing and things disappear. money goes missing in solar panels disappear overnight. i think i've moved to the problems of corruption. and yet my book is not about corruption. it's something much larger of which corruption is one part. china also is something that i talk about in the book. again the book is not about china. china such an important motto -- model. they have been piling enormous amounts of money to africa but interestingly china itself has lifted hundreds of people out of poverty more successfully than anyone else in recent years. they have their own methods of doing that. whether those methods are relevant to africa or not is a question that i posed. i certainly don't answer it but i think it's something that's on the forefront of the minds of

anyone who's interested in the subject. >> you said you are not cynical but skeptical and i was just wondering did this experience make you more broadly skeptical in general and did you find yourself thinking scientist and his team experts and politicians across-the-board are actually useless self or motors or something like that? >> are you a journalist? >> yeah, sometimes. >> i think it you can't possibly be a journalist unless you question everything and we are taught to do that. many people call us cynical and many people complain about us. i have heard it all and they may be right, they may be wrong but i will tell you i don't trust any expert. that's just my professional constitution. i am hope full often that once i

do the research myself and once i go to try to back it up, that i can demonstrate that person was right. but i never take anyone's word until i've done my own reporting. >> further questions clacks. >> i just wanted to say i spent an entire night last week reading nina's book cover to cover completely mesmerized and it's really hard to mesmerize me especially given who i am and my background and everything. >> who are you, maam? can you tell us who you are? >> i am senegalese and i have spent a great amount of my life so far on these issues. when i started reading nina's book i was very afraid in my heart was pounding because i could tell how fair she was trying to be.

for me it's not a matter of jeffrey sachs, it's beyond him. it's an entire thinking process of people who never ever would imagine their minds but africa just like anyone else we are no different from anyone else. the only way we will make this is through capitalism and i'd like to say conscious capitalism. that's the only way forward. it reminded me of an argument i had at some point with the editor "freakonomics" in "the new york times." she had the nerve to say i heard him talk and she was saying i could see why a business can work in china and india as vehicles of economic development but i don't see how it's relevant to africa and that's a problem. how come they got capitalism and we get economic -- >> you make such an interesting point.

i talk about this in my book. there is this tremendous overlay or suggestion that neocolonialism is people talk about, make you feel terribly uneasy when you're on the ground as an outsider in africa, watching the absolute domination in foreign aid and humanitarian aid circles of europeans. when africans say europeans they mean americans and europeans. it is unsettling and of course there are so many people who are in development in and foreign aid for deeply devoted. you don't work in those fields unless you are devoted to your cause but it's unsettling. you raise a very important point >> as we go around and talk about the book i don't know if you have spent any time interviewing people that i think think -- i would have loved when i was reading the book to see some hints on what i like to call the industry of aid because it's a real industry.

>> jeffrey sachs was lucky to have sub or for read this book about him. she spent six long years doing it. she's not like the reporter who cause you out of the blue with a deadline in the morning and doesn't have time to check anything. you will be lucky to read her book six years in the making in six years of hard research. it's an rate look. [applause]

>> why don't people take their seats. if you would prefer not to send sitting his -- so you all the longer if you stand for throughout this meeting. welcome to the council on foreign relations and tonight is one of those nights i like best

because it's a chance to celebrate a book via celebrated author and thinker. the council prides itself on being what i would call it low culture but not a book only culture. books do fill an essential space it's not simply research but we pride ourselves on policy relevant research. the length of the look ,-com,-com ma the amount of research and thinking that goes into it, the kind of thinking you all need to do if you are forced to write something at length in forms a lot of other things. there is a depth and breadth of analysis that emerges from books i don't care how good the op-ed is they can't compete. we are not a book only culture. people write and disseminate ideas and all sorts of forms that interlink but again books

occupy a unique and i believe essential part of the intellectual real estate here at the council on foreign relations. it's one of the things that distinguishes this organization from any others. and that is good is tonight we have jagdish bagwati who has been a senior fellow at the council on foreign relations and divides his life between there and the start of university of the road on 115th street. jagdish has produced no less than at least a half-dozen books in these years. essentially he writes them faster than we read them, but he really is somebody who has an amazing way with words. the idea are big and the style, the style and a book that over the years has had a tremendous

