Institutions and Organizations
Paragraphs

In contrast to its decentralized political economy model of the 1980s, China took a surprising turn towards recentralization in the mid-1990s. Its fiscal centralization, starting with the 1994 tax reforms, is well known, but political recentralization also has been under way to control cadres directly at township and village levels. Little-noticed measures designed to tighten administrative and fiscal regulation began to be implemented during approximately the same period in the mid-1990s. Over time these measures have succeeded in hollowing out the power of village and township cadres. The increasing reach of the central state is the direct result of explicit state policies that have taken power over economic resources that were once under the control of village and township cadres. This article examines the broad shift towards recentralization by examining the fiscal and political consequences of these policies at the village and township levels. Evidence for this shift comes from new survey data on village-level investments, administrative regulation and fiscal oversight, as well as township-level fiscal revenues, expenditures, transfers (between counties and townships) and public-goods investments.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
The China Quarterly
Authors
Scott Rozelle
Paragraphs

Recruiting and retaining leaders and public servants at the grass-roots level in developing countries creates a potential tension between providing sufficient returns to attract talent and limiting the scope for excessive rent-seeking behavior. In China, researchers have frequently argued that village cadres, who are the lowest level of administrators in rural areas, exploit personal political status for economic gain. Much existing research, however, compares the earnings of cadre and non-cadre households in rural China without controlling for unobserved dimensions of ability that are also correlated with success as entrepreneurs or in non-agricultural activities. The findings of this paper suggest a measurable return to cadre status, but the magnitudes are not large and provide only a modest incentive to participate in village-level public administration. The paper does not find evidence that households of village cadres earn significant rents from having a family member who is a cadre. Given the increasing return to non-agricultural employment since China’s economic reforms began, it is not surprising that the return to working as a village cadre has also increased over time. Returns to cadre-status (such as they are) are derived both from direct compensation and subsidies for cadres and indirectly through returns earned in offfarm employment from businesses and economic activities managed by villages

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Journal of Comparative Economics
Authors
Scott Rozelle
Number
3
Paragraphs

In this paper we have two objectives - one empirical; one methodological. Although China's leaders are beginning to pay attention to health care in rural China, there are still concerns about access to health services. To examine this issue, we use measure of travel distances to health services to examine the nature of coverage in Shaanxi Province, our case study. The mean distance by road to the nearest health center is more than 6 km. When we use thresholds for access of 5 and 10 km we find that more than 40 (15) percent of the population lives outside of these 5 (10) kilometer service areas for health centers. The nature of the access differs by geographical region and demographic composition of the household.. The methodological contribution of our paper originates from a key feature of our analysis in which we use Geographic Information System (GIS) network analysis methods to measure traveling distance along the road network. We compare these measures to straight-line distance measures. Road distances (produced by network analysis) produce measures (using means) that are nearly twice as great as straight-line distances. Moreover, the errors in the measures (that is, the difference between road distances and straight-line distances) are not random. Therefore, traditional econometric methodsof ameliorating the effects of measurements errors, such as instrument variables regression, will not produce consistent results when used with straight-line distances.

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px} p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 8.0px Helvetica} span.s1 {font: 12.0px Helvetica} span.s2 {font: 9.0px Helvetica} span.s3 {font: 8.5px Helvetica} span.s4 {font: 7.5px Helvetica}

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 12.0px Helvetica; min-height: 14.0px} p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; font: 8.0px Helvetica} span.s1 {font: 12.0px Helvetica} span.s2 {font: 8.5px Helvetica} span.s3 {font: 9.0px Helvetica}

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
GeoJournal
Authors
Scott Rozelle
Number
3
News Type
Q&As
Date
Paragraphs

For 14 years, Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar has been a tireless Stanford professor who has strengthened the fabric of university’s interdisciplinary nature. Joining the faculty at Stanford Law School in 2001, Cuéllar soon found a second home for himself at the Freeman Spogli for International Studies. He held various leadership roles throughout the institute for several years – including serving as co-director of the Center for International Security and Cooperation. He took the helm of FSI as the institute’s director in 2013, and oversaw a tremendous expansion of faculty, research activity and student engagement. 

