Solutions Manual for Development Economics Theory Empirical Research and Policy Analysis 1st Edition by sunny4324

Solutions Manual for Development Economics Theory Empirical Research and Policy Analysis 1st Edition by Schaffner Full clear download (no error formatting) at : https://downloadlink.org/p/solutions-manual-for-development-economicstheory-empirical-research-and-policy-analysis-1st-edition-by-schaffner/ Test Bank for Development Economics Theory Empirical Research and Policy Analysis 1st Edition by Schaffner Full clear download (no error formatting) at : https://downloadlink.org/p/test-bank-for-development-economics-theoryempirical-research-and-policy-analysis-1st-edition-by-schaffner/ S olu tion s Manu al f or Develop men t Econ o mic s: Th eory, E mp irical R esearch , an d Poli cy Anal ysis J ulie Schaffne r The Fletch er School, Tuf ts Uni versit y Decemb er 2013

This solut ions manual provides answers for sel ect ed discussi on questi ons a nd for all problems in t he tex t. Please do not post these answers on w ebsit es avail able to the general publ ic. P lease send comm ents, questi ons and suggesti o ns re gardin g the tex t, solut ions manual, or P owerPoi nt presentations t o J ulie.Schaffner@tu fts.edu . I welcom e your f ee dback!

Chapte r 1

Chap ter 1: Introd u cti on Discu ssi on Qu estion 1 : Man y developm ent act ors have rall ied a round the United Nati ons’ Mil lennium Developm ent Goals (MDGs), which a re li sted in Table 1.4 (se e tex t). a. W hat do the MDGs indi cate about the rel ati ve e mphasis placed b y supp orters on the following: In come ve rsus nonincome indi cators of w ell -bein g W ell -being im provement s for the poor ve rsus the nonpoor Imm ediat e versus lon ge r - term i mprovements b. W hat m ight ex plain the emphasis i n the MDGs on defining me asure able ta r gets? c. The MDGs have li tt le to sa y about the pr ocess or poli cies through which the targets mightbeachieved.Whatarethe potential benefits of remaining sil e nt aboutthe processesthatwilldeliver MDG success and the poli cies developm ent actorsshould employintheireffortsto achiev e the M DGs? D o you see an y pot ent ia l costs? S ee C oll ier and Dercon (200 6). [ Discussi on of the MDG s ma y be used to get students thi nking about the man y dim ension s of developmentperformancethatdevelopm ent obje cti ves mi ght emphasiz e, and the diff erence betweendevelopmentobjectives (i.e. v alues an d priorit ies) and d evelo pmentmethods(i.e. policiesandappro aches t hat m ight be used to a chi eve the obje cti ves).] a. The MDGs seems to place stron g emphasis on income, educati on and healt h as im portant for well -bein g, and to place stron g emphasis on improvements for people li ving on less than $1.25/da y relative to pe ople who a re less poor (but sti ll ver y poor b y developed countr y standards)andthenon-poor.Thegoalssee medtoemphasizeshort-andmedium-run im provements over lon ge r -term i mprovement, b ec ause the y set t ar gets for 2 015. b. An emph asis on me as urable ta r gets mi ght h ave sever al purpos es. It mi ght help fo cus e fforts onsuccessfuloutputsratherthanon qu anti ti es of “input s” to d evelopm ent effo rts,thereby increasinginterestinmoni toring, evaluation, ef fecti veness, mi dcoursecorrections,andredesign.Itmi ght also help focus diverse actors’ at tention on simi lar objecti ves, possi bl y aidi n g cooperati on. c. Focusin g p rimaril y o n objecti ves rathe r than me thods has the advan tage of le aving th e developm ent comm unit y fre e to sea rch for the b est wa ys to a chieve th e objecti ves (pe rhaps acknowled gin g that the re is no consensus about h ow best to do thi s). A possi ble cost of saying littleaboutmethods,pointedoutby C oll ier and Dercon (2006), is that it mi ght leadsome developmentactorstopursuethe objecti ves in the most direct and obvious wa ys,whichneed not,ultimately,bethemost effecti ve w a ys. For ex ampl e, developm ent actorsmightattempt toachievethefirst goal onl y in the most direct wa y – b y givi ng c ashtopoorhouseholds– insteadofalsotr yin g to r aise the in comes of the p oor indirectl y b y, for ex a mpl e, stren gthenin g propert y ri ghts (the reb y possi bl y encou ra gin g inv estm ent and incr easin g t he dem and fo r low - skil l l abor in a long-lasti ng w a y).

