Ad hoc-working-group-on-entrepreneurship-for-development psd-7-input-01-13-10


Published on

Input of ad hoc working group on entrepreneurship and development in the context of Presidential Study Directive 7 (policy for global development)

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ad hoc-working-group-on-entrepreneurship-for-development psd-7-input-01-13-10

  1. 1. MEMORANDUMTO: Gayle Smith, EOP/NSCFROM: Philip Auerswald, George Mason University and Harvard University Michael Fairbanks, The Seven Fund Bruce McNamer, TechnoServe Jacqueline Novogratz, Acumen Fund Julia Novy-Hildesley, The Lemelson Foundation Paul Polak, International Development Enterprises Iqbal Quadir, The Legatum Center for Development and Entrepreneurship, MIT Christine Eibs Singer, E+CoCC: Thomas Kalil, EOP/OSTP Pradeep Ramamurthy, EOP/NSC Lorraine Hariton, U.S. Department of State Michael Curtis, USAID Robert Schneider, USAID Patricia Bartlett, Smithsonian Institution Christopher Broughton, EOP/NSC Hillary Chen, EOP/OSTPDATE: 1/13/10RE: Policy Options for Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [ExternalInput to PSD-7] In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of shortcuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the fainthearted, for those that prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things—some celebrated, but more often men and women obscure in their labor—who have carried us up the long rugged path towards prosperity and freedom. —Barack Obama, President of the United States Inaugural Address, January 21, 2009 Nobody owes Rwandans anything. Why should anyone in Rwanda sit back and feel comfortable that taxpayers in other countries are contributing money for our own well- being or development? Why should we not be doing what we are able to do and raise ourselves up to higher standards and achieve more and better and get out of this poverty that we find ourselves in? Change has to start in the mind. And that is what we have been working on over time. Once the mind gets correct, the rest becomes simple. —Paul Kagame, President of Rwanda11 “The Backbone of a New Rwanda.” In Michael Fairbanks et al., eds. In the River They Swim: Essays from Around the World onEnterprise Solutions to Poverty Today. West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton Press, 2009.
  2. 2. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]Motivation for Policy ProposalsDuring our lifetime, the majority of the world’s population will join the global economy. This isnot just good news; it is a singular and defining transition in human history. Furthermore, as therevolution in mobile communications in this decade has evidenced, global economicinclusiveness will take place, in one form or another, with or without the active engagement ofthe United States and its citizens. The fact that the technologies driving such change wereoriginally developed in our country—often with funding from the federal government—does notguarantee our nation’s continued centrality. As President Obama stated in his inaugural address,“Greatness is never a given. It must be earned.”An approach that both advances the national interest of the United States and is relevant to the21st century must begin by asking: How does the process of development actually work? Howcan citizens of the United States benefit from the tremendous change that is taking place in theworld today? Who are the agents of positive change elsewhere in the world, and how can wework with them? How can the U.S. government contribute to this process in a way that makesthe most of its unique capabilities and reflects our nation’s core values?We are fully supportive of the commitment expressed by President Obama and Secretary of StateClinton to move away from policies of development that amount to the U.S. saying, “You arebroken, we will fix you,” and toward policies based on long-term partnerships that supportbottom-up and enterprise-oriented initiatives in developing countries.In our view, U.S. policy with regard to global development should at once leverage and seek toincrease the nation’s most valuable national asset: its global leadership in technology,entrepreneurship, and innovation. This leadership is based on knowledge, networks of capability,a habit of entrepreneurial thinking, and considerable know-how pertaining to the support andexpansion of entrepreneurship and innovation in key sectors and on specific challenges. Theseare the assets we should be sharing—and in so doing, further developing—with the rest of theworld.We maintain that entrepreneurial thinking and national systems that reward positiveentrepreneurship are the greatest potential tools to advance development by overcoming therelated curses of external dependency—in particular, the extraction of natural resources, illicittraffic, and aid—creating broad-based economic activity, and supporting an economicallyengaged middle class.Throughout the developing world, entrepreneurs who can change their societies already exist,and in many cases are thriving. These individuals and organizations are creating knowledge-based products, offering jobs that pay high wages, paying their taxes, not spoiling and frequentlyeven working to protect the environment. We need to find them, learn from them, and give them“rocket fuel” by providing mentorship, access to global networks, and investment capital—asrequired and subject to market-comparable terms.The policy proposals that follow are organized into two categories: Driving Development byEnabling Entrepreneurship, and Fostering a New Generation of Inventive Global ChangeLeaders.