An expert in administrative law, criminal law, international law, and executive power and legislation, Cuéllar is now taking on a new role. He leaves Stanford this month to serve as justice of the California Supreme Court and will be succeeded at FSI by Michael McFaul on Jan. 5.

 As the academic quarter comes to a close, Cuéllar took some time to discuss his achievements at FSI and the institute’s role on campus. And his 2014 Annual Letter and Report can be read here.

You’ve had an active 20 months as FSI’s director. But what do you feel are your major accomplishments? 

We started with a superb faculty and made it even stronger. We hired six new faculty members in areas ranging from health and drug policy to nuclear security to governance. We also strengthened our capacity to generate rigorous research on key global issues, including nuclear security, global poverty, cybersecurity, and health policy. Second, we developed our focus on teaching and education. Our new International Policy Implementation Lab brings faculty and students together to work on applied projects, like reducing air pollution in Bangladesh, and improving opportunities for rural schoolchildren in China.  We renewed FSI's focus on the Ford Dorsey Program in International Policy Studies, adding faculty and fellowships, and launched a new Stanford Global Student Fellows program to give Stanford students global experiences through research opportunities.   Third, we bolstered FSI's core infrastructure to support research and education, by improving the Institute's financial position and moving forward with plans to enhance the Encina complex that houses FSI.

Finally, we forged strong partnerships with critical allies across campus. The Graduate School of Business is our partner on a campus-wide Global Development and Poverty Initiative supporting new research to mitigate global poverty.  We've also worked with the Law School and the School of Engineering to help launch the new Stanford Cyber Initiative with $15 million in funding from the Hewlett Foundation. We are engaging more faculty with new health policy working groups launched with the School of Medicine and an international and comparative education venture with the Graduate School of Education. 

Those partnerships speak very strongly to the interdisciplinary nature of Stanford and FSI. How do these relationships reflect FSI's goals?

The genius of Stanford has been its investment in interdisciplinary institutions. FSI is one of the largest. We should be judged not only by what we do within our four walls, but by what activity we catalyze and support across campus. With the business school, we've launched the initiative to support research on global poverty across the university. This is a part of the SEED initiative of the business school and it is very complementary to our priorities on researching and understanding global poverty and how to alleviate. It's brought together researchers from the business school, from FSI, from the medical school, and from the economics department.  

Another example would be our health policy working groups with the School of Medicine. Here, we're leveraging FSI’s Center for Health Policy, which is a great joint venture and allows us to convene people who are interested in the implementation of healthcare reforms and compare the perspective and on why lifesaving interventions are not implemented in developing countries and how we can better manage biosecurity risks. These working groups are a forum for people to understand each other's research agendas, to collaborate on seeking funding and to engage students. 

I could tell a similar story about our Mexico Initiative.  We organize these groups so that they cut across generations of scholars so that they engage people who are experienced researchers but also new fellows, who are developing their own agenda for their careers. Sometimes it takes resources, sometimes it takes the engagement of people, but often what we've found at FSI is that by working together with some of our partners across the university, we have a more lasting impact.

Looking at a growing spectrum of global challenges, where would you like to see FSI increase its attention? 

FSI's faculty, students, staff, and space represent a unique resource to engage Stanford in taking on challenges like global hunger, infectious disease, forced migration, and weak institutions.  The  key breakthrough for FSI has been growing from its roots in international relations, geopolitics, and security to focusing on shared global challenges, of which four are at the core of our work: security, governance, international development, and  health. 

These issues cross borders. They are not the concern of any one country. 

Geopolitics remain important to the institute, and some critical and important work is going on at the Center for International Security and Cooperation to help us manage the threat of nuclear proliferation, for example. But even nuclear proliferation is an example of how the transnational issues cut across the international divide. Norms about law, the capacity of transnational criminal networks, smuggling rings, the use of information technology, cybersecurity threats – all of these factors can affect even a traditional geopolitical issue like nuclear proliferation. 

So I can see a research and education agenda focused on evolving transnational pressures that will affect humanity in years to come. How a child fares when she is growing up in Africa will depend at least as much on these shared global challenges involving hunger and poverty, health, security, the role of information technology and humanity as they will on traditional relations between governments, for instance. 

