IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/qjecon/v133y2018i2p993-1039..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Double for Nothing? Experimental Evidence on an Unconditional Teacher Salary Increase in Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Joppe de Ree
  • Karthik Muralidharan
  • Menno Pradhan
  • Halsey Rogers

Abstract

How does a large unconditional increase in salary affect the performance of incumbent employees in the public sector? We present experimental evidence on this question in the context of a policy change in Indonesia that led to a permanent doubling of teacher base salaries. Using a large-scale randomized experiment across a representative sample of Indonesian schools that accelerated this pay increase for teachers in treated schools, we find that the large pay increase significantly improved teachers' satisfaction with their income, reduced the incidence of teachers holding outside jobs, and reduced self-reported financial stress. Nevertheless, after two and three years, the increase in pay led to no improvement in student learning outcomes. The effects are precisely estimated, and we can rule out even modest positive impacts on test scores. Our results suggest that unconditional pay increases are unlikely to be an effective policy option for improving the effort and productivity of incumbent employees in public-sector settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Joppe de Ree & Karthik Muralidharan & Menno Pradhan & Halsey Rogers, 2018. "Double for Nothing? Experimental Evidence on an Unconditional Teacher Salary Increase in Indonesia," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(2), pages 993-1039.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:qjecon:v:133:y:2018:i:2:p:993-1039.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/qje/qjx040
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    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:oup:qjecon:v:133:y:2018:i:2:p:993-1039.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/qje .

    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.