IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/ijhcfe/v19y2019i3d10.1007_s10754-018-9259-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do government audits reduce dengue? Estimating the impact of federal monitoring lotteries program on dengue incidence

Author

Listed:
  • Gisléia Benini Duarte

    (Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco)

  • André de Souza Melo

    (Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco)

  • Diego Firmino Costa da Silva

    (Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco)

Abstract

The paper examines the relationship between the supervision carried out in the municipalities by the main Brazilan supervisory institution (Controladoria Geral da União—CGU, in portuguese) and the incidence of dengue cases in them. Since the audited municipalities were randomized, this allows the identification of a control group that adequately represents the counterfactual of the treated group. The sample was composed of all municipalities that could be selected for that CGU inspection cycle, that is, 1520 municipalities, of which 70 were drawn and therefore belong to the study treatment group. We identified a negative effect of the policy on the incidence of the disease. However, when we consider a model with lags, we note that this initial impact from the drawing did not persist throughout the year of the inspection. Our analysis suggests that when federal resources are monitored, municipalities reduce irregularities, which may contribute to a decrease in the number of dengue cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Gisléia Benini Duarte & André de Souza Melo & Diego Firmino Costa da Silva, 2019. "Do government audits reduce dengue? Estimating the impact of federal monitoring lotteries program on dengue incidence," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 359-369, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:ijhcfe:v:19:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10754-018-9259-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10754-018-9259-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10754-018-9259-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10754-018-9259-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2009. "Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8769.
    2. Granger, C W J, 1969. "Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross-Spectral Methods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 37(3), pages 424-438, July.
    3. Eric Avis & Claudio Ferraz & Frederico Finan & Carlos Varjão, "undated". "Money and Politics: The Effects of Campaign Spending Limits on Political Competition and Incumbency Advantage," Textos para discussão 656, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
    4. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
    5. Claudio Ferraz & Frederico Finan, 2008. "Exposing Corrupt Politicians: The Effects of Brazil's Publicly Released Audits on Electoral Outcomes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(2), pages 703-745.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kendall D. Funk & Erica Owen, 2020. "Consequences of an Anti‐Corruption Experiment for Local Government Performance in Brazil," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 444-468, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cage & Michael Sinkinson, 2020. "Media Competition and News Diets," Sciences Po publications 2020-03, Sciences Po.
    2. Andreas Peichl & Nico Pestel & Sebastian Siegloch, 2013. "The politicians’ wage gap: insights from German members of parliament," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 653-676, September.
    3. Ralf Becker & Maggy Fostier, 2015. "Evaluating non-compulsory educational interventions - the case of peer assisted study groups," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1509, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    4. León, Gianmarco, 2017. "Turnout, political preferences and information: Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 56-71.
    5. Anna Bindler & Nadine Ketel, 2022. "Scaring or Scarring? Labor Market Effects of Criminal Victimization," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(4), pages 939-970.
    6. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03384143, HAL.
    7. Toro, Weily & Tigre, Robson & Sampaio, Breno, 2015. "Daylight Saving Time and incidence of myocardial infarction: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1-4.
    8. Rezki, Jahen F., 2023. "Does the mobile phone affect social development? Evidence from Indonesian villages," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3).
    9. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," Sciences Po publications 2021-08, Sciences Po.
    10. Robert A. HartBy & Mirko Moro & J. Elizabeth Roberts, 2017. "Who gained from the introduction of free universal secondary education in England and Wales?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(3), pages 707-733.
    11. Ashesh Rambachan & Jonathan Roth, 2020. "Design-Based Uncertainty for Quasi-Experiments," Papers 2008.00602, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    12. Blunch, Niels-Hugo & Datta Gupta, Nabanita, 2020. "Mothers’ health knowledge gap for children with diarrhea: A decomposition analysis across caste and religion in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    13. Paul Hunermund & Elias Bareinboim, 2019. "Causal Inference and Data Fusion in Econometrics," Papers 1912.09104, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    14. Anup Agrawal & Tareque Nasser, 2019. "Blockholders on Boards and CEO Compensation, Turnover and Firm Valuation," Quarterly Journal of Finance (QJF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 1-67, September.
    15. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1dp7827s4n8ht8fk3qhmeuvd0o is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    17. Yihui He & Fang Han, 2023. "On propensity score matching with a diverging number of matches," Papers 2310.14142, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    18. Guido W. Imbens, 2022. "Causality in Econometrics: Choice vs Chance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(6), pages 2541-2566, November.
    19. Maximiliano Lauletta & Martín Rossi & Christian Ruzzier, 2021. "Playing Whac-A-Mole in the Fight against Corruption: Evidence from Random Audits in Brazil," Working Papers 157, Universidad de San Andres, Departamento de Economia, revised Sep 2021.
    20. Gregory J. Wawro & Ira Katznelson, 2020. "American political development and new challenges of causal inference," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 299-314, December.
    21. Roel Dom, 2017. "Semi-Autonomous Revenue Authorities in Sub-Saharan Africa: Silver Bullet or White Elephant," Discussion Papers 2017-01, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Policy evaluation; Randomized; Audit; Dengue;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:ijhcfe:v:19:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s10754-018-9259-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.