  3. 3. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]1. Driving Development by Enabling EntrepreneurshipPolicy Proposal 1.1: Undertake a National Initiative on Global Entrepreneurship andInnovation to enable the growth of markets that address global challengesProven, scalable, market-based solutions to global challenges are being developed daily byentrepreneurs and innovators in both the United States and the developing world. These solutionsprovide “Henry Ford–size” opportunities to create new markets that will drive increasingprosperity, with a focus on the 40 percent of the world’s population that remains on the peripheryof global markets, and with attention to the mitigation of the adverse consequences that willinevitably result from intensified economic activity.The Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) has supported U.S. investments andpartnerships for decades. Its functions can be expanded to support private-sector investments inentrepreneurship, and in innovative technologies that address such global challenges as waterand sanitation, energy and climate, access to financial services, and educational innovation.We proposed either a re-chartering of OPIC or the creation of a new National Corporation forGlobal Entrepreneurship and Innovation to act as a singular vehicle, working in collaborationwith the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and drawing resources andcapabilities from across the federal government—notably the Department of Defense (DoD), theDepartment of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Energy (DoE), and theDepartment of Veterans Affairs (VA)—for support of partnerships between U.S. and overseasentrepreneurs that are working to address global challenges. Investments would be comparable inscale and intent to awards from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)Technology Innovation Program (formerly Advanced Technology Program), and would similarlyencourage partnerships between entrepreneurs (particularly those located overseas) and U.S.multinational corporations.The objective of the fund in its first five years of operation should be to seed the creation of 10markets that serve 50 million customers each among the 2 billion people in the world who earnless than $2/day—what might be termed “ascending markets,” in contrast with conventionallydefined emerging markets. The investment portfolio will include projects aimed at building amanufacturing capability in the United States that is focused on the sort of low-cost, high-reliability, and, in many cases, income-generating products increasingly in demand amongascending-market consumers and entrepreneurs.The Aspen Network for Development Entrepreneurs (ANDE) provides one model for such aninitiative, in which capital is secondary to risk management and access to networks. Groups suchas the Acumen Fund, E+Co, Endeavor, and TechnoServe have expertise to offer in support ofhigh-impact entrepreneurial ventures in the developing world. Within the federal government,the CIA’s In-Q-Tel is a model of another sort, one that demonstrates how equity investments intechnology-based entrepreneurial ventures can be utilized to advance U.S. national interests.2The U.S. government could seed the creation of a $1.25 billion Global Entrepreneurship andInnovation Fund with $200 million in first-loss capital or loan guarantees. When consideredalongside the $750 million already committed to ANDE members, this would represent a $22 In-Q-Tel “identifies and partners with companies developing cutting-edge technologies to help deliver these solutions to theCentral Intelligence Agency and the broader U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) to further their missions.”
  4. 4. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]billion commitment to advance the growth of entrepreneurial ventures with high social value indeveloping countries.The Trade and Development Agency’s capacity to conduct feasibility studies could be associatedwith such a facility. Creating innovative technology R&D capacity at USAID (see below) will beessential to enable the agency to act as a full partner in this initiative.Agency responsibility: OPIC, in partnership with Department of State, USAID, TDA, and theDepartment of Commerce Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, in collaboration withDoD, HHS, DoE, and the VA.Budget: $200 million in loan guarantees or first-loss capital; $10 million annual operationallaunch budgetTimeframe: 36-month launchPolicy Proposal 1.2: Recognize and support outstanding entrepreneurs in developingcountriesIn poor places as in rich ones, the majority of jobs and other economic opportunities created byentrepreneurs ultimately come from the most rapidly growing 10 percent to 20 percent of newventures. The entrepreneurs who create and build these high-growth “gazelle” firms thus play adisproportionate role in economic development.People are stirred to embrace change when they see others like themselves acting as role models,when the perceived costs are low, and when the envisioned change is framed as being consistentwith their own deepest principles, goals, beliefs, attitudes, assumptions, and values.We propose that the U.S. convene an annual summit that brings together outstandingentrepreneurs from the developing world and leaders from the entrepreneurial and venture capitalcommunity in the United States. Such an event would increase the impact made by outstandingentrepreneurs currently working to advance development by telling their stories as iconicexamples of entrepreneurial leadership. These convenings would result in productive newrelationships between outstanding overseas entrepreneurs and partners in the United States.The ideal host for such a convening would be a newly created Smithsonian Center forEntrepreneurship and Innovation on the National Mall, in collaboration with USAID, the WhiteHouse Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and leaders in internationalentrepreneurial education, such as MIT’s Legatum Center for Development andEntrepreneurship. The Pioneers of Prosperity Awards Program and the Skoll Awards for SocialEntrepreneurship (SASE) provide two models for the process of identifying outstandingentrepreneurs in the developing world and celebrating their achievements.3Agency responsibility: Department of State and Department of Commerce, working closely withthe OSTP, potentially in collaboration with the Smithsonian Institution (see below)Budget: $2-$5 million in new fundingTimeframe: 18-month launch3 See <> and < >.