What are some concrete achievements that demonstrate how FSI has helped create an environment for policy decisions to be better understood and implemented?

We forged a productive collaboration with the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees through a project on refugee settlements that convened architects, Stanford researchers, students and experienced humanitarian responders to improve the design of settlements that house refugees and are supposed to meet their human needs. That is now an ongoing effort at the UN Refugee Agency, which has also benefited from collaboration with us on data visualization and internship for Stanford students. 

Our faculty and fellows continue the Institute's longstanding research to improve security and educate policymakers. We sometimes play a role in Track II diplomacy on sensitive issues involving global security – including in South Asia and Northeast Asia.  Together with Hoover, We convened a first-ever cyber bootcamp to help legislative staff understand the Internet and its vulnerabilities. We have researchers who are in regular contact with policymakers working on understanding how governance failures can affect the world's ability to meet pressing health challenges, including infectious diseases, such as Ebola.

On issues of economic policy and development, our faculty convened a summit of Japanese prefectural officials work with the private sector to understand strategies to develop the Japanese economy.  

And we continued educating the next generation of leaders on global issues through the Draper Hills summer fellows program and our honors programs in security and in democracy and the rule of law. 

How do you see FSI’s role as one of Stanford’s independent laboratories?

It's important to recognize that FSI's growth comes at particularly interesting time in the history of higher education – where universities are under pressure, where the question of how best to advance human knowledge is a very hotly debated question, where universities are diverging from each other in some ways and where we all have to ask ourselves how best to be faithful to our mission but to innovate. And in that respect, FSI is a laboratory. It is an experimental venture that can help us to understand how a university like Stanford can organize itself to advance the mission of many units, that's the partnership point, but to do so in a somewhat different way with a deep engagement to practicality and to the current challenges facing the world without abandoning a similarly deep commitment to theory, empirical investigation, and rigorous scholarship.

What have you learned from your time at Stanford and as director of FSI that will inform and influence how you approach your role on the state’s highest court?

Universities play an essential role in human wellbeing because they help us advance knowledge and prepare leaders for a difficult world. To do this, universities need to be islands of integrity, they need to be engaged enough with the outside world to understand it but removed enough from it to keep to the special rules that are necessary to advance the university's mission. 

Some of these challenges are also reflected in the role of courts. They also need to be islands of integrity in a tumultuous world, and they require fidelity to high standards to protect the rights of the public and to implement laws fairly and equally.  

This takes constant vigilance, commitment to principle, and a practical understanding of how the world works. It takes a combination of humility and determination. It requires listening carefully, it requires being decisive and it requires understanding that when it's part of a journey that allows for discovery but also requires deep understanding of the past.

Hero Image
tino mug
All News button
1
-

The lost decades for China in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s look remarkably like the lost decades of Africa in the 1980s and 1990s. Poor land rights, weak incentives, incomplete markets and inappropriate investment portfolios. However, China burst out of its stagnation in the 1980s and has enjoyed three decades of remarkable growth. In this talk Rozelle examines the record of the development of China’s food economy and identifies the policies that helped generate the growth and transformation of agriculture. Incentives, markets and strategic investments by the state were key. Equally important, however, is what the state did not do. Policies that worked and those that failed (or those that were ignored) are addressed. Most importantly, Rozelle tries to take an objective, nuanced look at the lessons that might be learned and those that are not relevant for Africa. Many parts of Africa have experienced positive growth during the past decade. Rozelle examines if there are any lessons that might be helpful in turning ten positive years into several more decades of transformation.

Scott Rozelle (main speaker). Scott Rozelle is the Helen F. Farnsworth Senior Fellow and the co-director of the Rural Education Action Program in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. His research focuses almost exclusively on China and is concerned with: agricultural policy, including the supply, demand, and trade in agricultural projects; the emergence and evolution of markets and other economic institutions in the transition process and their implications for equity and efficiency; and the economics of poverty and inequality, with an emphasis on rural education, health and nutrition.

