Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T01:57:58.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Efficiency Potential in Social Programs: Accounting for Heterogeneity in Benefit-Cost Analysis1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 March 2017

Nicolai Kristensen ,
Christophe Kolodziejczyk ,
Iben Bolvig  and
Kurt Houlberg
Nicolai Kristensen*
Affiliation:
KORA, Danish Institute for Local and Regional Government Research, Denmark, Phone: +45 2511 7372, e-mail: [email protected]. Address: Koebmagergade 22, 1150 Copenhagen K, Denmark Institute of the Study of Labor (IZA), Germany
Christophe Kolodziejczyk
Affiliation:
KORA, Danish Institute for Local and Regional Government Research, Denmark
Iben Bolvig
Affiliation:
KORA, Danish Institute for Local and Regional Government Research, Denmark
Kurt Houlberg
Affiliation:
KORA, Danish Institute for Local and Regional Government Research, Denmark
*
*e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Traditionally, benefit-cost analyses focus on average benefits and average costs. However, heterogeneous treatment effects and/or costs are most often present, which means that there is an efficiency potential hidden in the implementation of public programs, if policies can be targeted at those who, net of costs, benefit the most. We introduce efficiency potential defined as the ratio between the net benefit achieved under perfect selection of the individuals with significant positive net benefit of program participation, and the actually realized benefits net of costs. Using data from a randomized control-trial experiment of a Danish return-to-work program combined with rich administrative records and survey data, we find that there is indeed a potential for increased efficiency. Results from the treatment literature indicate that, generally, it may be difficult to harvest the full potential. Our application corroborates this finding.

Keywords

I180J48H7benefit-cost analysisheterogeneous treatment effectsMonte Carlo simulationRCTreturn-to-work coordination
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , Spring 2017 , pp. 1 - 23
Copyright
© Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

We thank the editor and two anonymous referees for very helpful suggestions. We also thank The National Research Centre for the Working Environment (NFA) for access to data and Birgit Aust and Lars Skipper for helpful comments.

