To Target or Not to Target? The cost efficiency of indicator-based targeting
AbstractThis paper assesses the cost efficiency of indicator-based targeting. Using household survey data from Malawi, we examine whether an indicator-based targeting of the poor is more target- and cost-efficient than the currently used mechanisms for targeting agricultural subsidy programs in the country. There is compelling evidence in favor of targeting Malawi’s poor based on the newly developed system. An indicator-based targeting system appears to be more target- and cost-efficient than the 2000/01 Starter Pack and the 2006/07 Agricultural Input Subsidy Program (AISP). While the Starter Pack and the AISP transferred about 50% of total transfer, under an indicator-based system, about 73% of transfers are delivered to the poor. Likewise, under an indicator-based system, the costs of leakage are cut down by more than 50% compared to Starter Pack and AISP. This work is prospectively relevant for Malawi as its policy makers reflect on improving the efficiency of the country’s pro-poor development programs. Likewise, the research can be applied in other countries with similar targeting problems.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Agricultural and Applied Economics Association in its series 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado with number 61007.
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC
Malawi; poverty targeting; validation tests; cost efficiency; development policy; Agricultural and Food Policy; Community/Rural/Urban Development; Food Security and Poverty; Political Economy; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods; C01; C13; I32;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C01 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Econometrics
- C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
- I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dorward, Andrew & Chirwa, Ephraim & Kelly, Valerie A. & Jayne, Thomas S. & Slater, Rachel & Boughton, Duncan, 2008. "Evaluation Of The 2006/7 Agricultural Input Subsidy Programme, Malawi. Final Report," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 97143, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
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.