In the (fascinating?) world of international relations theory the term “formal modeling” refers to a “methodology used to explain international relations phenomena”[1]. So, it is not surprising that the subject should come up in a room of IR majors reading theory articles. However, when it does, what I think of is not a mathematical equation or a diagram, but Gisel Bündchen. So when people start saying things like “I only like it when my professors model” and “I always liked looking at formal models” I laugh to myself. No one else does. So I gchat my friend (who incidentally is sitting next to me) to try to explain my thoughts. She judges me with her eyes and tells me to stop laughing. That does not help. So I move to my second friend (also in the room) to try to get a little more sympathy.

me: so when they talk about modeling, they are not talking about like, Tyra Banks because then the "I only like it when professors model" is so much more funny

friend:  hahahaha

me: Am I really the only one in the room that made that connection?

friend:  Fabio, as realism   

            this is when I leave the room laughing/crying

me:  comic genius my friend comic genius

friend:  haha thank you. I’m glad my one-liners bring you intense joy

me:  what was your logic behind that comparison

friend:  haha I don’t know, it was stream of consciousness because clearly noses broken by birds = realism

me:  wait, his nose was broken by birds...

friend:  yes a duck flew into his nose while he was riding Apollo's Chariot

             this time we both leave

Jessica Hovick

Some say our days will end in PLAID,

Some say in TRIP.

From how I’ve seen RAs go mad

I hold with those who favor PLAID.

But if professors crack the whip

I think I’ve read enough of Wendt

To say that for despondence TRIP

Is also meant

And might outstrip.

On June 10th, an elite group of William & Mary professors (Profs. Mike Tierney and Timmons Roberts), as well as class of 2003 grad Brad Parks (Millenium Challenge Corporation) traveled to Washington, D.C. to introduce their newest book, Greening Aid?  Understanding the Environmental Impact of Development Assistance (Oxford University Press, 2008). 

While co-author Professor Robert Hicks was busy liaising with important European muckety-mucks, the team of three (with two intrepid research students looking on), led a question and answer session at the College's Washington, DC office.  Dozens of alumni, current students, and development professionals attended the session, feasting on free hors d'oeurves and complimentary beverages, and proceeded to assault the authors with questions ranging from the trends of environmental assistance to the efficacy of the World Bank's policies regarding environmental aid. 

Following the enlightening discussion, the authors, accompanied by Professor Catherine Weaver (University of Kansas), and two RAs, attempted to enjoy a sumptuous celebratory dinner, only to be nearly drowned by a deluge of rain.  Soaking wet and frozen to the bone by DC's unremitting A/C, the authors and friends feasted merrily celebrating their first public appearance since the book's release.  Additionally, they ran into fellow political blogger and scholar Daniel Drezner (Tufts University) who would appear on the Hill the following day for a Congressional testimony.

The next day held the most exciting of the week's meetings.  The authors, graciously introduced by Manish Bapna (Executive Vice President and Managing Director, World Resources Institute) and accompanied by discusssant Robert Goodland, formerly of the World Bank Group, led an enthralling panel discussion at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, introducing the book, summarizing it's primary findings, and answering a flurry of challenging questions from NGO activists, former World Bank employees, development scholars, students and an additional five RAs (see http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?topic_id=1413&fuseaction=topics.event&event_id=408240 in the near future for the archived webcast).  The audience reacted extremely enthusiastically to the presentation, challenging the authors to continue to develop their argument and the PLAID database for future public use.

All in all, the week's events were extremely successful.  The book and authors' presentation received outstanding acclaim from a wide spectrum of the development community.  Additionally, the authors, colleagues, and RAs had the chance to chow-down on DC's delicious cuisine, a spectacular break from the Leafe and Cheese Shop.

Fact. The other day, all of us engaged in some post-work group bonding. False. Most of us engaged in group bonding. A select few of us engaged in group un-bonding, by forgetting the name of another group member. This destructive individual still owes the victimized group member a lot of favors in the form of food, coding, and apologies.

In addition to inordinate amounts of coding, we have been taking really important tests on the internet. The CIA called and said they are looking for some new agents, and asked us to take their new top-secret exam. Most of us are curious adventurers, but we have a handful of impressive masterminds, two daring thrill-seekers, and a thoughtful observer and an innovative pioneer among us. This qualifies us for a veritable stealth mission to Nawab for lunch today. We might take more than our allotted 30 minute lunch break, but no one will catch us… probably because no one really cares.

Goudey erroneously organized a failed mission to the Daily Grind for free coffee sampling to get new free-trade espresso beans. After prancing down the hall yelling “DIBS! DIBS!” Goudey gathered an elite team of habitual coffee drinkers and directed them to the Grind, only to find that the owner didn’t have anything ready for them. Debate ensued over whether to insist the owner to sell us espresso beans at market price, allowing him to profit from the deal. Dissidents were inclined to take advantage of his liberal heart and give him none of our research grant, most of which funds our lunches. To our credit, we recently used the grant to buy new recycled pens, some of which are made by blind people.

Stay tuned for: our final decision on how long we can keep saying erroneous, what’s going on in next week’s chaos including horrors such as entire days of learning and coding, and t-shirt phrase deliberations. It’s going to be crazy. It’s going to be a long ride. That’s what she said.

Chris Balattman points to the Hudson Institute's Center for Global Prosperity report that finds:

• "Private giving and investment continue to grow, now accounting for over 75 percent of donor countries’ entire economic dealings with developing nations..."
• "Government aid—official 'foreign aid'—is a minority shareholder in the growth and development of poor countries..." "In the U.S., private philanthropy, along with remittances, to developing nations constitutes four and one- half timesour official aid abroad..."
• "The savviest government aid agencies are rapidly changing their business model to leverage official aid with activities launched and run by private businesses, foundations, charities, religious groups, and universities. to give the children in Rwanda educational opportunities. Or a sophisticated group, the National Christian Foundation, giving advice to local churches on how to make Sunday donations more effective in overseas programs..."

As Professor Roberts will point out in a later post, the Hudson Institute is off-base in referring to private money flows  that include private remittances and private investments as "philanthropy."

Still the report does remind us of the critical need for more complete, more efficient tracking of private global giving.PLAID 2.0?

You can read the full report here.