Hidden Impact? Ex-Post Evaluation of an Anti-Poverty Program
Author(s) -
Shaohua Chen,
Martin Ravallion
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
ssrn electronic journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1556-5068
DOI - 10.2139/ssrn.417160
Subject(s) - beneficiary , poverty , impact evaluation , difference in differences , economics , poverty threshold , demographic economics , matching (statistics) , propensity score matching , china , socioeconomics , public economics , economic growth , geography , econometrics , statistics , mathematics , finance , archaeology
By the widely used difference-in-difference method, the Southwest China Poverty Reduction Project had little impact on the proportion of people in beneficiary villages consuming less than $1/day — despite a public outlay of $400 million. Is that right, or is the true impact being hidden somehow? We find that impact estimates are quite sensitive to the choice of outcome indicator, the poverty line and the matching method. There are larger poverty impacts at lower poverty lines. And there are much larger impacts on incomes than consumptions. Uncertainty about the project's impact probably made it hard for participants to infer the gain in permanent income, so they saved a high proportion of the short- term gain.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom