IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/wbecrv/v28y2014i3p413-431..html

Can We Trust Shoestring Evaluations?

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Ravallion

Abstract

Many more impact evaluations could be done, and at lower unit cost, if evaluators could avoid the need for baseline data using objective socio-economic surveys and rely instead on retrospective subjective questions on how outcomes have changed, asked post-intervention. But would the results be reliable? This paper tests a rapid-appraisal, "shoestring" method using subjective recall for welfare changes. The recall data were collected at the end of a full-scale evaluation of a large World Bank supported poor-area development program in China. Qualitative recalls on how living standards have changed are found to provide only weak and biased signals of the changes in consumption as measured from contemporaneous surveys. Importantly, the shoestring method was unable to correct for the selective placement of the program favoring poor villages. The results of this case study are not encouraging for future applications of the shoestring method, although similar tests are needed in other settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Ravallion, 2014. "Can We Trust Shoestring Evaluations?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 28(3), pages 413-431.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:wbecrv:v:28:y:2014:i:3:p:413-431.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/wber/lht016
    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

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. McKenzie, David, 2016. "Can Business Owners Form Accurate Counterfactuals? Eliciting Treatment and Control Beliefs about Their Outcomes in the Alternat," CEPR Discussion Papers 11280, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Minten, Bart & Singh, K.M. & Sutradhar, Rajib, 2013. "Branding and agricultural value chains in developing countries: Insights from Bihar (India)," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 23-34.
    3. Sophie Mitra & Michael Palmer & Daniel Mont & Nora Groce, 2016. "Can Households Cope with Health Shocks in Vietnam?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(7), pages 888-907, July.
    4. Masamitsu Kurata & Noriatsu Matsui & Yukio Ikemoto & Hiromi Tsuboi, 2018. "In recent years, the Sustainable Development Goals has managed to shepherd the reduction of energy poverty and extension of sustainable energy, making both international objectives. Using two-period d," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(2), pages 995-1013.
    5. McKenzie, David, 2020. "If it needs a power calculation, does it matter for poverty reduction?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).

    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:wbecrv:v:28:y:2014:i:3:p:413-431.. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/wrldbus.html .

    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.