Alain de Janvry (commentator). Alain de Janvry is an economist working on international economic development, with expertise principally in Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle-East, and the Indian subcontinent. Fields of work include poverty analysis, rural development, quantitative analysis of development policies, impact analysis of social programs, technological innovations in agriculture, and the management of common property resources. He has worked with many international development agencies, including FAO, IFAD, the World Bank, UNDP, ILO, the CGIAR, and the Inter-American Development Bank as well as foundations such as Ford, Rockefeller and Kellogg. His main objective in teaching, research, and work with development agencies is the promotion of human welfare, including understanding the determinants of poverty and analyzing successful approach to improve well-being and promote sustainability in resource use.

Bechtel Conference Center

Encina Hall East, E404
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
Faculty Co-director of the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions
Helen F. Farnsworth Endowed Professorship
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Senior Fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research
scott_rozelle_new_headshot.jpeg PhD

Scott Rozelle is the Helen F. Farnsworth Senior Fellow and the co-director of Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research at Stanford University. He received his BS from the University of California, Berkeley, and his MS and PhD from Cornell University. Previously, Rozelle was a professor at the University of California, Davis and an assistant professor in Stanford’s Food Research Institute and department of economics. He currently is a member of several organizations, including the American Economics Association, the International Association for Agricultural Economists, and the Association for Asian Studies. Rozelle also serves on the editorial boards of Economic Development and Cultural Change, Agricultural Economics, the Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, and the China Economic Review.

His research focuses almost exclusively on China and is concerned with: agricultural policy, including the supply, demand, and trade in agricultural projects; the emergence and evolution of markets and other economic institutions in the transition process and their implications for equity and efficiency; and the economics of poverty and inequality, with an emphasis on rural education, health and nutrition.

Rozelle's papers have been published in top academic journals, including Science, Nature, American Economic Review, and the Journal of Economic Literature. His book, Invisible China: How the Urban-Rural Divide Threatens China’s Rise, was published in 2020 by The University of Chicago Press. He is fluent in Chinese and has established a research program in which he has close working ties with several Chinese collaborators and policymakers. For the past 20 years, Rozelle has been the chair of the International Advisory Board of the Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy; a co-director of the University of California's Agricultural Issues Center; and a member of Stanford's Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center and the Center on Food Security and the Environment.

In recognition of his outstanding achievements, Rozelle has received numerous honors and awards, including the Friendship Award in 2008, the highest award given to a non-Chinese by the Premier; and the National Science and Technology Collaboration Award in 2009 for scientific achievement in collaborative research.

Faculty affiliate at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law
Faculty Affiliate at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Date Label
Scott Rozelle Speaker
Alain de Janvry Professor of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Goldman School of Public Policy, UC-Berkeley Speaker
Symposiums
Authors
James Chu
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Original article at: http://www.3ieimpact.org/news.html?id=106

16 year old Kou Yaokang’s family are poor subsistence farmers. They cannot afford to pay for Kou's high school education. Instead of ending his formal education after middle school, Kou Yaokang enrolled in a vocational school. This seemed like a good idea at the time. “The government was providing subsidies for vocational schools, and I thought I could learn new skills to get a good job,” Kou Yaokang told a team from the Rural Education Action Project in December 2011.

Vocational schools are increasingly viewed as an appealing alternative to academic high schools in rural China. In recent years, the Chinese government—at both the local and national levels—has been encouraging students like Kou Yaokang to attend vocational schools. Shaanxi Province has invested US$ 80 million in vocational education in 2010.The central government gives a subsidy of US$ 250 per year for each student enrolled in a vocational school.

So what is behind this recent expansion of vocational schooling? The drive seems to be aimed at addressing the perceived failures of the country’s traditional schooling system. There is now a feeling that China’s higher education system, which has seen a 30-fold expansion over the past two decades, has sacrificed quality of education for quantity of diplomas. Each year the system churns out thousands and thousands of graduates with high expectations but few practical skills. These graduates then enter an economy that still relies heavily on low wage exports.  At the same time, the upper secondary school system has not found a way of providing quality education to the large number of students from underserved rural areas. These students enter China’s extremely competitive higher education system without the skills to excel in the nation’s rigid, test-centered curriculum.

China’s policymakers believe that the expansion of vocational schooling can help redress these failures in two ways. On one hand it would reduce the pressure on the higher education system by drawing children to vocational schools. On the other hand it would also impart “useful” skills to young people who want to directly enter the workforce. The government’s goal is to have an equal number of students in academic and vocational high schools.

