How to Spend $50 Billion to Make the World a Better Place by Bjørn Lomborg

How to Spend $50 Billion to Make the World a Better Place Reviews

• 
  Y. L

  The Copenhagen Consensus is where one economist in his own field of expertise is invited to submit his opinion on what he/she perceives as a global challenge, and then be given further perspective by two other experts in the field - much like a parent meeting where all the grown ups who think they know best sit together and discuss what would be best for their children and their children's future generations.
  
  The book was written in 2006. It is now 2017 and I doubt we are anywhere near resolving these challenges confronted by the Consensus. Then again, "There are many ways of going forward, but only one way of standing still.” ― Franklin D. Roosevelt.
  
  I shall not destroy the gist of this book and your curiosity by listing out the ingredients to the End of Our World in bullet points for you simply because problems of the generation(s) of many are hardly ever as clear-cut as a to-do list with due dates. The reader will best appreciate the complexity of our situation by piecing together the seemingly unrelated issues we have. I promise you it won't take long before he/she realises that our one and biggest problem is our very own humanity.
  
  It didn't take long after my first few pages to admittedly come to terms on how saddening it is that we as a human race place priority and importance to our most concerning issues by rank of economical benefits rather than human lives and the value of it. Granted, economists are revered for their realistic take on our world and will stand up to be readily accountable for their assumptions and (well-calculated) decisions, but participants of the Copenhagen Consensus not being able (perhaps more reluctant than dismissive) to place a value on human life were as a whole incapable of balancing economic feasibility, humanity, sustainability and the sense of urgency for the challenges that we are currently presented with.
  
  Lomborg's summary of the Copenhagen Consensus is fair and goes well in length and depth. Any further and it would have border-lined as an article in Econometrica. And for this very reason, I gave this book four stars because it was a little pointless - yes, it expectedly lacked depth, but by all means not three stars because Lomborg had nonetheless perfectly summarised the Consensus despite the lack of appreciable content.
• 
  Khari

  This was a good little book. I learned a lot while reading it. I learned that economists are surprisingly full of common sense. We should have more panels of economists advising on things like education, climatology, trade, migration and disease prevention. Seriously. If we had economists talking to governments about the best place to spend foreign aid, then foreign aid might actually accomplish something other than lining the pockets of local warlords.
  
  Obviously economists shouldn't be the final and or only voice to determine policy, but it would be really good to at least listen to their opinions and projections of cost and benefits of programs and make decisions based on which programs would have the least cost and greatest benefit.
  
  Basically the ranking the panel came up with in this book was: focus on decreasing malnutrition and communicable disease first, then clean water, government and migration form, and lastly...climate change. Ha. I loved their basic analysis for climate change was "the panel urged increased funding for research into more affordable carbon-abatement technologies." Basically, do more research until you understand the process better. I agree. I agree with the designer of this think tank, Bjorn Lomborg, the number one resource on this planet is human minds, we should be saving as many of those as possible because one of them will come up with the solution to solving climate problems. Yes. We should be focusing on getting good nutrition to pregnant mothers and young babies and young children, good nutrition being the number one way to improve cognitive abilities. It's time we looked at humans as a resource and the method of problem solving instead of as a cancer on the planet.
  
  Anyway, I thought this book was a good book to read not only for governments and policy makers, but even for everyday people because it can really guide charitable giving. There are a bunch of programs out there, for example Survival Initiative, that focus on providing prenatal vitamins and nutritional support to pregnant mothers as well as education on things such as breastfeeding over formula. These are programs that make a difference on the individual level and are supported by individuals, and yet align with what economists say is the least cost and highest benefit options. There are other programs such as Compassion, adopt a child, etc., that pair up a sponsor with a child to provide that child with nutritional supplements and educational supplies throughout their school life, another great program that meets the goals outlined in this book. The one that surprised me the most was mosquito nets. Insecticide treated mosquito nets was the number one solution for decreasing malaria and other mosquito-born diseases and they cost just 2 dollars. We don't even need the government to get these into action. How many of us can spare two dollars a month? There are all sorts of private organizations that donate these the Against Malaria Foundation, Compassion, etc.
  
