I am always on the lookout for impact evaluations that give us the long term effects of interventions. I recently came across a paper by Pablo Ibarraran, Jochen Kluve, Laura Ripani and David Rosas Shady looking at the effects of a youth training program in the Dominican Republic. While we have some evidence on the long term effects of these kind of programs from developed countries, this is quite possibly the first in a developing context.
Markus Goldstein's blog
About a year ago, I blogged on a paper that had tried to replicate results on 61 papers in economics and found that in 51% of the cases, they couldn’t get the same result. In the meantime, someone brought to my attention a paper that takes a wider sample and also makes us think about what “replication” is, so I thought it would be worth looking at those results.
Last week I was at the GLM-LIC/IZA research conference and there was a pretty diverse and interesting group of papers – some fairly finished, and some still at the idea stage. Note that almost every paper here had co-authors, but I’ve left them out unless they also presented – the links will give you more information. Now, fasten your seat belts as we whizz through 2.5 days of papers in 15 minutes.
Surveys are expensive. And, in sub-Saharan Africa in particular, a big part of that cost is logistics – fuel, car-hire and the like. So with the increasing mobile phone coverage more folks are thinking about, and actually using, phones in lieu of in person interviews to complete surveys. The question is: what does that do to data quality?
No, dear reader it’s not a typo. Bear with me and I’ll explain.
I’ve recently been doing some work with my team at the Gender Innovation Lab on data we collected that was interrupted by conflict (and by conflict here I mean the armed variety, between organized groups). This got me thinking about how doing an impact evaluation in a conflict situation is different and so I reached out to a number of people - Chris Blattman, Andrew Beath, Niklas Buehren, Shubha Chakravarty, and Macartan Humphreys – for their views (collectively they’re “the crowd” in the rest of this post). What follows are a few of my observations and a heck of a lot of theirs (and of cou
I was recently at the GW conference on the economics & political economy of Africa where I saw an interesting paper by Richard Akresh, Emilie Bagby, Damien de Walque, and Harounan Kazianga on Burkina Faso. Akresh and co. make another compelling argument for focusing on early childhood (and indeed, in utero). Kids whose household has a shock during this critical period are less smart – and this leads to them going to school less.
A nice new paper by Abhijit Banerjee, Sylvain Chassang, and Erik Snowberg brings theory to how we choose to do evaluations – with some interesting insights into those of us who do them. It’s elegantly written, and full of interesting examples and thought experiments – well worth a read beyond the injustice I will do it here.
Last year, Banerjee and coauthors published a paper in Science that showed the striking impacts of poverty graduation programs in 6 countries after three years. This week, we get a new paper from Bandiera and coauthors that revisits one of the models of this type of program they wrote about in 2013 and looks not only at a wide range of benefits, but also at what happens in the longer run.