A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Selected Digital Projects in Latin America and the Caribbean

Abstract

The increase in access to digital technologies is opening up opportunities for governments in Latin America and the Caribbean to offer digital public services. However, there is scarce evidence regarding the benefits and costs of potential projects which makes it difficult for governments in the region to prioritize digital projects for implementation. As part of the report titled “Digitalizing Public Services: Opportunities for Latin America and the Caribbean,” produced by the Inter-American Development Bank (Cristia and Vlaicu, 2022), a set of cost-benefit analyses of the digital public services were performed. The present document complements the mentioned report by presenting the methodology, assumptions, and results of these cost-benefit analyses. To increase the comparability of the results across digital public services evaluated, common assumptions and a standardized methodology were used. Moreover, contextual conditions were fixed across projects by estimating results for a base country, Peru. The robustness of the results were examined by replicating the analysis for Chile, El Salvador, and Jamaica. Digital public services were evaluated in three sectors: education, health and government administrative services (e.g. production of identity cards). For each sector, the benefits and costs of two digital projects were estimated. For some these digital projects, only one policy option was assessed but, in other cases, several policy options were analyzed. A total of 11 policy options were assessed as part of this exercise. Results indicate that, in general, the policy options analyzed produced positive net present values. However, there is wide variation in the net present value across policy options suggesting that governments should carefully evaluate which digital public services they should prioritize for implementation.

Digitalizing Public Services: Opportunities for Latin America and the Caribbean

“…As a reference, Ross et al (2019) estimate the QALYs gained from in-person CBT relative to no treatment at 0.715 over one year, which will translate to around 0.18 QALYS in three months. A more detailed discussion of the estimation of health gains can be found in Cristia et al (2022). Source: Prepared by the authors.…”

“…The benefits and costs per person are only reported for those who complete treatment in Chapter 3. Detailed information on the methodology and assumptions is presented in Cristia et al (2022).…”

“…Additional main assumptions include (i) an effect on math test score of 2.8 learning points when teachers are supported by coaches (25 percent of the average effect estimated for technology programs focused on practice that kept instructional time constant presented in Table 2.3); (ii) an effect on math test scores of 0.9 learning points when teachers are supported with workshops (one-third of the effect when teachers are supported with coaches); and (iii) an effect of increasing test scores by 1 standard deviation on total years of education of 0.89. Detailed information on the methodology and assumptions is presented in Cristia et al (2022).…”

“…Each policy option is presented in a column in the same order as in Table 2.4 (see the notes of that table for more information about the policy option presented in each column). Detailed information on the methodology and assumptions for all countries is presented in Cristia et al (2022).…”

“…Table 3.4 summarizes the main results of the cost-benefit analysis. The key parameters and assumptions can be found in Cristia et al (2022). As mentioned, the analysis estimates the total number of patients treated over one year under the different types of Why is the number of patients who complete treatment much higher for guided iCBT?…”