effect in the policy relevant debate which is work about localization, which was important work when the idea was so under attack and now jagdish has produced a new look with the title "why growth matters". he has coproduced it actually. like most children it has two parents, in this case with a colleague of his at the same university, colombia and the subtitle is 10 -- how economic growth in india reduced poverty and the lessons for other developing countries. let me ask the obvious first question. why do you even have to write a book called "why growth matters" who in the world would not rank that? >> that's the question i'm frequently asked but it's not just in india but around the world that people in fact do

raise questions about growth partly because there is an antigrowth movement and an antigrowth sentiment around the world. what i want to do in this book is basically bring out the notion that in the very large countries with a lot of poor people in few rich people, even the 1% ers, you can put them all over the florida sinkholes and there would be another 1% of course pretty soon but that is not going to make any difference. the real problem is what to do about the large numbers of poor people. i think that is where india had a comparative advantage. too many exploiters so even if you ask are created the exploiters you could not

redistribute enough except to give everybody one burrito a day. it wouldn't go very far particularly with the rowing population. so the five countries which are in a position where you had to think of a different strategy to be able to get at the poor and this is where the growth strategy came in. there are five factors i would say that are relevant. india, china, indonesia purcell and to some extent south africa. that's about three fourths of the world in terms of population. it doesn't cover saudi arabia which has money crawling out of its ears. they have a different kind of rob rovlin, if you call it at rovlin, all right? so the issue was how do you get at the poor? that was my first job in india actually from the early 1960s. the idea was and she could not

redistribute in social spending like schools and education and even guaranteed employment which is what indians are trying now. then what would we do lacks the idea was we would have to grow. growth would have two effects. one is a good poll people up into gainful employment and people at the very bottom levels do use opportunity. that's pretty well-established. they just want to be a will to grow their way into the mainstream economy. that is one thing but the other thing is that it it would also join revenues. once you have revenue, this is something we know from here, revenue would in turn enable us who want to do some social spending to be a will to do it. you know, god is asleep up there usaid doesn't have any money so we have to grow our own revenues.

>> let the interrupt you for a second. in this country and we would all agree we want to expand the pot or the chapati or whatever metaphor one, one wants to use. but you mentioned some of the countries you mentioned, just take india and china the two most populous countries, 1.3 billion plus or minus, is fundamentally approach to growth. i assume i'm the synthesis not something the growth matters but somewhere along the idea that there has got to be sent competing models between india and china are often held out as in some ways the two iconic models of development not just for asia but really for the world. so it seems to me it's not just the growth matters but i assume a subset of issues is how you grow or how you attempt to grow? >> that is really important. many people ask me does your

book apply to the united states? i say yes if you think about how rove can improve in this country. i'm a republican in the medium run and the long run. we walk on two legs to produce growth in this country. this doesn't apply in the same way to other parts of the world. i think it's a very good question you ask. how do you grow? >> take china. china had a very different approach to growth. it went very fast on provinces. it absorbed a lot of foreign investment unlike india which remained until the reforms very much against foreign investment. we were trying to rely on very different model to row and of course we didn't grow as a result. china did grow very fast and so china had this advantage of being able to use a variety of

techniques to be able to draw its underemployed people into gainful employment. i think that is where we succeeded. i would say for the future, china has a big question mark and we have they question mark ourselves. but china you see because it had a reserve army of labor it was able, this is what we call economic jargon you know, an elastic supply curve. people coming in at a constant rate so when you increase demand for labor through export performance then you are basically not having to -- i mean you were adding to employment in people's welfare by basically giving them more jobs at a constant wage. but now china has rejoined the human race. >> there's only so so much low-hanging fruit. >> now our's they said they have rejoined the human race and than they are now having to pay for it. the wages are rising and that is

where they are getting into problem now because that freebie is gone. at the same time because it's an authoritarian system that's another are today and that is where the fact that peoples exasperation's are now being aroused they have to worry about how to satisfy them. in china you don't have any democracy and that is where the political differences come in. if in china if you really want war you can go out into the streets and beat on pots and pans and probably get backed off to mongolia or somewhere. i mean that's the idealized version. in india yet about the elements of what we call, you know, a liberal democracy. we have a relatively free press and large numbers of ngos, opposition parties and independent judiciary.