What is the quality of vocational education?

At REAP, we were concerned. Was the expansion of vocational education really good for students? There was little evidence on the quality of vocational education in China. No standardized evaluations of student performance had been conducted in Chinese vocational schools. Most of the available evidence was either anecdotal or based on scant data. From our preliminary assessment, it seemed like these vocational schools were hiring ill-qualified teachers. The facilities in these schools were poor and teachers were not able to maintain student discipline.

Unfortunately, Kou Yaokang’s story does not have a happy ending. He dropped out of the subsidized vocational school after just one semester, citing the poor quality of teachers, inability to gain practical experience at school, and lack of discipline in the school. “People would wrestle in class and the teacher would do nothing! How was I supposed to learn in this environment?” said Kou.

Were the other 12 million students in Chinese vocational schools also experiencing the same problems? Encouraging them to attend poor quality schools would have negative effects and their families. At REAP, we felt the need to assess whether students were actually learning in these vocational schools. However, a solid evaluation of vocational education alone would not have been enough to change or support policy. We also needed strategic partners who would help us communicate to the top leaders in China. REAP could not work alone.

Building Partnerships

Before we began any evaluation work, we contacted our long-time partners at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Chinese Institute for Education Finance Research (at Peking University), and Northwest University of Xi’an- three prestigious research groups.

Our partners were well positioned to translate our results to policy change. For example, the Chinese Academy of Sciences has a long track record in influencing national policy. They have published 12 policy briefs that have been read by top policymakers including Premier Wen Jiabao and State Councilor Liu Yandong. Our partners at Peking University were also part of an education finance research team, with previous work directly overseen by the Ministry of Finance.

Even though we had partners, we also wanted to directly collaborate with policymakers at all levels: local, provincial, and national. The Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Education were interested in this study as soon as we presented it to them. They pledged to provide access to any data they had and offered to write letters of introduction to provincial officials on our behalf.

At the provincial level, the Zhejiang Department of Education officially commissioned us to evaluate their vocational schools. The Shaanxi Department of Education also wrote a letter supporting our efforts and pledging to be a stakeholder in the final report. We even contacted individuals at the local level. These were people who were part of district education bureaus we had worked with before or bureaus we thought would be interested in our work.

Aiming for Policy Change

With the support of the government and our partners, and financial backing from 3ie, in the autumn of 2011, REAP began the first ever large-scale study to evaluate the impact of vocational schooling on student learning in China. Using standardized tests developed by our partners at Peking University, we conducted a baseline survey in Zhejiang and Shaanxi provinces covering over 120 randomly selected schools and 12,000 vocational school students. We also surveyed academic high schools that enrolled students with similar test scores and family backgrounds as our vocational school students.

Although our study is ongoing, preliminary results suggest that vocational schools are indeed not all that they promise to be. They do not offer much practical training, suffer from serious disciplinary problems, and lack well-qualified teachers. Of course, we still need to analyze our final results to see the “proof in the pudding”. Before the summer of 2012, we will return to each of these schools to conduct a second survey. It is only then that we will be able to compare the gains in standardized test scores between vocational and academic high school students.

Although our evaluation is still underway, we continue to communicate preliminary results to policymakers. Apart from our usual policy briefs and publications, we also periodically visit policymakers to inform them of our progress. In fact, because we took the lead in collaborating with them before undertaking the study, there are times when the policymakers themselves contact us, asking about our results.

We also periodically bring local and provincial policymakers to Beijing to attend policy relevant conferences. For example, we hosted a conference in March that brought together policymakers, students, school principals, academics and representatives from not-for-profit organizations, and foundations.

Ultimately, all of our efforts - building partnerships, conducting rigorous evaluations, and communicating results - are geared towards policy change. Conducting evaluations of new policies can sometimes be the best way to help students like Kou Yaokang stay in school. The results of the evaluation can help in designing programmes that achieve their intended goals and benefit the poor students of rural China. The fact that policymakers at all levels have been involved from the outset greatly increases the chances that our recommendations will be incorporated and lives will be changed.

