This year I donated to AMF, SCI, Deworm the World, Project Healthy Children, and the Copenhagen Consensus Center... These were all recommended by GWWC except the Copenhagen Consensus Center – I chose to donate to them because I think that promoting global prioritization is one of the most important activities to be doing, and, though harder to be sure about, their influence is potentially measured in the hundreds of millions or billions of dollars.

The genius of the Copenhagen Consensus exercise is to create a feasible, evidence based, alternative for the use of incremental resources that takes into account both the effectiveness of resources across sectors and across the globe.

In an environmental field where positions are too often frozen in orthodoxy-on the left and on the right-Bjorn Lomborg provides a much needed fresh perspective, grounded in a realism that still avoids pessimism. His work with the Copenhagen Climate Consensus is a vital, solution-oriented contribution to the economics of global warming-and the many other problems facing a growing planet.

Because the results of Copenhagen Consensus are so concrete, and because they are based on solid knowledge, the results provide a valuable insight for politicians – an insight that is in fact used by policy makers.

Not all policies are equal. Despite good intentions, some policies will do much more good for every taka spent – and those are the areas we should focus on. Bangladesh Priorities is making a real difference to Bangladeshi policy... It is clear that the research is having a real impact on guiding decisions on Bangladeshi priorities and promises to help even more into the future.

This book provides not only a reservoir of information on the reality of human induced climate change, but raises vital questions and examines viable options on what can be done to meet the challenge. In the introduction itself Bjorn Lomborg catalogues the impacts of climate change, highlighting the problem of sea level rise, pressure on water resources, and declining food production in some countries, ' possibly becoming a source of societal conflict'. It allows different authors to articulate their views on a range of solutions, and then leaves the book's readers to form their own conclusions on what might be the best set of actions to adopt. Even though its pages present a diversity of options, at the end the average reader would stand better informed, and would have formed his or her own compelling logic on the answer to this planet's problem of climate change. I would recommend this book as much for the fact that Lomborg supports the view that we have 'long moved on from any mainstream disagreements abot the science of climate change', as for the rich diversity of analysis it presents on a range of possible solutions.

The Copenhagen Consensus brings together an impressive roster of minds. Not everyone agrees with the composition and ordering of Lomborg's priorities lists, of course -- climate change tends to rank further down the list than many stakeholders would like, for example -- but as a point of departure for discussion, the exercise of priority-setting is a sound one.

Using evidence based analysis for policy decisions is a better investment than reading 100s of recommendation with little heed to sequencing pro-poor development priorities.

More focus could have been given to studying the costs and benefit of strengthening the capacity of health service providers, in operating modern equipment. This is important for ensuring better primary healthcare by the Upazila health complexes and health officers working in rural and peri-urban areas.

In 2008, eight of the world’s leading economists, including five Nobel Laureates, in the so-called Copenhagen Consensus, recommended priorities for confronting the top ten global challenges. They ranked providing young children with micronutrients the number one most cost-effective way to advance global welfare.