References

Aust, Birgit, Helverskov, Trine, Nielsen, Maj Britt D., Bjorner, Jakob Bue, Rugulies, Reiner, Nielsen, Karina, Sørensen, Ole H, Grundtvig, Gry, Andersen, Malene F., Hansen, Jørgen V., Buchardt, Helle L., Nielsen, Lisbeth, Lund, Trine L., Andersen, Irene, Andersen, Mogens H., Clausen, Aksel S., Heinesen, Eskil, Mortensen, Ole S., Ektor-Andersen, John, Ørbæk, Palle, Winzor, Glen, Bültmann, Ute & Poulsen, Otto M. (2012). The Danish National Return-to-work program – Aims, Content, and Design of the Process and Effect Evaluation. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 38(2), 120–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aust, Birgit, Nielsen, Maj Britt D., Grundtvig, Gry, Buchardt, Helle L., Ferm, Linnea, Andersen, Irene, Lund, Trine L., Jelle, Martin O. C., Andersen, Malene F., Hansen, Jørgen V., Tverborgvik, T., Helverskov, Trine, Bjorner, Jakob Bue, Rugulies, Reiner, Ørbæk, Palle, Winzor, Glen, Bültmann, Ute & Poulsen, Otto M. (2015). Implementation of the Danish Return-to-work Program: Process Evaluation of a Trial in 21 Danish Municipalities. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 41(6), 529–541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bitler, Marianne P., Gelbach, Jonah. B. & Hoynes, Hilary W. (2006). What Mean Impacts Miss: Distributional Effects of Welfare Reform Experiments. American Economic Review, 96(4), 988–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bitler, Marianne P., Gelbach, Jonah B. & Hoynes, Hilary W.(2014). Can Variation in Subgroups’ Average Treatment Effects Explain Treatment Effect Heterogeneity? Evidence from a Social Experiment. Review of Economics and Statistics, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boardman, Anthony, Greenberg, David, Vining, Aidan & Weimer, David (2014). Cost-Benefit Analysis. In Concepts and Practice. (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Briggs, Andrew H., Mooney, Chrisptoher Z. & Wonderling, David E. (1999). Constructing Confidence Intervals for Cost-Effectiveness Ratios: An Evaluation of Parametric and Non-parametric Techniques Using Monte Carlo Simulation. Statististics in Medicine, 18, 3245–3262.3.0.CO;2-2>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Card, David, Kluve, Jochen & Weber, Andrea (2010). Active Labour Market Policy Evaluations: A Meta-Analysis. The Economic Journal, 120(November), F452–F477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harberger, Arnold C. (1978). On the Use of Distributional Weights in Social Cost-Benefit Analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 86(2), 87–120; pt. 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heckman, James, J., LaLonde, Robert J. & Smith, J. Jeffrey (1999). The Economics and Econometrics of Active Labor Market Programs. In Ashenfelter, Orley & Card, David (Eds.), Handbook of Labor Economics (Vol. III, pp. 1865–2097). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Heckman, James, J., Smith, Jeffrey & Clements, Nancy (1997). Making The Most Out Of Program Evaluations and Social Experiments: Accounting For Heterogeneity in Program Impacts. Review of Economic Studies, 64, 487–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holtmann, Alphonse G. (1991). Beyond Efficiency: Economics and Distributional Analysis. In Weimer, David L. (Ed.), Policy Analysis and Economics. Developments, Tensions, Prospects. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Houlberg, Kurt, Kolodziejczyk, Christophe & Kristensen, Nicolai(2012). Evaluering af Det Store TTA-projekt. Delrapport om økonomisk Evaluering. Report. København: KORA (In Danish).Google Scholar
Imbens, Guido W. & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M. (2009). Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(1), 5–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleven, Henrik J. & Kreiner, Claus T. (2006). The Marginal Cost of Public Funds: Hours of Work Versus Labor Force Participation. Journal of Public Economics, 90, 1955–1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristensen, Nicolai, Andersen, Lotte B. & Pedersen, Lene H. (2012). Public Service Efficacy. International Journal of Public Administration, 35(14), 947–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Grand, Julian (2003). Motivation, Agency and Public Policy: Of Knights and Knaves, Pawns and Queens. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Grand, Julian (2010). Knights and Knaves Return: Public Service Motivation and the Delivery of Public Services. International Public Management Journal, 13(1), 56–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mishan, Ezra J. & Quah, Euston (2007). Cost-Benefit-Analysis. (5th ed.). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moore, Mark A., Boardman, Anthony E., Vining, Aidan R., Weimer, David L. & Greenberg, David H. (2004). Just Give Me a Number! Practical Values for the Social Discount Rate. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(4), 789–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichol, Kristin L. (2001). Cost-Benefit Analysis of a Strategy to Vaccinate Healthy Working Adults Against Influenza. Archived of Internal medicine, 161(5), 749–759.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, Maj Britt D., Hansen, Jorgen V., Aust, Birgit, Tverborgvik, Torill, Thomsen, Birthe L., Bjorner, Jakob Bue, Mortensen, Ole Steen, Rugulies, Reiner, Winzor, Glen, Ørbæk, Palle, Helverskov, Trine, Kristensen, Nicolai & Poulsen, Otto Melchior (2013). A Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial on Time to Self-support Among Sickness Absence Beneficiaries. The Danish National Return-to-work Program. European Journal of Public Health, 25(1), 96–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulsen, Otto Melchior, Aust, Birgit, Bjorner, Jakob Bue, Rugulies, Reiner, Hansen, Jorgen V., Tverborgvik, Torill, Winzor, Glen, Mortensen, Ole Steen, Ørbæk, Palle & Nielsen, Maj Britt D. (2012). Effect of the Danish Return-to-work Program on Long-term Sickness Absence: Results From A Randomized Controlled Trial in Three Municipalities. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 38(2), 120–133.Google Scholar
Schandelmaier, Stefan, Ebrahim, Shanil, Burkhardt, Susan C. A., de Boer, Wout E. L., Zumbrunn, Thomas, Guyatt, Gordon H., Busse, Jason W. & Kunz, Regina (2012). Return to Work Coordination Programs for Work Disability: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. PLoS One, 7(11), e49760.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vining, Aidan & Weimer, David L. (2010). An Assessment of Important Issues Concerning the Application of Benefit-Cost Analysis to Social Policy. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 1(1), 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weimer, David L. & Sager, Mark A. (2009). Early Identification and Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease: Social and Fiscal Outcomes. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 5, 215–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winzor, Glen, Poulsen, Otto M., Andersen, Irene, Andersen, Malene Friis, Andersen, Mogens H., Aust, Birgit, Bjørner, Jakob, Buchardt, Helle Løvdal, Clausen, Aksel S., Ferm, Linnea, Grundtvig, Gry, Hansen, Christoffer R., Hansen, Jørgen Vinsløv, Helverskov, Trine, Hviid, Kirsten, Jelle, Martin O., Juhl, Martin, Lund, Trine Lehmann, Mortensen, Ole Steen, Nielsen, Lisbeth, Nielsen, Maj Britt Dahl, Lykke, Birthe, Helle Tornemand, Thomsen & Tverborgvik, Torill2013. Det store TTA-projekt. Proces-, effekt- og økonomisk evaluering. København: Det Nationale Forskningscenter for Arbejdsmiljø (NFA) (In Danish).Google Scholar