  5. 5. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]Policy Proposal 1.3: Strengthen the capacity of USAID to support entrepreneurship andprovide technological oversight and support, and ensure a close working relationshipbetween this capacity and operational relationships with DoD, including investments ininnovative technology with development applicationsUSAID’s capacity to provide innovative investment in technology, and to effectively oversee theapplications of technology, to meet development goals has been hampered by inadequateinvestment in bilateral development assistance resources, in support of a culture of technologyand innovation, and a depletion of technical and engineering personnel at the agency. Wepropose a marked increase in USAID resources that are dedicated to technology and innovation,thus allowing for the development of a technology-based innovation/entrepreneurial capacity atthe agency (on the In-Q-Tel and/or ANDE model; see policy proposal 1.1 above) and significantaddition of personnel in the areas of technology, science, and engineering. USAID should have aseparate fund to make innovative investments in new technologies that have developmentapplications. These investments would be on a smaller scale and have a more exploratory naturethan those supported by the National Corporation for Global Entrepreneurship and Innovation,which are focused on developing an "absorptive" capacity for technology and innovation.Furthermore, support for USAIDs distance-learning platforms and technology enhancedentrepreneur development programs should be expanded , with the specific goals of increasingthe efficiency with which entrepreneurs capacity is built, and of expanding investment in and theimpact of these entrepreneurs.The DoD has, through its broad investment in research and development, supported private-sector innovation in many technologies that have dual-use applications that could provide a basisfor entrepreneurial initiatives in developing countries. USAID needs to create links with DoD’sinnovations, including those that may have grown out of DoD programs in Iraq and Afghanistan,to find ways to bring such innovations into development applications. In turn, USAIDinnovations and the applications of innovative technologies should be infused into programs andareas in which DoD has temporary responsibility for economy-related investments.The military also has core competencies in logistics, command and control, monitoring andevaluation, operations research, training, and program management, all of which USAID or otheragencies could leverage as part of their development efforts. Formal funded processes need to beput in place to enable the military to help USAID develop these capabilities within their ownorganizations, or to lend assistance when they share a common footprint in various countries.Finally, shared strategic planning that will help predict post-conflict requirements and shapefuture strategies is a necessity. Particularly important is the need to emphasize strategies forreconstruction and renewal in post-conflict environments that engage in-country entrepreneurs ascentral actors early-on, rather than late in the game and on the periphery. Such strategic planningwill have little weight if not backed by a structure that enables DoD and USAID to make jointlyconsidered investments in technological capabilities and organizational development that willpermit successful mission hand-off and will seed entrepreneur-based social renewal in placeswhere the United States is compelled, for whatever reason, to have a military presence in thefuture.Agency responsibility: USAID, DoD, NISTBudget: $20/year million in new funding + $20/year million redirected from existing staffingcommitmentsTimeframe: 36-month launch, ongoing thereafter
  6. 6. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]Policy Proposal 1.4: Deploy crowd-sourcing and social networking technologies to identifyoutstanding entrepreneurs and facilitate partnershipsThe U.S. government has valuable information, which is in the public domain, regarding newtechnologies and the entrepreneurs who are working to bring them to market. We propose thatthe government work with national leaders, such as LinkedIn and the Kauffman Foundation, toemploy crowd-sourcing and social networking technologies to help identify and recognizeoutstanding entrepreneurs who are working to advance development in both the U.S. and in thedeveloping world. This could be based on the model of USAID’s Development 2.0 Challenge,but on a considerably greater scale.Seeded with data that is in the public domain, this secure site would offer not only a validateddatabase of technology entrepreneurs who have received federal funding (e.g., through the SmallBusiness Innovation Research program, ATP, or other federal programs), but, more important,would enable users to initiate new connections and establish collaborative arrangements based onshared objectives and complementary capabilities. As the site develops, it would serve as a “backoffice” to facilitate partnerships between