>> jagdish as an interventionist he described india as a functioning democracy. many people would challenge that. they would actually say india is a dysfunction or nonfunctioning democracy. indian growth has slowed in reisinger's dramatically. after a good good run india has elections coming up in early 2014. do you believe that india can grow at seven, eight or 9% again or is there something about politics in india that preclude its? >> i think what happened was the corruption grew in a massive way. when we started our development, india india was supposed to be a great gift to the world. we had a super judiciary.

leaders came over from the independent movement who were not corrupt and so on. that is not what you have today. that is what you're referring to. all of these institutions have come under heavy fire. one important cause has been -- because what happened was many of us economists recommend the resources we have to have all kinds of controls. it is in fact exactly the wrong thing to do. the result was that you had bureaucrats learning how to exercise power by handing out licenses. the politicians learned he could make a lot of money even if you are raising it for the party. at some stage the money is going past with the window you are likely to take some in yourself and so on. the system gradually collapsed. i think what we are facing now

now is a very important i think change and that is so many people are fed up now with the corruption that's been going on for quite a while but they are not willing to make any concessions to anyone. what you are having his street demonstrations on a massive scale, the current government. that is, under heavy fire and has been discredited. that is creating a massive problem right now because that is causing the macroeconomic problem in turn. whatever you do is going to be challenged by somebody in the parliament as a source of corruption. if you accept it that is because you must be taking money on the side. that is what is slowing down for

decision-making by the bureaucrats. that is the reason for the growth and slowdown precisely because people are trying to change the system and saying -- that means bureaucrats don't. [inaudible] the investment is not taking place place. >> let me also last question i want to open it up to our members. the last question which is you have written important books about. you have written much about migration and the movement of people. you mention before before that a.i.d. is out of money but the united states still has tools. we have the. negotiations. what can the united states and what should the united states and others be doing? do directly or in direct to promote higher levels of growth? >> it think we have to have --

on a. you can't just give money away. often economics and politics are not going in the same direction. many people used to say -- that's the politics that the economics is substitution possibility. you had better put your nose into every corner and so on. people resent it on the other hand people are going to come. >> so you are a fan of millennial challenge? >> very much so and i think we do need that and won everything about india, the big thing is about india and china and indonesia. they should be able to raise it in the public domain.

i would want to reorder their priorities in usaid and the world bank so countries that cannot do it like many of them in africa are able to raise the money through these eight giving sources. when i say things like that and any guess i am not regarded with a great sense of -- >> obviously a lot we touched on an even more we didn't touch on and jagdish is that rare person with breadth and depth and space. just wait for the microphone and let us know who you are. >> i'm with morgan stanley. my question is about india's growth has been largely based in the service sector where lots of call centers and service-based technologies i.t. services have been kind of the frontier.

how has that compared to more traditional export investments led model which created much more employment and opportunities for sustained growth over period of time? how would you compare those two models and what its implication with india's model? >> i would say one thing which is in the book we do explain how we haven't really used labor-intensive manufactures. what we do find out is that our growth has been inclusive. there's a lot of evidence in the book that in fact the north has benefited and the marginalized groups including women. there is not a single group including the untouchables which have not profited as a result. we haven't made the same impact. we haven't had as much bang for the buck in reducing poverty as economies which use actually a

lot of labor-intensive manufactures. we have been trying to protect small guys which is a big mistake. as a result they have not been able to grow into bigger ones with more scale efficiency and so on. i think is the wrong way to approach the problem. i think we need to, the next stage of reform we should not knock manufactures out. i think that is the really wrong. on the service sector if it's going to be important i don't think it carries the full weight but in the sense that we are a freewheeling democracy of the united states. we have actually no problem with people using software. in china for years the problem was we see --

