2017
DOI: 10.1080/19439342.2017.1305981
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The targeting effectiveness of social transfers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
103
0
8

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 104 publications
(116 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
5
103
0
8
Order By: Relevance
“…The processes of selecting appropriate eligibility criteria and of identifying eligible people for selection into programmes present seemingly intractable challenges to social protection policymakers and administrators. Evidence from cross‐country reviews suggests that trade‐offs between targeting accuracy and targeting costs are inevitable and that choices need to be made about whether to invest more resources into improving targeting accuracy and whether to minimise inclusion error or exclusion error (Coady et al ., ; Devereux et al ., ). The findings presented in this paper reinforce Besley and Kanbur's () theoretical proposition, that simpler approaches such as single proxy indicators are cheaper but less accurate than more complex approaches such as means tests.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The processes of selecting appropriate eligibility criteria and of identifying eligible people for selection into programmes present seemingly intractable challenges to social protection policymakers and administrators. Evidence from cross‐country reviews suggests that trade‐offs between targeting accuracy and targeting costs are inevitable and that choices need to be made about whether to invest more resources into improving targeting accuracy and whether to minimise inclusion error or exclusion error (Coady et al ., ; Devereux et al ., ). The findings presented in this paper reinforce Besley and Kanbur's () theoretical proposition, that simpler approaches such as single proxy indicators are cheaper but less accurate than more complex approaches such as means tests.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In emergency contexts, or in localities where poverty is widespread, the time and budgetary costs of identifying and excluding the non‐poor might make poverty targeting inappropriate (Ellis, ). Conversely, crude targeting or no targeting (universal coverage) can be extremely wasteful of scarce resources (Devereux et al ., ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Of equal if not of more importance are the costs experienced by participants/beneficiaries of CCT programmes. Such costs relate to costs of opportunity, incentives, social, political and psycho-social costs, as well as costs of inclusion and exclusion that tend to be neglected in the literature (Devereux, 2017). The costs of compliance that are incurred by beneficiaries of CCT programmes are difficult to quantify, yet they deserve significant attention.…”
Section: Costs To Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This may include travel costs and opportunity costs in relation to the application process, as well as the possible stigma of being targeted to receive social benefits (Conning and Kevane, ). Third, there may also be a number of “invisible costs”, such as social tensions that are created through the targeting process (Devereux et al, ). The latter may be particularly important in the context in which the introduction of the targeting intervention is planned as a partial compensation for the phasing out of universal food and energy subsidies that will have negative effects over the entire spectrum of the income distribution.…”
Section: Targeting Versus Universal Social Protection Programmes: Assmentioning
confidence: 99%