U.S. entrepreneurs (including student entrepreneurs),their counterparts overseas, and the business process and financial resources available to supportthose partnerships.This platform could also complement support for a global series of National Business PlanCompetitions focused on identifying entrepreneurs with compelling business ideas and providingthem technical and business building skills to scale their enterprises—much on the modelcurrently used by TechnoServe, the Unreasonable Institute, the Seven Fund, and Ashoka’ responsibility: USAID, OSTP, Small Business AdministrationBudget: $2 million in new fundingTimeframe: 24-36 monthsPolicy Proposal 1.5: Actively encourage national governments to adopt policies that favorentrepreneurial entryA key element in accelerating entrepreneurship as a driver for development is to understand thefactors that enable and inhibit entrepreneurial entry and the growth of new firms. These factorsare less a function of the policy absolutes (e.g., whether or not a business-friendly climate exists)than of the relative “price” of entry—the ease with which new entrants can exploit opportunity,as compared with incumbent firms (or, where relevant, the government). The World Bank hasprovided a substantial service by beginning to track policies favorable to entrepreneurs. The U.S.government should support governments elsewhere in the world that would like technical andother assistance in implementing policies favorable to entrepreneurial entry and the growth ofentrepreneurial firms.Agency responsibility: Department of StateBudget: $1 million in new funding + $1-$2 million/year redirected from existing staffingcommitmentsTimeframe: ongoing
  7. 7. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]2. Fostering a New Generation of Inventive Global Change LeadersPolicy Proposal 2.1: Seed a global network of universities with the capability to design fordevelopmentWe propose that the U.S. government seed the creation of 100 university programs focused ondesign for the global majority,4 that would drive the creation of breakthrough innovations toadvance development. They would also prepare university innovators worldwide to leadentrepreneurial efforts to effect positive change. We term this initiative DR-100, for the creationof 100 programs to drive development through a design revolution.Programs that provide hands-on extracurricular opportunities for service in learning havebecome widespread, through the efforts of organizations like Engineers Without Borders, whichnow has over 200 chapters at universities in the U.S. that give students opportunities to workwith poor communities, typically to address infrastructure and public health needs.A number of U.S. universities have developed strong, successful programs that enable thecreation of breakthrough technologies that provide services in ascending markets. MIT’s D-Labis an example of such a program. Each year, 30 MIT undergraduates learn about villageproblems in countries like Haiti, Zambia, and Ghana, design practical solutions for theseproblems, and then test them in the field. MIT’s Legatum Center for Development andEntrepreneurship is similarly training MIT students to design and deploy entrepreneurialsolutions to global challenges. Another model, in the D-School at Stanford University, providesdesign-driven hands-on opportunities for multidisciplinary teams to create and launchbreakthrough products. These three programs have launched student-led products and venturesthat develop high-impact solutions to address basic needs, such as fuel and lighting.The most successful programs share the following priorities:1. Building participation and developing quality capacity in technology innovation for the poorin higher education institutions in both developed and developing countries2. Developing model courses in design for the poor in North America, Europe, and developingcountries, and providing initial financial support for this development3. Building an infrastructure for effective communication and learning among faculty, students,and industry mentors, including sharing successful strategies for continued productive mutuallearning between institutions of higher education and the specific settings where key globalproblems existThe proposed DR-100 initiative will capitalize on student interest and engagement in service-oriented programs, such as Engineers Without Borders, and broaden their opportunities forlearning to include an entrepreneurial approach and a focus on the application of cutting-edgetechnology to create affordable breakthrough innovations. It will foster the next generation ofinnovators, with a focus on high-impact breakthrough technologies (beyond implementation ofexisting solutions) to reach underserved markets.Again, if created, the Smithsonian Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation on the NationalMall could serve as a hub for this initiative. The National Collegiate Inventors and Innovators4 As a point of reference, see exhibit at the Cooper-Hewitt Museum, sponsored by the Lemelson Foundation, on “Design for theOther 90%” <>.
