Crump and Norberg-Bohm Fellowship Reflections

Each year, the Belfer Center's Environment and Natural Resources Program supports several Harvard doctoral candidates who are pursuing critical research on policy issues related to climate change, environmental protection, energy, and other areas through the Joseph Crump Fellowship and the Vicki Norberg-Bohm Fellowship. 

We sat down with this year's cohort of Crump and Norberg-Bohm fellows, who shared their reflections on their fellowship experiences and the research progress they have made. 

Magdalena Larreboure

2024-2025 Joseph Crump Fellow
PhD Candidate in Public Policy
Home Country: Chile

Before HKS: 

Prior to starting my PhD, I worked as a senior research specialist at the Busara Center in Nairobi, Kenya. I have a Master’s degree in economics and a Bachelor’s degree in business and economics from Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.

Why study water politics in Chile?

I’ve always been interested in protests, and since coming to the Kennedy School, I’ve become more interested in environmental issues. Water politics are at the intersection of both, and as climate change affects the course of rains, both drought and floods can impact water availability in rural areas.
Chile underwent a huge social movement called Estallido Social in 2019. There was wide criticism of the system that governs the country, which exacerbates inequalities, and one of the main complaints was the distribution of access to water, which is currently concentrated in big industries such as mining and large-scale agriculture. Rural areas in Chile have experienced a decrease in access to water over time and conflicts over water are on the rise. Part of this is because of a mega-drought, but I wanted to understand how existing water governance impacts the situation.

My research has two parts: First, using spatial data on water rights going back to the 1980s, I’m exploring whether the allocation of water rights for productive activities affects the current distribution of water shortages. Second, I’m interested in how changes in water availability, whether from natural or human causes, impact political outcomes in rural communities facing water stress. Are people in those communities blaming the companies for the water stress? Are they more likely to vote for candidates campaigning on water issues? Or for extremist or populist parties?

Early Research Findings:

Something that shocked me is the stark inequality in the distribution of groundwater rights in Chile. The top 10% of water rights holders account for almost 70% of the country’s water. Splitting it further, the top 1%, which is fewer than 400 users, hold almost 30% of the water.

So, why is the burden of rationing water falling on everyday citizens? Of course, the government can’t expropriate water rights at will, and there’s a trade-off with the economic benefits and employment opportunities these companies bring. Moreover, larger companies tend to be more efficient with their water usage and are faster to adapt to drought than smaller users and water utilities.

If you want to solve the water crisis, you might want to target the usage of these large companies, but politically and legally it’s challenging to do so. Instead, the government has provided tanker trucks for domestic water consumption during the “emergency” and is slowly investing in more infrastructure for affected rural areas. It’s an interesting problem to study.

Experience as a Crump Fellow:

People often think that as a PhD student you’re working on your thesis 24/7, but the reality is that you work on multiple projects at a time, some co-authored with other students or with professors, and besides you have to teach which takes a lot of your time. The Crump fellowship allowed me to have more time to dedicate fully to my project, which is incredibly valuable in this journey. With this time, I improved my skills with spatial data, read widely about water governance systems in different countries, and had the chance to travel to Chile mid-semester to conduct semi-structured interviews with relevant actors (supplemented with the SEHE stipend from the Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy).

Regarding post-grad plans, the Crump Fellowship made me double-down on my plan to become an academic at an interdisciplinary institution, be it in public policy, environment sciences or business school. Being able to experiment with different methods and draw from various fields is extremely valuable in my view.

Khadidja Ngom

2024-2025 Vicki Norberg-Bohm Fellow
PhD Candidate in Public Policy
Home Country: Senegal

Before Harvard: 
Prior to starting my PhD, I was a senior analyst at Analysis Group, where I conducted research at the intersection of environmental and health economics. I also worked to support experts across several antitrust litigation cases. I have a B.A in Economics and International Studies from Macalester College.