Chapte r 1

Notice also that the quan ti tative targets ( right colu mn of Table 1.4) ar e neit her pure statements ofobjectivenorpreciseand compl ete statements about poli c y. For ex ampl e, the thi rd target is

Chapte r 1

to ensure that all bo ys an d girls compl ete a full co urse of primar y edu cati o n. This reflectsthe valuethateveryoneshould have a real opportu nit y for primar y educati on,andperhapsthe beliefthateducationis useful fo r sust ained im provements in in come andwell-being,butit alsoimpliesthebeli ef that poli c ymak ers shoul d work toward the goalofexpandingeducation byconcentrati n g on effo rts to get all chil dren into school andtogetthemtoremaininschool through the official n um ber of ye ars of primar y schoo l. Unfortunatel y, the ex perience of the last 15 ye ars is that ev e n gr eat suc cess in gett in g all kids int o and throu gh prima r y school doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;tmeantheyobtainrealprimar y educ ati on. The quali t y of t eachin g and l earninghas plummetedandmanychildren leave p rimar y scho ol wit hout even becomi n g li terat e. The C oll ier and Der con (2006) piec e r aises other provocati ve discussi on questi ons, suchas: Doestheinternationalcommunit yâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s push to focus on absol ute povert y r edu cti onindeveloping countrieshavenormative just ificati on, given tha t it seems to override the social choic es of democrati c all y elected governments i n developi n g countri es?

Chapte r 1 1

Chapte r 2

Chap ter 2: Well -B ein g Discu ssi on Qu estion 3: C onsi der two approaches for assessi ng househ old li ving standards andwell-being.Thefirstinvol ves selecti ng a r andom sampl e of households withinaregion andusinglong,detailed questi onnaires to eli cit comprehensive informationaboutincome, consumption, and li ving st andards more gene ra ll y. The secondinvolvesaveryshort questionnaire that is admi nist ered to ever y hou sehold in a community,whichincludesonly questions that are eas y t o answer and ma y b e used to const ructsimpleindicesofhouseholds’ living standa rds ( e. g., qu esti ons a bout how man y rooms respond ents’ hom es hav e and wh ether the household h ead is l it e rate). Fo r wh at purposes is each method b est s uit e d? (Purposesmight includeidentificationof regions that merit priorit y in povert y redu ctionefforts,academic researchonpovert y, and assessment o f eli gibi li ty f or an emer gencycashtransferprogram.) Howcould anal ysis of the result s of the first ap proach beusedtogivepracticalguidance regardin g the d esign o f t he second app roa ch? Lon g qu esti onnaires ad mi nist ered to ran dom sa mpl es of the population could be use ful for identif yin g which re gion s are poo rer than othe rs. The lon g qu esti onnaire s all ow re asonably accuratemeasurementofgoodwell -b eing i ndicat ors (e. g. consum pti on ex penditurepercapita) andtherandomsample s mi ght all ow good infer en ces about re gional povertyrateswithoutthe expenseofafull census. Data from long questi onnaires and randomsamplesmightalsoallow economists to stud y the determi nants of povert y and the effe cti veness of various poli cies fo r reducin g pove rt y. S hort questi onnaires admi nist ered to ever yone in a comm unit y, b y contrast, mi ght be usefulas partofaproxymeanstestwhenim plementi ng a ta rgeted pove rt y reducti on program. Anal ysis of the first kind of data mi ght all o w rese arch ers to const ruct a good short questi onnaire to use in prox y means t esti ng. W it h a random sampl e of answ ers to a lon g questi onnaire that includes both good measures o f consum pti on ex pendit ure per c apitaanda varietyofshorterquestions, rese arch ers could ide nti f y a set of sim ple questionsthattogether aregood predictors of pe r capit a consum pti on ex pendit ure and povert y leve ls. The y could also produceanequationorrulefortaking the answe r s to the sim ple questi ons and using themto determinewhetherahouseholdis probabl y p oor or not b y a more accu rate m easur e. Practitionerscouldthencollectdata onl y on the easier qu esti ons , and us e the rule orequation todeterminewhoispoor(and ther eb y eli gibl e for the program b y the prox y means t est). Prob le m 1: S uppose we know that a poli c y did not produce an y chan ge in a household’s re al per c apit a consum pti on e x pendit ure. List at least f ive wa ys the poli c y mi gh t nonetheless have improvedthehousehold’swell-being. Th at is, suggest at least five stories regardinghowthe household’scircumstanc es mi ght have chan ged, and how th e household respondedtothose changes,thatareconsi st ent with the household’s well -being risin gevenwhileitspercapita consumptionex pendit ure remains const ant.

