Does Household Electrification Supercharge Economic Development?

Lee, Kenneth; Miguel, Edward; Wolfram, Catherine

doi:10.3386/w26528

Cited by 20 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This would be at the expense of an already very limited external validity. More generally, our comment amplifies concerns expressed in Lee et al (2020a) Chaplin et al 2017, Lee et al 2020b, and Lenz et al 2017). According to Bos et al (2018) and Peters and Sievert (2016), both review studies, this contrasts with more positive evidence from Latin America and Asia (see Grogan and Sadanand 2013, Grogan 2018, Kassem 2019, Khandker et al 2012, Lipscomb et al 2013, Rud 2012, and van de Walle et al 2017.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 59%

“…and Pande (2007). The use of IVs based on geographical variation has recently been criticized by Lee et al (2020a). Therefore, as much as Dinkelman (2011) has contributed to promoting empirical research in the field, it is important to critically assess the reliability and robustness of this approach and these influential results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lee et al (2020a) point out that most of these latter studies are based on IVs and indeed Burlig and Preonas (2016) raise doubts about the positive effect of rural electrification in India, using a well-identified identification.Yet another contribution of the Dinkelman (2011) study was to compile an impressive number of datasets that was unique at the time and that allowed for investigating many interesting outcomes beyond employment (a reconstruction of Dinkelman's Theory of Change and identification strategies on each level can be found in Annex A2). A broader look into this might actually reconcile the Dinkelman (2011) data with the newer evidence in that there is no increase in wages and labor demand from firms due to general electricity expansion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of Rural Electrification on Employment: A Comment on Dinkelman (2011)

Bensch¹,

Gotz²,

Peters³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper replicates and extends the seminal paper by Dinkelman (2011) on the impacts of electrification on female employment. We revisit the validity of the identification strategy that uses the land gradient as an instrumental variable (IV). Our robustness checks cast doubt on the exclusion restriction as the IV drives the outcome variable in non-electrified regions. We also demonstrate that it is more difficult to disentangle the effects of electricity and road infrastructure than the original paper claims, because the IV affects both. We additionally highlight that the IV is weak, consequently preventing interpretation of the point estimates that are used throughout the original paper. The concomitance of a questionable exclusion restriction and a weak IV is particularly problematic. We conclude by arguing that the take-aways of the original paper for policy and the academic literature need to be reconsidered. In general terms, our comment shows the difficulties of using geographical variation as a natural experiment for infrastructure evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 59%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Rural Electrification on Employment: A Comment on Dinkelman (2011)

Bensch¹,

Gotz²,

Peters³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many of these technologies, and especially infrastructure solutions (e.g., electricity and piped water or sewer), are deployed with substantial government investment, and there is often an attempt to then create pro-poor tariffs for these services. Thus, one might anticipate that public funding would reduce disparities in access between wealthier versus poorer households [ 11 , 12 ], although some have questioned whether so-called “lifeline” tariffs really reach the poor [ 13 ]. Other EHAs, such as bed nets, have typically been distributed for free such that access should be equitable [ 14 , 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Access to environmental health assets across wealth strata: Evidence from 41 low- and middle-income countries

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionLow levels of household access to basic environmental health assets (EHAs)–including technologies such as clean cookstoves and bed nets or infrastructure such as piped water and electricity–in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are known to contribute significantly to the global burden of disease. This low access persists despite decades of promotion of many low-cost, life-saving technologies, and is particularly pronounced among poor households. This study aims to characterize variation in access to EHAs among LMIC households as a function of wealth, as defined by ownership of various assets.MethodsDemographic and Health Survey (DHS) data from 41 low- and middle-income countries were used to assess household-level access to the following EHAs: 1) improved water supply; 2) piped water supply; 3) improved sanitation; 4) modern cooking fuels; 5) electricity; and 6) bed nets. For comparison, we included access to mobile phones, which is considered a highly successful technology in terms of its penetration into poor households within LMICs. Ownership levels were compared across country-specific wealth quintiles constructed from household assets using bivariate analysis and multivariable linear regression models.ResultsAccess to EHAs was low among the households in the bottom three quintiles of wealth. Access to piped water, modern cooking fuels, electricity and improved sanitation, for example, were all below 50% for households in the bottom three wealth quintiles. Access to certain EHAs such as improved water supply and bed nets increased only slowly with concomitant increases in wealth, while gaps in access to other EHAs varied to a greater degree by wealth quintile. For example, disparities in access between the richest and poorest quintiles were greatest for electricity and improved sanitation. Rural households in all wealth quintiles had much lower levels of access to EHAs, except for bed nets, relative to urban households.ConclusionsThe findings of this study provide a basis for understanding how EHAs are distributed among poor households in LMICs, elucidate where inequalities in access are particularly pronounced, and point to a need for strategies that better reach the poor, if the global environmental burden of disease is to be reduced.

show abstract

“…Lee et al (ref. 15, p. 6) concludes unequivocally that “we currently have almost no data on even the most basic patterns of outages in developing countries.”…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Power quality and modern energy for all

Jacome

Klugman

Wolfram

et al. 2019

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“Modern energy for all,” an internationally supported initiative to connect populations to electricity services, is expected to help reduce poverty-induced vulnerabilities. It has become a primary strategy for meeting sustainable development goals, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. However, when electricity is supplied by a capacity-constrained grid to a resource-constrained population, the service quality can vary both spatially and temporally. This research explores the quality of electricity services based on a case study of Unguja, Tanzania. Using 1) open-ended interviews, 2) detailed electricity-systems monitoring, and 3) household surveys, we show how voltage quality varies significantly, even within highly localized settings. Fluctuations result in dim lights at best and power outages and broken appliances at worst, denying many Unguja residents the expected benefits of access to modern energy. By combining an extensive understanding of the physical system together with interviews and surveys, this work presents a unique mapping of voltage quality in a system that is financially and physically constrained and highlights the consequences of poor-quality service for poor users.

show abstract

Does Household Electrification Supercharge Economic Development?

Cited by 20 publications

References 24 publications

Effects of Rural Electrification on Employment: A Comment on Dinkelman (2011)

Effects of Rural Electrification on Employment: A Comment on Dinkelman (2011)

Access to environmental health assets across wealth strata: Evidence from 41 low- and middle-income countries

Power quality and modern energy for all

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About