IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Programme evaluation: counterfactual analysis and good practices

Listed author(s):
  • Trivellato Ugo

Many empirical issues in economics and other social sciences depend on causal effects of programmes or policies. In the last decades research on statistical and econometric methods to evaluate the effects of such policies has undergone remarkable advances. It has by now reached a level of maturity that makes it an important tool in many areas of empirical research in the social sciences, such as education, research & development, labour economics, industrial organisation, urban development, welfare and poverty, epidemiology, etc. This plain review presents and discusses some of the recent developments, and complements them with a historical overview of the topic. The focus is on the logical frame of programme evaluation, based on counterfactual analysis, and on the relevance of practices of policy design and implementation which incorporate the goal of a credible evaluation of their effects. In this perspective, some good practices of policy evaluation in developed countries are also briefly presented.

If 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.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Società editrice il Mulino in its journal Politica economica.

Volume (Year): (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 5-54

in new window

Handle: RePEc:mul:je8794:doi:10.1429/31934:y:2010:i:1:p:5-54
Contact details of provider: Web page:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mul:je8794:doi:10.1429/31934:y:2010:i:1:p:5-54. See general 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: ()

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.