IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipg/wpaper/2015-619.html

An Introduction to Alternative Methods in Program Impact Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Nguyen Viet Cuong

Abstract

During the recent years, researchers as well as policy makers have been increasingly interested in impact evaluation of development programs. A large number of impact evaluations have been developed and applied to measure the impact of programs. Different impact evaluation methods rely on different identification assumptions. This paper presents an overview of several widely-used methods in program impact evaluation. In addition to a randomization-based method, these methods are categorized into: (i) methods assuming “selection on observable” and (ii) methods assuming “selection on unobservable”. The paper discusses each method under identification assumptions and estimation strategy. Identification assumptions are presented in a unified framework of counterfactual and two-equation model.

Suggested Citation

  • Nguyen Viet Cuong, 2015. "An Introduction to Alternative Methods in Program Impact Evaluation," Working Papers 2015-619, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:ipg:wpaper:2015-619
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://faculty-research.ipag.edu/wp-content/uploads/recherche/WP/IPAG_WP_2015_619.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abhijit V. Banerjee & Esther Duflo, 2009. "The Experimental Approach to Development Economics," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 151-178, May.
    2. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2002. "Simple and Bias-Corrected Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," NBER Technical Working Papers 0283, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cuong NGUYEN, 2016. "An Introduction to Alternative Methods in Program Impact Evaluation," Journal of Economic and Social Thought, KSP Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 349-375, September.
    2. Harris, J. Michael & Williams, Robert P. & Mishra, Ashok K., 2015. "The Effect of Gender on Productivity Status in U.S. Agriculture," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205780, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. James J. Heckman, 1991. "Randomization and Social Policy Evaluation Revisited," NBER Technical Working Papers 0107, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Su, Huei-Chun & Colander, David, 2021. "The Economist As Scientist, Engineer, Or Plumber?," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 297-312, June.
    5. Stefano DellaVigna & Elizabeth Linos, 2022. "RCTs to Scale: Comprehensive Evidence From Two Nudge Units," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(1), pages 81-116, January.
    6. Julie Le Gallo & Yannick L'Horty & Pascale Petit, 2014. "Does subsidising young people to learn to drive promote social inclusion? Evidence from a large controlled experiment in France," TEPP Working Paper 2014-15, TEPP.
    7. Miet Maertens & Liesbeth Colen & Johan F. M. Swinnen, 2011. "Globalisation and poverty in Senegal: a worst case scenario?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(1), pages 31-54, March.
    8. Richard Blundell & Lorraine Dearden & Barbara Sianesi, 2005. "Evaluating the effect of education on earnings: models, methods and results from the National Child Development Survey," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 168(3), pages 473-512, July.
    9. Kumar, Neha & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2010. "Access, adoption, and diffusion," IFPRI discussion papers 995, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    10. Antonio Cruz & Carol Newman & John Rand & Finn Tarp, 2017. "Learning by Exporting: The Case of Mozambican Manufacturing," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 26(1), pages 93-118.
    11. Shen, Chung-Hua & Wu, Meng-Wen & Chen, Ting-Hsuan & Fang, Hao, 2016. "To engage or not to engage in corporate social responsibility: Empirical evidence from global banking sector," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 207-225.
    12. Aassve, Arnstein & Arpino, Bruno, 2008. "Estimation of causal effects of fertility on economic wellbeing: evidence from rural Vietnam," ISER Working Paper Series 2007-27, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    13. Dettmann, Eva & Becker, Claudia & Schmeißer, Christian, 2010. "Is there a Superior Distance Function for Matching in Small Samples?," IWH Discussion Papers 3/2010, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    14. Pedro Carneiro & Sokbae Lee & Daniel Wilhelm, 2020. "Optimal data collection for randomized control trials," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(1), pages 1-31.
    15. Werner L. Hernani-Limarino & Paul Villarroel & Christian Valencia, 2015. "¿Libres de Analfabetismo? Evaluando la Experiencia Boliviana con el Programa Nacional de Alfabetización “Yo Si Puedo”," Working Papers 04/2015, Fundación Aru.
    16. Heinrich, Carolyn J. & Lopez, Yeri, 2009. "Does Community Participation Produce Dividends in Social Investment Fund Projects?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1554-1568, September.
    17. Steve Gibbons & Max Nathan & Henry G. Overman, 2014. "Evaluating Spatial Policies," SERC Policy Papers 012, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    18. Paolo Pinotti, 0. "The Credibility Revolution in the Empirical Analysis of Crime," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 0, pages 1-14.
    19. Emran,M. Shahe & Sun,Yan - GSP05, 2015. "Are the children of uneducated farmers doubly disadvantaged ? farm, nonfarm and intergenerational educational mobility in rural China," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7459, The World Bank.
    20. Marlene Karl, 2015. "Are Ethical and Social Banks Less Risky? Evidence from a New Dataset," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1484, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C40 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - General
    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • J68 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Public Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ipg:wpaper:2015-619. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Ingmar Schumacher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipagpfr.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.