IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/usppxx/v9y2022i1p1-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reconciling Evaluations of the Millennium Villages Project

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Gelman
  • Shira Mitchell
  • Jeffrey Sachs
  • Sonia Sachs

Abstract

The Millennium Villages Project was an integrated rural development program carried out for a decade in 10 clusters of villages in sub-Saharan Africa starting in 2005, and in a few other sites for shorter durations. An evaluation of the 10 main sites compared to retrospectively chosen control sites estimated positive effects on a range of economic, social, and health outcomes (Mitchell et al. 2018). More recently, an outside group performed a prospective controlled (but also nonrandomized) evaluation of one of the shorter-duration sites and reported smaller or null results (Masset et al. 2020). Although these two conclusions seem contradictory, the differences can be explained by the fact that Mitchell et al. studied 10 sites where the project was implemented for 10 years, and Masset et al. studied one site with a program lasting less than 5 years, as well as differences in inference and framing. Insights from both evaluations should be valuable in considering future development efforts of this sort. Both studies are consistent with a larger picture of positive average impacts (compared to untreated villages) across a broad range of outcomes, but with effects varying across sites or requiring an adequate duration for impacts to be manifested.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Gelman & Shira Mitchell & Jeffrey Sachs & Sonia Sachs, 2022. "Reconciling Evaluations of the Millennium Villages Project," Statistics and Public Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 1-7, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:usppxx:v:9:y:2022:i:1:p:1-7
    DOI: 10.1080/2330443X.2021.2019152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/2330443X.2021.2019152
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/2330443X.2021.2019152?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:usppxx:v:9:y:2022:i:1:p:1-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/uspp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.