Why study gas flaring in Nigeria?
My research explores the long-term health effects of gas flaring. Gas flaring is a common practice in the oil industry, and it has been associated with the deterioration of ambient air quality. However, most of the literature to date has focused on the effects of flaring in developed countries. My hope with this project is to contribute to this literature by focusing on settings where avoidance behavior may be limited.

Experience as a Norberg-Bohm Fellow:
Last summer, thanks to the Norberg-Bohm Fellowship, I was able to visit Rivers State, Nigeria. It was important for me to see firsthand what flaring sites look like and to understand the impact of hydrocarbon pollution on local communities. Moreover, this experience allowed me to connect with researchers and faculty at Rivers State University who are working on this topic and whose insights have been invaluable.

Early Research Findings:
The project is currently underway, and I am in the process of analyzing data and refining the empirical strategy. I look forward to sharing the findings as the analysis progresses.

Katie Zhang

2024-2025 Vicki Norberg-Bohm Fellow
PhD Candidate in Public Policy (Economics Track)
Home Country: Australia

Before Harvard: 

Before beginning my PhD at Harvard, I completed my undergraduate studies at the University of Melbourne, earning a Bachelor of Commerce in Economics and Finance, followed by an Honours degree in Economics, where I wrote an environmental economics thesis on the environmental impact of a Chinese place-based policy—work that laid the foundation for my current interest in the field. Following graduation, I worked as a Research Economist at the Australian Government Productivity Commission, then later came stateside to join the University of Chicago as a Research Professional.

Why study mercury usage in small-scale gold mining?

I'm interested in understanding the persistent use of mercury in artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM), particularly why simple and low-cost protective technologies—like retorts, which can capture up to 95% of toxic mercury vapor—remain underused. This question matters not only due to mercury’s potential for severe health risks, but also because ASGM is the single largest source of global anthropogenic mercury emissions, accounting for approximately 37% by the UN Environment Programme. Like many environmental health issues in low-income countries, it disproportionately affects the poorest communities.

Australia’s own gold mining history partly shaped my interest. During the 19th-century gold rushes, my hometown of Melbourne prospered, with many of our iconic buildings funded by gold wealth. Today, mercury has been phased out in Australia and other wealthy producers like Canada thanks to more advanced technologies and an awareness of its dangers. But in much of the developing world, particularly in small-scale operations, mercury remains the norm. I became interested in whether tools from environmental and development economics could help to tackle this issue.

Experience as a Norberg-Bohm Fellow:

With support from the Vicki Norberg-Bohm Fellowship, I travelled to Western Kenya for a scoping trip to assess the feasibility of an intervention on mercury usage in ASGM. Data on mercury use in such contexts is scarce, so my co-author and I were considering an intervention that either combined information about mercury toxicity with varying levels of access to, and training in, retort use, or created a centralized processing facility to remove the mercury processing aspect altogether.

Our goal for the trip was to better understand the local context—awareness around mercury risks, availability of protective equipment, labor structures, wages, local economic alternatives, and the functioning of gold and mercury markets. We met with individual miners, cooperatives, health professionals, and NGO staff, which gave us valuable insight into the practical realities of mining in the region.

Early Research Findings:

We found that awareness of mercury toxicity among miners was very low, though many did recognize that dust exposure generally was harmful. Still, most viewed mining, despite the risks, as the best available income source as it generally paid more than the predominant outside option of agriculture. Interestingly, some miners even preferred informal mines due to the higher variance in earnings, suggesting a preference for riskier payoffs over stable but lower wages in formal employment.

However, the trip also revealed significant challenges for our initially planned intervention. The context is low-trust, meaning there would be difficulties in interventions that require the sharing of resources between miners at several small miners. Additionally, we would need to give more consideration to the level of randomization, since there may be power concerns from the sample size limitations. While our original plan may need rethinking, the trip was immensely valuable in informing our next steps. We're now reevaluating the design and discussing with advisors whether to adapt the intervention or consider a different setting altogether.