Efficiency, Legitimacy, and Impacts of Targeting Methods: Evidence from an Experiment in Niger
[ad_1]
No AccessPoverty ReductionNov 2021
The methods to select safety net beneficiaries are the subject of frequent debates. Targeting assessments usually focus on efficiency by documenting the pre-program profile of selected beneficiaries. This study provides a more comprehensive analysis of targeting performance through an experiment embedded in a national cash transfer program in Niger. Eligible villages were randomly assigned to have beneficiary households selected by community-based targeting (CBT), proxy-means testing (PMT), or a formula to identify the food-insecure (FCS). The study considers targeting legitimacy and the impact of targeting choice on program effectiveness based on data collected after program roll-out. PMT is more efficient in identifying households with lower consumption per capita. Nonbeneficiaries find formula-based methods (PMT and FCS) more legitimate than CBT. Manipulation and information imperfections affect CBT, which can explain why it is not the most legitimate. Program impacts on some welfare dimensions are larger among households selected by PMT than CBT.
References
- . 2012. “Targeting the Poor: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia.” American Economic Review 102 (4): 1206–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2019. “Does Elite Capture Matter? Local Elites and Targeted Welfare Programs in Indonesia.” AEA Papers and Proceedings 109: 334–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2016a. “Network Structure and the Aggregation of Information: Theory and Evidence from Indonesia.” American Economic Review 106 (7): 1663–704. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2016b. “Self-Targeting: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia.” Journal of Political Economy 124 (2): 371–427. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2018. “Finding the Poor vs. Measuring Their Poverty: Exploring the Drivers of Targeting Effectiveness in Indonesia.” World Bank Economic Review 33 (3): 573–97. LinkGoogle Scholar
- . 2019. “Universal Basic Income in the Developing World.” Annual Review of Economics 11 (1): 959–83. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2000. “Capture and Governance at Local and National Levels.” American Economic Review 90 (2): 135–39. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2019. “Decentralization and Efficiency of Subsidy Targeting: Evidence from Chiefs in Rural Malawi.” Journal of Public Economics 185: 1–25. Google Scholar
- . 2020. “Food Security Measures in Sub-Saharan Africa. A Validation of the LSMS-ISA Scale.” Journal of African Economies 29 (1): 90–120. Google Scholar
- . 2019. “Promoting Productive Inclusion and Resilience among the Poor: Multi-country RCT of the Sahel Adaptive Social Protection Program.” AEA RCT Registry. Google Scholar
- . 2018. “A Poor Means Test? Econometric Targeting in Africa.” Journal of Development Economics 134: 109–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2014. “Validity and Reliability of Food Security Measures.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1331 (1): 230–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2004a. Targeting of Transfers in Developing Countries: Review of Lessons and Experience. Vol. 1. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications. LinkGoogle Scholar
- . 2004b. “Targeting Outcomes Redux.” World Bank Research Observer 19 (1): 61–85. LinkGoogle Scholar
- . 2004. “On the Targeting and Redistributive Efficiencies of Alternative Transfer Instruments.” Review of Income and Wealth 50 (1): 11–27. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2002. “Community-Based Targeting Mechanisms for Social Safety Nets: A Critical Review.” World Development 30 (3): 375–94. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2015. Safety Nets in Africa: Effective Mechanisms to Reach the Poor and Most Vulnerable. Washington, DC: World Bank; and Agence Française de Développement. LinkGoogle Scholar
- . 2017. “The Targeting Effectiveness of Social Transfers.” Journal of Development Effectiveness 9 (2): 162–211. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2020. Exploring Universal Basic Income: A Guide to Navigating Concepts, Evidence, and Practices. Washington, DC: World Bank. LinkGoogle Scholar
- . 1995. “Proxy Means Tests for Targeting Social Programs.” Working Paper 118, Living Standards Measurement Study, World Bank. Washington, DC, USA. LinkGoogle Scholar
- . 2018. “Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 32 (4): 201–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2019. “Targeting Ultra-poor Households in Honduras and Peru.” World Bank Economic Review 33 (1): 63–94. LinkGoogle Scholar
- . 2016. “How Narrowly Should Anti-poverty Programs Be Targeted? Simulation Evidence from Bolivia and Indonesia.” Discussion Paper Series No. 213, Göttingen University. Göttingen, Germany. Google Scholar
- . 2016. “Retooling Poverty Targeting Using Out-of-Sample Validation and Machine Learning.” World Bank Economic Review 32 (3): 531–50. Google Scholar
- 2013. “Community-Based Targeting in the Social Protection Sector.” Working Paper No. 514, Overseas Development Institute, London, UK. Google Scholar
- 2012. “Beyond Baseline and Follow-Up: The Case for More T in Experiments.” Journal of Development Economics 99 (2): 210–21. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2012. “Who is Vouching for the Input Voucher? Decentralized Targeting and Elite Capture in Tanzania.” World Development 40 (8): 1619–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2020. “Behavioral Change Promotion, Cash Transfers and Early Childhood Development, Experimental Evidence from a Government Program in a Low-income Setting.” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 9368, World Bank: Washington, DC, USA. LinkGoogle Scholar
- . 1995. “Is Targeting Through a Work Requirement Efficient? Some Evidence for Rural India.” In Public Spending and the Poor: Theory and Evidence. Edited by Dominique van de Walle and Kimberly Nead, 413–44. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Google Scholar
- . 2009. “How Relevant is Targeting to the Success of an Antipoverty Program?” World Bank Research Observer 24 (2): 205–31. LinkGoogle Scholar
- . 2019. “How to Target Households in Adaptive Social Protection Systems? Evidence from Humanitarian and Development Approaches in Niger.” Journal of Development Studies 55 (sup1): 75–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2016. “Reaching the Poor: Cash Transfer Program Targeting in Cameroon.” World Development 83: 244–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- . 2020. “Poor Households’ Productive Investments of Cash Transfers: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from Niger.” Journal of African Economies 29 (1): 63–89. Google Scholar
- . 2009. “Validating the World Food Programme’s Food Consumption Score and Alternative Indicators of Household Food Security.” Discussion Paper 00870, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC, USA. Google Scholar
World Bank . 2011. “Niger Safety Net Project, Project Appraisal Document.” World Bank, Washington, DC, USA. Google ScholarWorld Bank . 2017. “Republic of Niger. Priorities for Ending Poverty and Boosting Shared Prosperity. Systematic Country Diagnostic.” World Bank, Washington, DC, USA. LinkGoogle ScholarWorld Food Programme . 2008. “Food Consumption Analysis: Calculation and Use of the Food Consumption Score in Food Consumption and Food Security Analysis.” Technical Guidance Sheet, Rome. Google Scholar- . 1998. “Nonparametric Regression Techniques in Economics.” Journal of Economic Literature 36 (2): 669–721. Google Scholar
[ad_2]
Source link
