There should be a second round of Bangladesh Priorities to cover some missing agendas, and complementing it within the SDGs context.

This book helps you make up your own mind, prioritize, and make your own choice. Just in time.

The world's staggering problems won't be solved by singing pop songs, denouncing villains, or adopting the proper moral tone, but by figuring out which policies have the best chance of doing the most good. If the world is going to become a better place, it will be because of the kinds of thinking on display in this courageous and fascinating book.

This effort will inevitably help to channel more money into the right areas. This will enable the country to get the most out of its public investments.

A cost-benefit analysis of the various interventions under Digital Bangladesh, will be useful in adding credibility to the government's agendas for good governance and more inclusive development.

This is a stimulating intellectual game with important real-world consequences. Lomborg asks all of us to stop talking grandly and vaguely about solving global problems and instead to rank them - based not only on the potential harm they can cause but also on our ability to turn things around. To govern is to choose and this pithy book forces us to choose.

Land administration reform has been a longstanding priority. It will be useful for the research to examine different components of land administration system.

A hugely sensible book about global health and environmental problems, based on the “Copenhagen Consensus” project documented in The Economist. Its authors, eminent economists, recognise that the resources to tackle such problems are finite and need to be applied where they are most likely to be effective. Better, for instance, to spend resources on the immediate problem of AIDS in Africa than the more distant one of global warming. This book is a healthy antidote to the narrow views of single-issue pressure groups.

The Copenhagen Consensus 2012 is a valuable contribution to the development debate, particularly given its focus on getting the best value for money and greatest impact from aid DFID’s program priorities are closely aligned with the recommendations from the Copenhagen Consensus. I find the analysis compelling, and I have been working with the Consensus since 2004.

The only question is why we have never done this before. It’s an unprecedented approach which I have not seen from any of the think-tanks or advisory groups that work in Bangladesh, and the results are going to be powerful and practical.