A comparison of model-based and design-based impact evaluations of interventions in developing countries

Publikation: Working paperForskning

Standard

A comparison of model-based and design-based impact evaluations of interventions in developing countries. / Hansen, Henrik; Klejnstrup, Ninja Ritter; Andersen, Ole Winckler.

Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, 2011.

Publikation: Working paperForskning

Harvard

Hansen, H, Klejnstrup, NR & Andersen, OW 2011 'A comparison of model-based and design-based impact evaluations of interventions in developing countries' Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen. <http://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:foi:wpaper:2011_16>

APA

Hansen, H., Klejnstrup, N. R., & Andersen, O. W. (2011). A comparison of model-based and design-based impact evaluations of interventions in developing countries. Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen. FOI Working Paper Nr. 2011/16 http://econpapers.repec.org/RePEc:foi:wpaper:2011_16

Vancouver

Hansen H, Klejnstrup NR, Andersen OW. A comparison of model-based and design-based impact evaluations of interventions in developing countries. Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen. 2011 dec.

Author

Hansen, Henrik ; Klejnstrup, Ninja Ritter ; Andersen, Ole Winckler. / A comparison of model-based and design-based impact evaluations of interventions in developing countries. Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, 2011. (FOI Working Paper; Nr. 2011/16).

Bibtex

@techreport{8de0e2f166a5416bbfd2d26d062848ee,
title = "A comparison of model-based and design-based impact evaluations of interventions in developing countries",
abstract = "We argue that non-experimental impact estimators will continue to be needed for evaluations of interventions in developing countries as social experiments, for various reasons, will never be the most preferred approach. In a survey of four studies that empirically compare the performance of experimental and non-experimental impact estimates using data from development interventions, we show that the preferred non-experimental estimators are unbiased. We try to explain the reasons why the non-experimental estimators perform better in the context of development interventions than American job-market interventions. We also use the survey as a source for suggestions for implementation and assessment of non-experimental impact evaluations. Our main suggestion is to be more careful and precise in the formulation of the statistical model for the assignment into the program and also to use the assignment information for model-based systematic sampling.",
author = "Henrik Hansen and Klejnstrup, {Ninja Ritter} and Andersen, {Ole Winckler}",
note = "FOI Working Paper 2011/16, University of Copenhagen, Institute of Food and Resource Economics.",
year = "2011",
month = dec,
language = "English",
series = "FOI Working Paper",
publisher = "Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen",
number = "2011/16",
type = "WorkingPaper",
institution = "Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen",

}

RIS

TY - UNPB

T1 - A comparison of model-based and design-based impact evaluations of interventions in developing countries

AU - Hansen, Henrik

AU - Klejnstrup, Ninja Ritter

AU - Andersen, Ole Winckler

N1 - FOI Working Paper 2011/16, University of Copenhagen, Institute of Food and Resource Economics.

PY - 2011/12

Y1 - 2011/12

N2 - We argue that non-experimental impact estimators will continue to be needed for evaluations of interventions in developing countries as social experiments, for various reasons, will never be the most preferred approach. In a survey of four studies that empirically compare the performance of experimental and non-experimental impact estimates using data from development interventions, we show that the preferred non-experimental estimators are unbiased. We try to explain the reasons why the non-experimental estimators perform better in the context of development interventions than American job-market interventions. We also use the survey as a source for suggestions for implementation and assessment of non-experimental impact evaluations. Our main suggestion is to be more careful and precise in the formulation of the statistical model for the assignment into the program and also to use the assignment information for model-based systematic sampling.

AB - We argue that non-experimental impact estimators will continue to be needed for evaluations of interventions in developing countries as social experiments, for various reasons, will never be the most preferred approach. In a survey of four studies that empirically compare the performance of experimental and non-experimental impact estimates using data from development interventions, we show that the preferred non-experimental estimators are unbiased. We try to explain the reasons why the non-experimental estimators perform better in the context of development interventions than American job-market interventions. We also use the survey as a source for suggestions for implementation and assessment of non-experimental impact evaluations. Our main suggestion is to be more careful and precise in the formulation of the statistical model for the assignment into the program and also to use the assignment information for model-based systematic sampling.

M3 - Working paper

T3 - FOI Working Paper

BT - A comparison of model-based and design-based impact evaluations of interventions in developing countries

PB - Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen

ER -

ID: 41791105