  8. 8. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]Alliance and D-REV5 (founded by Paul Polak) have an expressed commitment to advancing theDR-100 initiative. The Lemelson Foundation has been a consistent supporter of design fordevelopment.Agency responsibility: USAID, NIST, NSF, DoD, DoE, HHS, VABudget: $20-40 million in new fundingTimeframe: 36-month launchPolicy Proposal 2.2: Create a Smithsonian Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation onthe National Mall to showcase the leadership role of the United States in developingentrepreneurial solutions to global challengesThe still-vacant Arts and Industries Building on the National Mall would be the ideal location forthe founding of a Smithsonian Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation that would• Celebrate and support the inventiveness and entrepreneurship of all Americans;• Communicate and advance America’s vital role in the 21st century as a source of solutions to global challenges.By nurturing a culture of innovation both at the Smithsonian and throughout the United States,the Center would encourage the development and deployment of entrepreneurial solutions toglobal challenges and reaffirm America’s positive role in the world community.The original purpose of the Arts and Industries building—to showcase and celebrate Americaningenuity—could be adapted fluidly for this new mission. Exhibits, educational programs, andconvenings would catalyze and convey transformational new ideas, thus creating value forsociety.The Arts and Industries Building would:• Provide an integrative, forward-looking platform for the unparalleled content in the Smithsonian’s collections• Realize potential synergies that exist among the diverse entities that comprise the Smithsonian Institution• Promote new external partnerships that will extend, on a global scale, the reach and impact of communities of learning to which the Smithsonian is a vital contributor (see 1.2 and 2.1 above)Designed to be operationally self-sustaining, the Smithsonian Center for Entrepreneurship andInnovation would be a lasting resource for the nation and the world.Agency responsibility: The Smithsonian Institution, in partnership with the National Academy ofSciences; leading universities in the Washington, D.C., area, elsewhere in the United States, andaround the world; private foundations; not-for-profit organizations such as Engineers WithoutBorders and Maker Faire; and U.S. corporationsBudget: $50 million in federal funds, matched by $250 million in private commitments, torefurbish and repurpose the Arts and Industries Building; $10 million/year additional annualfunding thereafter to support programmatic activitiesTimeframe: ongoing5 See <>.
  9. 9. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]Annex 1. Policies to harness the mobile revolution for development, security,and human rights6The mobile revolution is well underway.7 Current trends suggest strongly that with or withoutthe involvement of the U.S. government or major multilateral organizations, the mobilerevolution will continue for the foreseeable future, bringing significant benefits to the majority ofthe world’s population that until recently has remained on the margins of the global economy.Nonetheless, we, the authors of this memorandum (see note below), share the view that the U.S.government can make significant beneficial contributions to both the rate and the direction of theglobal changes effected by mobile communications.Indeed, it is possible that such an initiative, properly directed in the next 2-3 years, couldpositively affect the lives of more people in the coming decade than any other action the U.S.government could undertake.We envision three broad areas of engagement for the U.S. government in harnessing the mobilerevolution:A1.1. Convening leaders in the mobile industry (e.g., via the GSM Association),international organizations (e.g., UNCTAD, IFC), and major consumers oftelecommunications and financial services in developing countries (e.g., multinationalcorporations) • To accelerate the adoption of leading mobile services, such as mobile payments; • To develop shared standards for data exchange, facilitating interoperability (including via “cloud computing”); • To encourage and strengthen flexible regulation that does not impede innovations that could transform delivery of essential products and services to the poor; • To ease the process by which remittances can be transferred via mobile phones; and • To seek approaches that lower the price of SMS messaging.Agency responsibility: The Department of State (Global Partnerships Initiative), the Departmentof Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administration (Office ofInternational Affairs)Budget: $10-$20 millionTimeframe: 18 monthsDirect Benefits to the United States: U.S. corporations have been among the leaders ininnovation via open architectures. By decreasing the costs of doing business in developingcountries and increasing the potential for more active forms of customer engagement, advancesin mobile communications will facilitate increased trade and commerce with those parts of theworld that will drive global economic growth over the coming quarter centuryA1.2. Actively supporting the development and deployment of open-source, interoperablemobile applications (in particular SMS) in a range of areas, including health, financial6 This set of recommendations was drafted by Philip Auerswald, George Mason University and Harvard University; Ken Banks,; Menekse Gencer, mPay Connect; Erik Hersman, Ushahidi; Ben Lyon, FrontlineSMS:Credit; Josh Nesbit,FrontlineSMS:Medic; Jan Chipchase, Nokia.7 Thomas Kalil. “Harnessing the Mobile Revolution.” Innovations: Technology | Governance | Globalization 4, no. 1 (2009): 9–23.