 

 

Hero Image
4905882946 ba38deed87 z
All News button
1
-

The Indian economy has expanded at a fairly steady and rapid rate in the past fifteen years, and part of that expansion has been a greatly increased demand for university graduates, particularly for those in technical fields. As of 2008, India was the largest producer and exporter of IT enabled services in the developing world. At the same time, Indian higher education has also expanded rapidly, both in the number of students enrolled and number of institutions—now four times the number in the US and Europe and more than twice that of China. The growth of private colleges in technical and business fields is an important feature of India’s higher education expansion, but it needs to be interpreted carefully. The rapid expansion of unaided colleges affiliated with universities is gradually transforming the role of public universities into regulating, degree-granting institutions and away from teaching or research (Kapur, 2009). Further, the form that higher education expansion took in India in the 2000s resulted in a steady reduction in public spending per student in higher education in the early 2000s. 

State authorities appear increasingly willing to grant support for private unaided colleges to become autonomous universities, thereby loosening the regulatory power over the institutions’ decision making.  At the same time, many signals (including the government’s 2012 higher education enrollment target of 15 percent of age cohort—approximately 21 million students) point toward considerable expansion of public universities and colleges over the next 4-5 years. The total number of students in all these institutions together, however, will be small compared to the total output of India’s technical colleges.

Given this background and some preliminary data we have from student and institutional surveys and interviews in Indian technical colleges and universities, we try to address several important issues in Indian higher education:

  1. What is the essence of the higher education financing system established by government policies and what can we infer from that financing system about government goals for higher education in the next ten years?
  2. How are colleges, their faculty, and their students reacting to these policies?
  3. What can be said about the current quality of Indian technical/engineering education and its prospects for the future?
  4. What can we conclude from the Indian case about the driving forces shaping higher education and where they are likely to take it?

Philippines Conference Room

Martin Carnoy Vida Jacks Professor of Education Speaker Stanford University School of Education
Seminars
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

An "International Workshop on Evaluation With Participation (EWP)" was held in Beijing between August 21st and 23rd. This is one of the series of activities organized by the Rural Education Action Project (REAP) in order to share its projects and research progress with the general public.

The Policy Forum on Rural Education Challenges in China was held on the first day (August 21st). Professor Jikun Huang, the Director of the Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy (CCAP) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and Dr. Jin He, the Ford Foundation's Program Officer, gave the opening address. Dr. Linxiu Zhang, Deputy Director of CCAP and Director of REAP-China, chaired the opening ceremony. During the day, REAP team members and collaborators shared their most recent research findings on multiple topics: nutrition and education in rural areas, rural boarding school management, barriers to higher education for the rural poor, and the migrant children's education . Experts from other organizations were also invited to share the results from their research.

From August 22nd to 23rd, Paul Glewwe, a professor from the University of Minnesota, gave a two-day intensive training on the "Methods for Project Evaluation." At Glewwe's side was Professor Scott Rozelle, the Co-Director of REAP from Stanford University, who summarized the presentation with his fluent Chinese and translated on the spot.

Nearly 140 participants from government organizations, universities, research organizations, NGOs, businesses, and the media, attended the policy forum and the methodology training. The participants all agreed that the training was very helpful. They also expressed their keen interest in building up their research capacities through similar training workshops in the future. 

Hero Image
screen shot 2014 08 22 at 3 27 41 pm
All News button
1

A REAP-sponsored workshop lead by REAP affiliate Paul Gewwe (University of Minnesota) designed to target foundation and non-profit managers and executives, researchers and government officials.

Introduction and objectives

Numerous programs are implemented by governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which are intended to change individuals’ economic or social outcomes. Common examples of this include agricultural extension services, public health programs and education programs. An important (and admittedly difficult to answer) question is: How effective are these programs in changing economic or social outcomes? Comparing the relative effectiveness of different programs, as well as comparing these programs’ benefits to their costs is crucial for governments to understand.

Objectives

  • To obtain a better understanding of how to objectively assess the impacts of programs through program design and data analysis
  • To specifically discuss possible scenarios based on how intervention status is decided, and methods for analyzing data for each scenario

Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research
No.11 Jia Datun Road
Chaoyang District
Beijing, China

Paul Gewwe Speaker University of Minnesota
Workshops
Subscribe to Institutions and Organizations