The expiration of the Millennium Development Goals in 2015 creates a focal point of opportunity for academics to impact global poverty policy by playing a leading role in shaping their successors.
The main advantage that we have as academics in influencing this process stems from our authority as experts. However, this authority is often undermined by the fact that we appear to disagree sharply with one another. It is hard to argue that policy makers should listen to the experts when the experts appear to diverge widely.
We believe that while there is real disagreement among the experts there is much more overlapping consensus on what can and ought to be done to alleviate global poverty than would appear on the surface.
This project aims to address this problem by identifying and clearly articulating that consensus which lies beneath the surface of academic disagreement on global poverty alleviation in a way that is accessible to policy makers and suitable for framing and directly feeding into the MDG replacement process.
For more information contact Rachel Payne at email@example.com.