AADAPT Workshop for Impact Evaluation in Agriculture and Rural Development Goa, India 2009 With generous support from Gender Action Plan.

AADAPT Workshop for Impact Evaluation in Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentGoa, India 2009With generous support from Gender Action Plan

AADAPT Workshop for Impact Evaluation in Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentGoa, India 2009With generous support from Gender Action Plan

Arianna LegoviniHead, Development Impact Evaluation Initiative (DIME)World Bank

Impact Evaluation for Real Time Decision-Making

Do we know…

What information and services will improve market conditions for farmers? –India soybeans

What payment system will secure the financial sustainability of irrigation schemes? –Ethiopia irrigation

What is the best way to select local projects? –Indonesia direct voting versus representatives’ decisions

Will local workforce participation improve construction and maintenance of local investments? –Afghanistan road construction

Trial and error

These are difficult questions…We turn to our best judgment for

guidance and pick a subsidy level, a voting scheme, a package of services…

Is there any other subsidy, scheme or package that will do better?

The decision process is complex

A few big decisions are taken during design but many more decisions are taken during roll out & implementation

DesignEarly roll outImplementation

Developing a decision tree for an irrigation scheme…

Irrigation schemeBuild and operate to large private operator

Subschemes organized around farmer associationsWater payments independently

collectedWater payments subtracted from crop

sales

New user associations establishedWater payments independently

collectedWater payments subtracted from crop

salesBuilt by private constructions co. and operated by user

consortiumSubschemes organized around farmer associationsWater payments independently

collectedWater payments subtracted from crop

sales

New user associations establishedWater payments independently

collectedWater payments subtracted from crop

sales

How to select between plausible alternatives?

Establish which decisions will be taken upfront and which will be tested during roll-out

Scientifically test critical nodes: measure the impact of one option relative to another or to no intervention

Pick better and discard worse during implementation

Cannot learn everything at onceSelect carefully what you want to test

by involving all relevant partners

Walk along the decision tree for your irrigation scheme to get more results

Irrigation schemeBuild and operate to large private operator

Subschemes organized around farmer associationsWater payments independently

collectedWater payments subtracted from crop

sales

New user associations establishedWater payments independently

collectedWater payments subtracted from crop

salesBuilt by private constructions co. and operated by user

consortiumSubschemes organized around farmer associationsWater payments independently

collectedWater payments subtracted from crop

sales

New user associations establishedWater payments independently

collectedWater payments subtracted from crop

sales

What is Impact Evaluation? Impact evaluation measures the

effect of an intervention on outcomes of interest relative to a counterfactual (what would have happened in the absence of)

It identifies the causal effect of an

intervention on an outcome separately from the effect of other time-varying conditions

Impact evaluation

Application of the scientific method to understand and measure human behavior Hypothesis

▪ If we subsidize fertilizer then farmers will use more fertilizer and increase production

Testing ▪ Provide small discount with deadline after harvest or large

subsidy before planting. Compare fertilizer use and productivity

Observations▪ Fertilizer use increases more with small discount with deadline▪ Production increases and then declines with fertilizer

quantities Conclusion

▪ Timing the subsidy when farmers have financial resources is most effective

What is counterfactual analysis?

Counterfactual analysis isolates the causal effect of an intervention on an outcome Effect of subsidy on fertilizer use Effect of information on market prices

Compare same individual with & without subsidy, information etc. at the same point in time to measure the effect This is impossible

Impact evaluation uses large numbers (farmers, communities) to estimate the effect

What is a good counterfactual?

Treated & counterfactual groups have identical observed and unobserved characteristics

The only reason for the difference in outcomes is due to the intervention

How to define a counterfactual?

Design impact evaluation before the intervention is rolled out

Define eligibility Assign interventions to some and not

some other eligible populations on a random basis or on the basis of clear and measurable criteria

Obtain a treatment and a control groups Measure and compare outcomes in those

groups over time

Nudging Farmers to Use Fertilizer: Evidence from Kenya (Duflo, Kremer, Robinson, 2009)

Farmers randomly selected into groups: Free delivery offered for planting or top

dressing fertilizer just after harvest No subsidy 14.3 percentage point increase in

fertilizer use relative to controls Free delivery and 50% subsidy later

during top dressing (1-2 months after planting) 13.2 percentage point increase in

fertilizer use relative to controls Control group with none of the above

Nudging Farmers to Use Fertilizer Policy conclusions

Small, well-timed discounts can induce some farmers to purchase productive inputs

Time dimensions and farmer “impatience” may be important for technology adoption

Large, costly subsidies might not be appropriate policy response

How is this done?