Chapte r 2

Good answers to thi s questi on reflect the use of the anal yti cal fr amework of C hapter 2, and point clearl y to ch an ges that would raise well -b eing even w h il e n ot rai sin g con su mp tion expenditure.Answerssuchasâ&#x20AC;&#x153;receivi n g acc ess to a bett e r a gricult ural te chnolog yâ&#x20AC;? (wit hout

Chapte r 2

some sort of quali ficati on) are off tr ack, bec ause the most obvious wa y th rough which sucha changewouldraisewell-beingisby incr easin g inc ome and consum pti on ex pendit ure. Here are som e possi b le a nswers: The poli c y ma y have in creas ed income (b y p rov idi ng a cash transf er o r information about a new agri cult ural technolog y, or throu gh man y other t yp es of int erventi on),but theadditionalincomewasput int o saving rathe r than consum pti on ex penditure. It ma y h ave im proved t he profit abil it y of in co me gener ati ng oppo rtunit ies, but the householdtookadvantageofthe opportuni t y to w ork less and earn the sa me income– enjoyingmorenon-worktime.We mi ght see thi s in: o more leisure o chil dren going to s chool rather than workin g It ma y h ave im prov e d the household’s cu r rentwell-beingalongnon-income dim ension s such as o reduced p oll uti on o bett er healt h It ma y have r educ ed the househ old’s ex posure to future risk or fluctuations , or im proved the household’ s abil it y to cope with risk and fluctuations (w it ho ut chan ging current i ncom e), b y c reat ing o infrastructur e that redu c es flood risk o a publi c works pro gr am t hat hous eholds can a cc ess i n the future if the y ne e d it o im proved access to credi t that hou seholds could use to smoo th consum pti on in the future o new opportuni ti es to purchase insuran ce It ma y hav e im proved t he household’s investm e nt opportuni ti es or abil ity to take up investm ent opportuni ti es , for ex ampl e through o im proved acc ess t o scho ol for ch il dren Prob le m 2: S uppose yo u are att empt ing to choose a measure of li ving standards for use in determiningwhichhouseholdsmostneed assi stance. Discuss the rel ati ve merit s of the followingpossiblemeasuresofliving stand ards: R eal i ncome per capit a w it hin t he household over the last t wo weeks R eal i ncome per capit a w it hin t he household over the last 12 mont hs R eal consumpt ion ex pendit ure per c apit a over th e last mont h P er capit a me at consump ti on over the last mont h Indic ators of wh ether a h ouseho ld has a dirt floor, uses water from an im pr oved source, and sends chil dren to s ch ool Indivi dual m e asures of h eight ( for a ge), w eight ( f or a ge), and re cent i ll nes s Me asure

Str engt hs

Weaknesse s

Rea l i ncome per ca pi ta wi t hi n t he house hol d over t he l ast t wo wee ks

Chapte r 2 It i s not sensi ti ve t o vari at i

T hi s is a summar y mea sur e of a

on house hol dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; s abi li t y t o pur chase goods and ser vi ces thatis adjust ed at lea st cr udelyfor vari ati on i n need acr oss 1

i n house hol dsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; capaci t y t o obtain goods and ser vicesthat ar e not sol d i n well- functi oni ng mar ket s (e.g.

Chapte r 2 house hol ds.

Rea l i ncome per ca pi ta wi t hi n t he house hol d over l ast 12 mont hs

If mea sur ed wel l , i t pr ovi des an even bet ter mea sur e of per ca pit a capaci t y t o pur chase goods and ser vi cesthanthe pr evi ous mea sur e, beca use i t is l es s subj ect t o f l uct uat i ons ac r oss mont hs or seas ons.

