IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Education and health services in Uganda : quality of inputs, user satisfaction, and community welfare levels


  • Tsimpo Nkengne,Clarence
  • Etang Ndip,Alvin
  • Wodon,Quentin T.


Good health and quality education are essential for economic growth and poverty reduction. Unfortunately, the quality of the education and health services provided in low-income countries is often low. Improving access and quality of education and health are key policy goals for Uganda. This paper builds on the Service Delivery Indicator study by further exploring issues related to the quality of service delivery in Uganda. The paper analyzes the quality of service from a poverty perspective, to contribute to the ongoing policy debate on the quality of service delivery in Uganda, especially in the education and health sectors. Combining data from the Service Delivery Indicator and the Uganda National Household Survey surveys, the paper shows a strong correlation between welfare and quality of service. The quality of service is lowest for those living in poor areas. This has implications for pupils'learning outcomes. Pupils in poor areas perform poorly on a standardized test covering English, numeracy, and nonverbal reasoning. Increased access to education was not accompanied by improvement in learning outcomes. Results from econometric analysis suggest that improvements in school facilities, improvements in the quality of teaching, and the knowledge base of teachers could bring substantial gains in student performance, particularly in poor communities. Despite the low quality they face, if the poor are more satisfied with the service, this has implications for demand for social accountability, as the poor often are not exposed to or ignore the standard of service to which they should refer.

Suggested Citation

  • Tsimpo Nkengne,Clarence & Etang Ndip,Alvin & Wodon,Quentin T., 2017. "Education and health services in Uganda : quality of inputs, user satisfaction, and community welfare levels," Policy Research Working Paper Series 8116, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:8116

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2002. "Sex Differences and Statistical Stereotyping in Attitudes Toward Financial Risk," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-03, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    2. Malmendier, Ulrike & Tate, Geoffrey, 2008. "Who makes acquisitions? CEO overconfidence and the market's reaction," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 20-43, July.
    3. Pollmann, Monique M.H. & Potters, Jan & Trautmann, Stefan T., 2014. "Risk taking by agents: The role of ex-ante and ex-post accountability," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 387-390.
    4. Banuri, Sheheryar & Keefer, Philip, 2016. "Pro-social motivation, effort and the call to public service," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 139-164.
    5. Song, Fei, 2008. "Trust and reciprocity behavior and behavioral forecasts: Individuals versus group-representatives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 675-696, March.
    6. Sujoy Chakravarty & Glenn W. Harrison & Ernan E. Haruvy & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2011. "Are You Risk Averse over Other People's Money?," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 901-913, April.
    7. Christiane Bradler, 2009. "Social Preferences under Risk - An Experimental Analysis," Jena Economic Research Papers 2009-022, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    8. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    9. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    10. Liv Langfeldt, 2004. "Expert panels evaluating research: decision-making and sources of bias," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 51-62, April.
    11. Gary Charness & Matthias Sutter, 2012. "Groups Make Better Self-Interested Decisions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 157-176, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Inequality; Educational Sciences;


    Access and download statistics


    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:wbk:wbrwps:8116. 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: (Roula I. Yazigi). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.