Author:
Domínguez Viera Marcos E.
Abstract
Evidence on Oportunidades, a successful anti-poverty program in Mexico, has suggested that changes to the current grant structure may induce considerable improvements to its effectiveness. Moreover, there are proposals addressing the importance of regional, observable and unobservable characteristics, regarding its implementation. It is employed competitiveness level outcomes to investigate if this social policy has heterogeneous performance in different regions of intervention. For this purpose, a Difference-in-Difference model is applied to estimate short and mid-term impacts on enrolment rates. Results indicate that the general competitiveness effect is positive but not robust, given the considerable level of aggregation of the data used, whereas if it is distinguised Oportunidades treatment by selected competitiveness outcomes, states with highly efficient government institutions, middle competitive economic sectors and middle inclusive, educated and healthy individuals, present a larger program impact on enrolment rates. It is confirmed the significant improvements to program effectiveness and the impact of the competitiveness JEL Classification: C33, D61, I38, R59.
Publisher
Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon
Reference27 articles.
1. Abadie, A. (2005). “Semiparametric Difference-in-Differences Estimators.” Harvard University and NBER, Review of Economic Studies, 72, 1–19.
2. Acemoglu, D., J. A. Robinson, and S. Johnson. (2001). “The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation.” American Economic Review, 91 (5), 1369-1401.
3. Aldy, J. and W. Pizer (2009). “The Competitiveness Impacts of Climate Change Mitigation Policies.” Prepared for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.
4. Angelucci, M., and G. De Giorgi (2009). “Indirect Effects of an Aid Program: How Do Cash Transfers Affect Non-Eligibles’ Consumption?” American Economic Review, 99 (1), 486-508.
5. Angelucci, M. and O. Attanasio (2009). “Oportunidades: Program Effect on Consumption, Low Participation, and Methodological Issues.” University of Chicago Press, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 57 (3), 479-506.