  10. 10. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]services, election monitoring, and human rights through direct funding, prizes, and thefacilitation of advance-usage commitments, with an emphasis on connecting U.S. and in-country talent, and on nurturing entrepreneurship among youth with programming skills.Agency responsibility: Department of the Treasury (Fighting Illicit Finance Program), NationalInstitutes of Health, VA, DoD, OPICBudget: $50-$250 millionTimeframe: 24-36 monthsDirect Benefits to the United States: Mobile health case services delivered over wirelessbroadband infrastructure have the potential to contribute significantly to reductions in the cost ofproviding health care to the elderly, and to improving care for veterans located in rural areas inthe United States. Such services may also improve delivery of health care and financial servicesin a variety of crisis contexts, thus increasing national resilience.3. Convening leaders in the mobile industry (e.g., via the GSM Association), United NationsHigh Commissioner for Refugees, and leaders of open-source mapping initiatives (e.g., to develop and deploy mobile and GPS-enabled mechanisms formobile-based tracking of identity and property rightsAgency responsibility: Department of State (Bureau of Public Affairs; Bureau of Population,Refugees, and Migration), National Institute of Standards and Technology, National Geospatial-Intelligence AgencyBudget: $50-$100 million, including resources dedicated from existing budget linesTimeframe: 36-48 monthsDirect Benefits to the United States: Documentation of individual identity and property rights isa prerequisite for rule of law and the growth of market exchange. The United States benefitsdirectly from the increased security afforded by the extension of formal systems of identification.Furthermore, by lowering the costs to citizens and consumers of developing and maintaining aformal identity, and by increasing the benefits of developing a mobile identity (e.g., throughactions accelerated by policy initiatives A1.1 and A1.2 above), the mobile and related industries,with support from the U.S. government and international organizations, can draw even illiciteconomic transactions onto the grid. This is of great significance to maintaining the integrity ofthe global financial system, as an estimated $500-$800 billion in illicit capital flows fromdeveloping to developed countries every year—10 times the amount of aid that flows fromdeveloped to developing countries.
  11. 11. Policy Options to Accelerating Entrepreneurship as a Driver for Development [PSD-7]Annex 2: Additional ReadingIbrahim Abouleish and Helmy Abouleish. “Garden in the Desert: Sekem Makes ComprehensiveSustainable Development a Reality in Egypt.” Innovations: Technology | Governance |Globalization 3, no. 3 (2008): 21–48.Philip Auerswald. “Creating Social Value.” Stanford Social Innovation Review (Spring 2009):51–55.President Paul Kagame. “The Backbone of a New Rwanda.” In Michael Fairbanks, Malik Fal,Marcela Escobari-Rose, and Elizabeth Hooper, eds. In the River They Swim: Essays from Aroundthe World on Enterprise Solutions to Poverty Today. West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton Press,2009. [attached]Thomas Kalil. “Harnessing the Mobile Revolution.” Innovations: Technology | Governance |Globalization 4, no. 1 (2009): 9–23.Julia Novy-Hildesley. “By the Grace of Invention: How Individuals Power Development.”Innovations: Technology | Governance | Globalization Tech4Society special edition (2010): 7–24. [attached]Paul Polak. Out of Poverty: What Works When Traditional Approaches Fail. San Francisco, CA:Berrett-Koehler, 2008.Paul Polak, Peggy Reid, and Amy Schefer. “2.4 Billion Customers: How Business Can ScaleSolutions to Poverty.” Innovations: Technology | Governance | Globalization Tech4Societyspecial edition (2010): 163–178. [attached]Iqbal Quadir. “Foreign Aid and Bad Government.” Wall Street Journal, January 30, 2009. J. Schramm. “Toward an Entrepreneurial Society: Why Measurement Matters.”Innovations: Technology | Governance | Globalization 3, no. 1 (2008): 3–10.