A cost-effectiveness analysis of demand- and supply-side education interventions
This paper is concerned with the issue of the most cost-effective way of improving access to education for poor households in developing countries. We consider two alternatives: (1) extensive expansion of the school system (i.e., bringing education to the poor) and (2) subsidizing investment in education by the poor (i.e., bringing the poor to the education system). To this end, we evaluate the Programa Nacional de Educación, Salud y Alimentación (PROGRESA), a large poverty alleviation program recently introduced in Mexico that subsidizes education. Using double-difference regression estimators on data collected before and after the program for randomly selected control and treatment households, we estimate the relative impacts of the demand- and supply-side program components. Combining these estimates with cost information, we find that the demand-side subsidies are substantially more cost-effective than supply-side expansions.
|Date of creation:||2002|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 1201 Eye Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005-3915|
Web page: http://www.ifpri.org/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Schultz, T. Paul, 2001.
"School subsidies for the poor,"
102, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Schultz, T. Paul, 2001. "School subsidies for the poor," FCND discussion papers 102, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Hanushek, Eric A, 1995. "Interpreting Recent Research on Schooling in Developing Countries," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 10(2), pages 227-246, August.
- Eric A. Hanushek, "undated". "Interpreting Recent Research on Schooling in Developing Countries," Wallis Working Papers WP3, University of Rochester - Wallis Institute of Political Economy.
- Jean Drèze & Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, 2001. "School Participation in Rural India," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 1-24, 02.
- Psacharopoulos, George, 1994. "Returns to investment in education: A global update," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(9), pages 1325-1343, September.
- Psacharopoulos, George, 1993. "Returns to investment in education : a global update," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1067, The World Bank.
- Schultz, T. Paul, 1988. "Education investments and returns," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 13, pages 543-630 Elsevier.
- Behrman, Jere R & Sengupta, Piyali & Todd, Petra, 2005. "Progressing through PROGRESA: An Impact Assessment of a School Subsidy Experiment in Rural Mexico," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(1), pages 237-275, October.
- Bouis, Howarth E., 1994. "Agricultural technology and food policy to combat iron deficiency in developing countries," FCND discussion papers 1, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Skoufias, Emmanuel & Davis, Benjamin & de la Vega, Sergio, 2001. "Targeting the Poor in Mexico: An Evaluation of the Selection of Households into PROGRESA," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1769-1784, October.
- Rosenzweig, Mark R & Wolpin, Kenneth I, 1986. "Evaluating the Effects of Optimally Distributed Public Programs: ChildHealth and Family Planning Interventions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(3), pages 470-482, June.
- Kremer, Michael R, 1995. "Research on Schooling: What We Know and What We Don't: A Comment," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 10(2), pages 247-254, August. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)