Targeting Outcomes Redux
AbstractA newly constructed comprehensive database of 122 targeted antipoverty interventions in 48 countries is used to examine the contested issue of the efficacy of targeting interventions in developing countries. Though the median program transfers 25 percent more to poor individuals (those in the bottom two quintiles) than would universal allocation, a quarter of the interventions are regressive. Targeting is better in richer countries, in countries where governments are more likely to be held accountable, and in countries where inequality is higher. Interventions that use means testing, geographic targeting, and self-selection based on a work requirement are all associated with an increased share of benefits going to poor people. Proxy-means testing, community-based selection, and demographic targeting to children show good results on average but with wide variation. Self-selection based on consumption, demographic targeting to the elderly, and community bidding show limited potential for good targeting. The substantial variation in targeting performance within specific program types and specific targeting methods suggests that differences in implementation are also important factors in determining the success of targeting to poor individuals. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by World Bank Group in its journal The World Bank Research Observer.
Volume (Year): 19 (2004)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK
Phone: (202) 477-1234
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://wbro.oxfordjournals.org/
More information through EDIRC
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.