Select one group to receive treatment (subsidy, information…)

Find a comparison group to serve as counterfactual

Use these counterfactual criteria: Treated & comparison groups have identical

initial average characteristics (observed and unobserved)

The only difference is the treatment Therefore the only reason for the difference in

outcomes is due to the treatment

Methods (tomorrow)

Experimental or random assignment Equal chance of being in the treatment or

comparison group By design treatment and comparison have the

same characteristics (observed and unobserved), on average

Simple analysis (means comparison) and unbiased impact estimates

Non-experimental (Regression discontinuity, IV and encouragement designs, Difference in difference) Require more assumptions or might only estimate

local treatment effects May suffer from non-observed variable bias Use more than one method to check robustness of

results

How is monitoring different from impact evaluation?Monitoring is trend

analysis Change over time Compare results before

and after on the “treated” group

Y

AfterBefore

A

B

t0 t1

A

Intervention

Intervention

Change

Change

B’ImpactImpactImpact evaluation

Change over time and relative to comparison

Compare results before and after in the “treated” group and relative to the “untreated” group

Monitoring & Impact Evaluation monitoring to track

implementation efficiency (input-output)

INPUTS OUTCOMESOUTPUTS

MONITOR EFFICIENCY

EVALUATE EFFECTIVENESS

$$$

BEHAVIORBEHAVIOR

impact evaluation to measure effectiveness (output-outcome)

Question types and methods

Descriptive analysis

Descriptive analysis

Causal analysis

Causal analysis

Monitoring and process evaluation

Is program being implemented efficiently?

Is program targeting the right population?

Are outcomes moving in the right direction?

Impact Evaluation What was the effect of the program on

outcomes? How would outcomes change under

alternative program designs? Is the program cost-effective?

When would you use M&E and when IE?

Are grants to communities being delivered as planned?

Does participation reduce elite capture?

What are the trends in agricultural productivity?

Does agricultural extension increase technology adoption?

M&E

IE

M&E

IE

Uganda Community-Based Nutrition

Failed project Project ran into financial difficulties Parliament negative reaction Intervention stopped

…but…

Strong impact evaluation results Children in treatment scored half a standard

deviation better than children in the control

Recently, Presidency asked to take a second look at the evaluation: saving the baby?

Separate performance from quality of intervention: babies & bath water

Why Evaluate?

Improve quality of programs Separate institutional performance from quality

of intervention Test alternatives and inform design in real time Increase program effectiveness Answer the “so what” questions

Build government institutions for evidence-based policy-making Plan for implementation of options not solutions Find out what alternatives work best Adopt better way of doing business and

taking decisions

Institutional frameworkPM/Presidency:

Communicate to constituencies

Treasury/Finance:

Allocate budget

Line ministries:

Deliver programs and negotiate

budget

Cost-effectiveness of different programs

Effects of government

program

BUDGET

SERVICE DELIVERY

CAMPAIGNPROMISES

Accountability

Cost-effectiveness of alternatives and effect of

sector programs

From: Program is a set of activities designed

to deliver expected results

Program will either deliver or not

To: Program is menu of alternatives with a

learning strategy to find out which work best

Change programs overtime to deliver more results

Shifting Program Paradigm

Shifting Evaluation Paradigm From retrospective, external, independent

evaluation Top down Determine whether program worked or not

To prospective, internal, and operationally driven impact evaluation /externally validated Set program learning agenda bottom up Consider plausible implementation alternatives Test scientifically and adopt best Just-in-time advice to improve effectiveness

of program over time

Retrospective impact evaluation: Collecting data after the event you don’t know

how participants and nonparticipants compared before the program started

Have to try and disentangle why the project was implemented where and when it was, after the event

Prospective evaluation: design the evaluation to answer the question

you need to answer collect the data you will need

27

Retrospective (designed & evaluated

ex-post) vs. Prospective (designed ex-ante and evaluated ex-post)

Is this a one shot analytical product?

This is a new model to change the way decisions are taken

It is about building a relationship between operations and research

Adds results-based decision tools to complement existing sector skills

The relationship delivers not one but a series of analytical products

Must provide useful (actionable) information at each step of the impact evaluation

Ethical considerations

It is not ethical to deny benefits to something that is available and we know works HIV medicine proven to prolong life

It is ethical to test interventions before scale up if we don’t know if it works and whether it has unforeseen consequences Food aid may impair local markets and create

perverse incentives Most times we use opportunities created by

roll out and budget constraints to evaluate so as to minimize ethical considerations

Thank you

Financial support from

Is gratefully acknowledged