Rea l consumpt i on expe ndi t ur e over t he l ast mont h

Like i ncome per ca pi ta, i t i s a good su mmar y mea sur e of a house hol d’ s ca pac it y t o pur chas e goods and ser vi ces. It i s even bett er than i ncome per ca pi ta mea sured over a short r ecall peri od if people ca n smoot h cons umpt i on, becauseit may f l uctuate much lessthan i ncome f r om mont h t o mont h. Of t en it i s t hought t o be mea sur ed mor e ac cur at el y t han 2

hea lt h car e) . It does not ac count f or t he hour s of wor k r equir ed t o obt ai n t he gi venlevelof i ncome. It adj ust s f or dif fer ence s i n needonlyi mper f ectl y. It adjustsf or dif fer ence sin numbers of househol d me mber s but not , f or exa mple, int heir healt h -r el ated nee ds. Whe n mea sured over j ust t wo wee ks, it may pr ovi de a poor mea sur e of the househol d’ s usua l ca pacit y t o pur chas e goods and ser vi ce s, becaus e incomefl uct uat es and house hol ds may be abl e t o smoot h c onsumpt i on. It i s i nse nsit i ve t o dif f er ences in house hol ds’ prospects r egar ding f ut ur e i ncome and cons umpt i on. It i s a house hol d -l evel measure that does not all ow st udy of t he di st ri buti on of wel l -bei ng wi t hi n t he house hol It has t he sa me wea knes ses as d. above. It i s cos l yf and icult ift oy It ma y alt so ai l tdio ffi dent mea sur house hole.ds t hat suff er sever e depri vat i on f or shor t peri ods wi t hi n a yea r. It i s dif fi cul t t o mea sur e ac cur atel y, becaus e peopl e havelimit ed r ecall capa ci ties . It has si mi l ar wea knesse s as f or t he f ir st mea sur e. It f ai l s t o r egi st er i mpr ovemen t when househol ds use r isi ng i ncome t o i ncr eas e sa vi ng and i nves t ment rat her than cons umpt i on.

Chapte r 2

Per capit a mea t cons umpt i on over t he l ast mont h

Indi ca t or s of whet her a house hol d has a di rt fl oor, uses wat er f r om an impr oved sour ce,and se nds chil dr en t o school

Indi vi dual mea sur es of hei ght (f or age) , wei ght (for age) and r ecent ill ness.

i ncome. If mea t cons umpt i on i s a steady fracti on of i ncome or cons umpt i on expendit ur e, t hen i t woul d have compar able st rengt hs t o those mea sur es. It al so has t he meritof mea sur i ng a l i vi ng standardof di r ect i nt er est t o poli cymaker s conc er ned about nut ri ti on. It i s ea si er t o mea sur e t han t otal consumpt i on expendit ure. T hese mea sur es may do a b et ter j ob t han i ncome or cons umpt i on expe ndit ure at mea sur i ng househol dsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; l iving standar ds al ong ver y i mportant di mens i ons. T o t he extent t hey r efl ect ass ets rathert han i ncome, t heymay also have mor e t o sa y about likelyf ut ure wel l -bei ngthana cur rent i ncome mea sur e. T hey ar e eas ier to mea sur e t han i ncome or cons umption ex T heset mea pendi ur e. sures shed l i ght on hea lt h, whi ch i sofdirect i nter est i n t he ass ess ment of wel l -bei ng. T hey all ow st udy of t he compar at i ve well -bei ng of men/ wo men, young/ ol d wi t hin househol ds ( u nl i ke all theother mea sur es ment i oned above). Bec ause t hey r efl ect hea lt h as set s, t hey shed li ght on future pr ospec ts as well as t he cur r ent wel l -bei ng.

Bec ause mea t i s a luxur y, mea t consumpti on may f l uct uat e mor e t han t otal consumpt i on expe ndi t ur e. Meat cons umpt i on over a short period may, t her ef or e,givea poor i ndi cati on of usual l ivi ng st andar ds. Some house hol ds may ch oose not to eat mea t f or r el i gi ous or culturalr eas ons; a mea t cons umpt i on mea sure mi ght underst at e t hei r l evel of wel l - bei ng. T hey ar e ha r d t o aggr egat e i nto asinglei ndex f or i denti fyi ng who i s depri ved. Agai n, people wit h simi l ar ca paci t y t o obt ai n goods and services may choos e not to acquire some of t hes e t hings bec ause of di ff erencesin pr eferenc es.

T hey may not var y even when non-hea l t h di mensionsof l i vi ng st andar ds var y a gr eat dea l .

Chapte r 2

Test Bank for Development Economics Theory Empirical Research and Policy Analysis 1st Edition by Schaffner Full clear download (no error formatting) at : https://downloadlink.org/p/test-bank-for-development-economics-theoryempirical-research-and-policy-analysis-1st-edition-by-schaffner/ development economics: theory, empirical research, and policy analysis pdf development economics textbook