Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRavallion, Martin
dc.date.accessioned7/19/2013 11:59
dc.date.available7/19/2013 11:59
dc.date.issued2012-03
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12799/1372
dc.description.abstractMany 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 poor-area development program in China. Qualitative recalls of 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.es_ES
dc.language.isoenes_ES
dc.publisherWorld Bankes_ES
dc.relation.ispartofseriesPolicy Research Working Paper;5983
dc.subjectEvaluación del impactoes_ES
dc.subjectAnálisis de datoses_ES
dc.subjectEconometríaes_ES
dc.subjectCondiciones de vidaes_ES
dc.titleCan We Trust Shoestring Evaluations?es_ES
dc.typeWorking Paperes_ES


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record