Reality check: Too many outcome shapers seem to be in need of one

livemint.com:

Subscribe to enjoy similar stories. Most of one wall was a high-tech digital screen. The very large room was designed for meetings that many would join online.

The opposite wall was glass, through which you had an unobstructed view of 30km out from the 20th floor office of this multilateral institution, which was co-hosting the meeting along with a sensible organization. The topic: The economic empowerment of women in rural India. There were 40 people in the room and a similar number on the screen—crystal clear with great audio.

Quickly, the conversation turned to the ‘care economy.’ It was not clear to me what that meant in rural India, but many people seemed to be sure. Somehow, crèches became the focus of the discussion. Because there seemed to be a general consensus that crèches could serve the nutritional needs of very young children, provide more mothers an opportunity to join the workforce and also employ women themselves.

The fluent economists debated the wage premium that would get the best women from the village as crèche workers. Progress on this matter was bogged down since 20 of the people in the meeting seemed to be economists and they got into the thick of what data was available and what should be used. The two high-profile policymakers who were there made elaborate statements about how the most important thing would be to design incentive structures to ensure accountability of the crèche workers.

Also, the importance of installing CCTVs in all crèches. The economists warmed up to the centrality of incentive structures and CCTVs and agreed among themselves that while they can keep debating the data, the wage premium would be the key issue, and that private capital must be encouraged to invest. A donor