[inaudible] they were very good at hardware but not with software. .. >> levy to expand its on a

massive scale. >> a microphone is coming. >> chai that has been growing where rarely with did businesses farley monday from the banking system and infrastructure spending has fueled the growth. the five-year plan they introduced 2010 they will reverse that. investment spending was 5 percent of gdp then it was 35. three years into the five-year plan those numbers

are still five / 35 with investment spending. if china will grow they have to get the consumer to spend. why haven't they and why can't day and will they ever do it? [applause] >> there is the economy more than in china but what you ask they have to go through domestic spending why is that in days significant ways so far? to my judgment is the scale of the problem. it cannot be mounted just like that. the infrastructure that is nowhere. >> that is what they are doing. >> they are already. but on the of a hand they

don't do well and have a mutual dependence as well. maybe it is the wrong kind of infrastructure as a result of technology. >> but why the transition a little more consumer demand led the economy was not happening? because the tidies said on the funds they don't trust the government or the safety net this savings rates is fairly high. >> one policy has not helped >> but the growth has slowed down. [inaudible] >> i teach at the upstart university as well. [laughter]

but it you have a terrific new governor of the central bank in india. kayhan he and the of macro lovers influence? >> that brings us write-up to now become as what happens now? it is very simple. if you go less rapidly the bureaucrats not taking positions but if it is slow down that means the revenue intake also has slowed down. and when that is happening cover the forthcoming election means the government at the same time

wants to spend more on social spending. like the security bill. you have the attention. then board monday being spent you don't have to be a macro economist, i am not one, but to know that you get inflation. big inflation is in the position to be very dangerous. the big question mark of the economy now. related to the situation is exactly the opposite of what we have here. but we have here cannot get off the ground. the violence is out of lax -- what. what about the central government? [laughter] other then what is run by my students of macroeconomics.

[laughter] >> maybe that is not a compliment. [laughter] >> for me it is because i know nothing. [laughter] so now i say that what you have this a situation with the fiscal policy with money supply has helped the country because it was not grow ring some of it was sent abroad to leading to a decline of the dollar. leading to more prosperity. so when it comes to india cover the opposite but

vitarelli applied the brakes. doing that it will be very unpopular. they don't have the autonomy that the federal reserve in juries. -- in joyce. i am right about the situation that somehow looking at social spending have you ever tried? is very hard to. >> especially with the of run up to election. if mr. moody is elected what about changing the economic policy? >> very substantial. the last two years the european government has not undertaken any significant

changes. it could also mean stymied by the charges of corruption. maybe with the ethnic might blunt dash bias with the prime minister that i don't write about the matter but to be incorruptible he has never been accused of any corruption. just like the prime minister. he has not been forceful. he is very forceful and is a fantastic speaker. in 2002 it was the and it to other people but i would not go because it had cleared and now there is nothing against him.

so i went there and it is from the best american politicians. nothing i could tell you exactly what he had been doing. astonishing. absolutely. and if we get elected but not a good run for his many -- money it is for the leadership right now and you don't see that in the newspapers like he gets all over the country. the rallies that he never used to get. so i think he should capitalize:that to change

the style of the government. i think we have some hope. >> another question. >> a microphone is headed your way. >> could you comment primary secondary and tertiary education in the role the public sector should play in it with growth? paradise think back to the debates we have had people criticize to say that education is more important than growth and so just having the education is not

by itself but if you try to be more productive continuing to the secondary sector but education is important it has to be dovetailed into a changes even considering grows beyond what you have. just to say it is important is not the look at singapore they can export to a lot cover they turned inward in india with a lot of machinery with the latest technology. but some -- education by itself is not irrelevant. >> this is a rare economic co said as the happy ending the book about how economic policies have done right. and you have some case

studies clearly that those of you that economics is the old saw here is your chance to look as a cure for science. then we owe a great debt to you being here tonight for your years of sustained riding, talking, and thinking as someone who has informed the policy debates of this country. thank you. congratulations. [applause]