IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v93y2013icp301-312.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving stove evaluation using survey data: Who received which intervention matters

Author

Listed:
  • Mueller, Valerie
  • Pfaff, Alexander
  • Peabody, John
  • Liu, Yaping
  • Smith, Kirk R.

Abstract

As biomass fuel use in developing countries causes substantial harm to health and the environment, efficient stoves are candidates for subsidies to reduce emissions. In evaluating improved stoves' relative benefits, little attention has been given to who received which stove intervention due to choices that are made by agencies and households. Using Chinese household data, we find that the owners of more efficient stoves (i.e., clean-fuel and improved-biomass stoves, as compared with traditional-biomass and coal stoves) live in less healthy counties and differ, across and within counties, in terms of household characteristics such as various assets. On net, that caused efficient stoves to look worse for health than they actually are. We control for counties and household characteristics in testing stove impacts. Unlike tests that lack controls, our preferred tests with controls suggest health benefits from clean-fuel versus traditional-biomass stoves. Also, they eliminate surprising estimates of health benefits from coal, found without using controls. Our results show the value, for learning, of tracking who gets which intervention.

Suggested Citation

  • Mueller, Valerie & Pfaff, Alexander & Peabody, John & Liu, Yaping & Smith, Kirk R., 2013. "Improving stove evaluation using survey data: Who received which intervention matters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 301-312.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:93:y:2013:i:c:p:301-312
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.06.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800913001973
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.06.001?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rema Hanna & Esther Duflo & Michael Greenstone, 2016. "Up in Smoke: The Influence of Household Behavior on the Long-Run Impact of Improved Cooking Stoves," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 80-114, February.
    2. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    3. Angrist, Joshua D. & Krueger, Alan B., 1999. "Empirical strategies in labor economics," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 23, pages 1277-1366, Elsevier.
    4. Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Alexander Pfaff, 2009. "Behavior, Environment, and Health in Developing Countries: Evaluation and Valuation," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 183-217, September.
    5. James J. Heckman & Jeffrey A. Smith, 1995. "Assessing the Case for Social Experiments," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 85-110, Spring.
    6. Alberto Abadie & David Drukker & Jane Leber Herr & Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 4(3), pages 290-311, September.
    7. Juan Robalino & Alexander Pfaff, 2013. "Ecopayments and Deforestation in Costa Rica: A Nationwide Analysis of PSA’s Initial Years," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(3), pages 432-448.
    8. Peabody, John W. & Nordyke, Robert J. & Tozija, Fimka & Luck, Jeff & Muñoz, Jorge A. & Sunderland, Anne & DeSalvo, Karen & Ponce, Ninez & McCulloch, Charles, 2006. "Quality of care and its impact on population health: A cross-sectional study from Macedonia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(9), pages 2216-2224, May.
    9. Pfaff Alexander & Robalino Juan & Sanchez-Azofeifa G. Arturo & Andam Kwaw S & Ferraro Paul J, 2009. "Park Location Affects Forest Protection: Land Characteristics Cause Differences in Park Impacts across Costa Rica," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-26, July.
    10. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2002. "Simple and Bias-Corrected Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," NBER Technical Working Papers 0283, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:zbw:rwirep:0494 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Bensch, Gunther & Peters, Jörg, 2015. "The intensive margin of technology adoption – Experimental evidence on improved cooking stoves in rural Senegal," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 44-63.
    3. Jacopo Bonan & Stefano Pareglio & Massimo Tavoni, 2014. "Access to Modern Energy: a Review of Impact Evaluations," Working Papers 2014.96, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Li, Fanlue & He, Ke & Wang, Yuejie & Zhang, Junbiao, 2021. "Does Indoor Air Pollution from Solid Fuels Influence the Mental Health of Rural Residents? Evidence from China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315024, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Gunther Bensch & Jörg Peters, 2014. "The Intensive Margin of Technology Adoption - Experimental Evidence on Improved Cooking Stoves in Rural Senegal," Ruhr Economic Papers 0494, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jennifer M. Alix-Garcia & Elizabeth N. Shapiro & Katharine R. E. Sims, 2012. "Forest Conservation and Slippage: Evidence from Mexico’s National Payments for Ecosystem Services Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 613-638.
    2. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    3. Kumar, Neha & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2010. "Access, adoption, and diffusion," IFPRI discussion papers 995, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Dettmann, Eva & Becker, Claudia & Schmeißer, Christian, 2010. "Is there a Superior Distance Function for Matching in Small Samples?," IWH Discussion Papers 3/2010, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    5. Markus Frölich, 2004. "Programme Evaluation with Multiple Treatments," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 181-224, April.
    6. Hugo Ñopo, 2008. "Matching as a Tool to Decompose Wage Gaps," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(2), pages 290-299, May.
    7. Lina Cardona-Sosa & Leonardo Morales, 2015. "Efectos laborales de los servicios de cuidado infantil: evidencia del programa Buen Comienzo," Borradores de Economia 882, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    8. Hans Lööf & Anders Broström, 2008. "Does knowledge diffusion between university and industry increase innovativeness?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 73-90, February.
    9. Roberto ESPOSTI, 2014. "To match, not to match, how to match: Estimating the farm-level impact of the CAP-first pillar reform (or: How to Apply Treatment-Effect Econometrics when the Real World is;a Mess)," Working Papers 403, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    10. Smith, Jeffrey, 2000. "Evaluation aktiver Arbeitsmarktpolitik : Erfahrungen aus Nordamerika (Evaluating Avtive Labor Market Policies : Lessons from North America)," Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 33(3), pages 345-356.
    11. Deborah A. Cobb‐Clark & Thomas Crossley, 2003. "Econometrics for Evaluations: An Introduction to Recent Developments," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 79(247), pages 491-511, December.
    12. Grit Muehler & Michael Beckmann & Bernd Schauenberg, 2007. "The returns to continuous training in Germany: new evidence from propensity score matching estimators," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 209-235, November.
    13. Maria Cervini-Plá & Jose I. Silva & Judit Vall Castelló, 2016. "Estimating the income loss of disabled individuals: the case of Spain," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 809-829, September.
    14. Kuhn, Dieter, 2011. "Delayering and Firm Performance: Evidence from Swiss firm-level Data," Working papers 2011/02, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    15. Bensch, Gunther & Peters, Jörg, 2015. "The intensive margin of technology adoption – Experimental evidence on improved cooking stoves in rural Senegal," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 44-63.
    16. Wichman, Casey J. & Ferraro, Paul J., 2017. "A cautionary tale on using panel data estimators to measure program impacts," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 82-90.
    17. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2008. "On the Failure of the Bootstrap for Matching Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(6), pages 1537-1557, November.
    18. Burt S. Barnow & Jeffrey Smith, 2015. "Employment and Training Programs," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States, Volume 2, pages 127-234, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Advani, Arun & Sloczynski, Tymon, 2013. "Mostly Harmless Simulations? On the Internal Validity of Empirical Monte Carlo Studies," IZA Discussion Papers 7874, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Tauer, Loren, 2014. "Are two heads better than one head in managing the farm business?," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 165739, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:93:y:2013:i:c:p:301-312. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.