  I was glad I read this book. It means that I can make my giving more effective.
• 
  Kåre

  Det er først nu, jeg læser noget fra den begivenhed, som fandt sted i 2004.
  Jeg syntes om Lomberg fra han kom frem og var på den måde helt modsat alle, jeg på det tidspunkt var sammen med. På Institut for Antropologi kunne de slet ikke have ham og fx Steven Sampson undsage ham helt direkte som helt tåbelig.
  Retrospektivt er det stadig oplagt for mig, at hele projektet er godt tænkt og vigtigt. Selvfølgelig skal vi forsøge at forholde os rationelt til udfordringer, bla ved at rangordne dem i forhold til, om der skal hældes penge på dem nu, senere eller slet ikke. Oplagt, at man må komme frem til, at sikre succeser trumfer usikre, mere evidens trumfer mindre, nutid trumfer fremtid. Det er også disse prioriteringer, som alle de tre paneler kommer frem til uafhængigt af hinanden. Dermed er forsøget temmeligt robust.
  Bogen er klart skrevet og kan læses af de fleste. Metoderne er økonomi og cost benefit.
• 
  Anthony

  From the Copenhagen Consensus convened by Lomborg, top economists gathered to assess which social problems deserve immediate attention and funding, the fruits of which are manifest in this book. Realizing that money is scarce while global issues are not, the Consensus established a prioritization model based on cost-benefit payouts where challenges like the spread of HIV/AIDS and malnutrition merit immediate care and carbon taxes and guest-worker programs do not.
  
  The book's concept is excellent, however, because this is a diluted and reader-friendly version of Lomborg's Global Crises, Global Solutions, I would recommend avoiding this 187-pager and going straight to the source, replete with substantiated CBA's and proper referencing - both of which this book lacks in its attempt to not scare off non-economist, lay readers.
• 
  Eliza

  I liked the idea of exploring different issues, their costs and benefits, and ranking them in some kind of order of priority, but this book assesses issues in purely economic terms, as if in a vacuum, and I couldn't help but think that every argument would not quite occur in its predicted manner in the real world. Reading this book was sometimes a little tedious, boring and annoying because there were so many numbers. I'm glad I never studied economics! I don't think I ever could! I don't feel like I really learnt anything except that so many of our policies seem to be based off predictions made by experts that disagree with each other.
• 
   ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎

  Book is a good take on where humanity has to head next in order to make earth a more fluid experience that can promote group work to simultaneously bring up the bottom countries and continue to make progress in our discovery of new ideas and technologies for the betterment of humanity.
  
  I felt like the second half of the book was focused on problems that didn't persuade me to be important enough to be featured in this particular book, but that's not to say that they aren't issues that society won't have to deal with in the future.
  
  Overall, like I said, this book serves as an example from a group of some of societies best and smartest people on how we should look at reality and some starting points any normal person can take part in.
• 
  Brandur

  Pulls together recommendations of the Copenhagen Concensus, a meeting that asked what problems experts and policy-makers should address, given $50 billion to spend. Good material is covered, but it's not quite as engaging as Bjorn's previous hit.
• 
  Mckinley

  Interesting book. First comes a chapter about a global issues. Following it, is commentary by other economists on the viability and issues outlined in the previous chapter. An interesting way to better understand the problems and solutions.
• 
  Maciej

  Some Swedish guy complains about how we're not spending money on common sense shit.
• 
  Andrew Hoffman

  Shows that it is hard to get your mind around how exactly to make the biggest difference in the world and that simple answers usually feel a little forced.
• 
  Kit

  Recommend by Jordan Peterson on his podcast 8/29/18
• 
  Harry Harman

  Bill Gates seems to be working on these issues like HIV, Aids, Malaria, Malnutrition, and is making good progress.
• 
  Z.

  I'd really like to see 2021 version of this.