IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/phs/dpaper/200908.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What difference can performance ratings make? Difference-in-difference estimates of impact on local government responsiveness in the Philippines

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph J. Capuno

    (U.P. School of Economics, Diliman, Quezon City)

  • Maria Melody S. Garcia

    (University of Rome – Tor Vergata)

Abstract

In many countries that have decentralized, improving the accountability of local officials is increasingly emphasized to make them more responsive to their constituents’ needs. This paper provides evidence that the public announcement of performance ratings can induce local governments to become responsive. The evidence is based on application of a difference-in-difference method on a unique household-level dataset collected during the three-year pilot test of a rating system in 12 municipalities and cities in the Philippines. The results are consistent with the predictions of political agency models of incumbent behavior. Some policy guidelines on the design and implementation performance benchmarks are made.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph J. Capuno & Maria Melody S. Garcia, 2009. "What difference can performance ratings make? Difference-in-difference estimates of impact on local government responsiveness in the Philippines," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 200908, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:phs:dpaper:200908
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.upd.edu.ph/dp/index.php/dp/article/view/86/77
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2009. "Alternative Approaches to Evaluation in Empirical Microeconomics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 44(3).
    2. Edward C. Norton & Hua Wang & Chunrong Ai, 2004. "Computing interaction effects and standard errors in logit and probit models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 4(2), pages 154-167, June.
    3. Faguet, Jean-Paul, 2004. "Does decentralization increase government responsiveness to local needs?: Evidence from Bolivia," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3-4), pages 867-893, March.
    4. Ravallion, Martin, 2008. "Evaluating Anti-Poverty Programs," Handbook of Development Economics, in: T. Paul Schultz & John A. Strauss (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 59, pages 3787-3846, Elsevier.
    5. Pranab Bardhan, 2002. "Decentralization of Governance and Development," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 185-205, Fall.
    6. A. D. Roy, 1951. "Some Thoughts On The Distribution Of Earnings," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 135-146.
    7. World Bank, 2005. "East Asia Decentralizes : Making Local Government Work," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 7492.
    8. Heckman, James J. & Lalonde, Robert J. & Smith, Jeffrey A., 1999. "The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 31, pages 1865-2097, Elsevier.
    9. Pranab Bardhan & Dilip Mookherjee (ed.), 2006. "Decentralization and Local Governance in Developing Countries: A Comparative Perspective," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262524546, April.
    10. Besley, Timothy & Case, Anne, 1995. "Incumbent Behavior: Vote-Seeking, Tax-Setting, and Yardstick Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 25-45, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Joseph J. Capuno, 2005. "The quality of local governance and development under decentralization in the Philippines," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 200506, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
    13. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    14. Blane D. Lewis, 2005. "Indonesian Local Government Spending, Taxing and Saving: An Explanation of Pre‐ and Post‐decentralization Fiscal Outcomes," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 19(3), pages 291-317, September.
    15. World Bank, 2001. "Philippines : Filipino Report Card on Pro-Poor Services," World Bank Publications - Reports 14022, The World Bank Group.
    16. Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini, 2002. "Political Economics: Explaining Economic Policy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262661314, April.
    17. Arsenio M. Balisacan & Hal Hill (ed.), 2007. "The Dynamics of Regional Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4178.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Joseph J. Capuno & Stella A. Quimbo & Aleli D. Kraft & Carlos Antonio R. Tan, Jr. & Vigile Marie B. Fabella, 2012. "Perks and public provisions : Effects of yardstick competition on local government fiscal behavior in the Philippines," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 201208, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
    2. Joseph J. Capuno & Stella A. Quimbo & Aleli D. Kraft & Carlos Antonio R. Tan, Jr., 2012. "The effects of term limits and yardstick competition on local government provision of health insurance and other public services : The Philippine case," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 201201, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
    3. Volpe Martincus, Christian & Carballo, Jerónimo, 2010. "Beyond the average effects: The distributional impacts of export promotion programs in developing countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 201-214, July.
    4. 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.
    5. Christian Volpe Martincus, 2010. "Odyssey in International Markets: An Assessment of the Effectiveness of Export Promotion in Latin America and the Caribbean," IDB Publications (Books), Inter-American Development Bank, number 16458, February.
    6. Jones A.M & Rice N, 2009. "Econometric Evaluation of Health Policies," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 09/09, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    7. Joseph Capuno & Ma. Garcia, 2010. "Can Information about Local Government Performance Induce Civic Participation? Evidence from the Philippines," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(4), pages 624-643.
    8. Smoke, Paul, 2016. "Looking Beyond Conventional Intergovernmental Fiscal Frameworks: Principles, Realities, and Neglected Issues," ADBI Working Papers 606, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    9. Joseph J. Capuno, 2010. "Leadership and Innovation under Decentralization : A Case Study of Selected Local Governments in the Philippines," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 201010, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
    10. Changwony, Frederick Kibon & Paterson, Audrey S., 2019. "Accounting practice, fiscal decentralization and corruption," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).
    11. Volpe Martincus, Christian & Carballo, Jerónimo, 2010. "Beyond the average effects: The distributional impacts of export promotion programs in developing countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 201-214, July.
    12. Stephan Thomsen, 2009. "Job Search Assistance Programs in Europe: Evaluation Methods and Recent Empirical Findings," FEMM Working Papers 09018, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    13. Heckman, James, 2001. "Accounting for Heterogeneity, Diversity and General Equilibrium in Evaluating Social Programmes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(475), pages 654-699, November.
    14. Bolwig, Simon & Gibbon, Peter & Jones, Sam, 2009. "The Economics of Smallholder Organic Contract Farming in Tropical Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1094-1104, June.
    15. Kis-Katos, Krisztina & Sjahrir, Bambang Suharnoko, 2017. "The impact of fiscal and political decentralization on local public investment in Indonesia," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 344-365.
    16. Francesco Porcelli, 2014. "Electoral accountability and local government efficiency: quasi-experimental evidence from the Italian health care sector reforms," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 221-251, August.
    17. Susanne Prantl & Alexandra Spitz‐Oener, 2009. "How does entry regulation influence entry into self‐employment and occupational mobility?1," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 17(4), pages 769-802, October.
    18. Djebbari, Habiba & Smith, Jeffrey, 2008. "Heterogeneous impacts in PROGRESA," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 145(1-2), pages 64-80, July.
    19. Serena Yu, 2016. "Retiree Welfare and the 2009 Pension Increase: Impacts from an Australian Experiment," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 92(296), pages 67-80, March.
    20. Alain de Janvry & Frederico Finan & Elisabeth Sadoulet, 2012. "Local Electoral Incentives and Decentralized Program Performance," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(3), pages 672-685, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Local governments; political agency; performance ratings; decentralization;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • H30 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - General
    • H77 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Intergovernmental Relations; Federalism
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    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:phs:dpaper:200908. 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: RT Campos (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/seupdph.html .

    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.