发帖
雷达卡
摘要翻译：
我们使用随机实验将劳动力培训计划与卢旺达的现金转移进行比较。这项研究以贫困和就业不足的青年为样本，测量培训方案的影响，不仅相对于对照组，而且相对于简单地将方案费用直接支付给受益者的反事实。虽然培训方案成功地改善了一些核心成果（生产时间、资产、储蓄和主观幸福感），但成本等值现金转移转移了所有这些成果以及消费、收入和财富。在头对头的成本比较中，现金证明在许多经济结果上都是优越的，而培训只在商业知识的生产方面优于现金。我们几乎没有发现人力资本和物质资本干预之间互补的证据，也没有异质性或溢出效应的迹象。
---
英文标题：
《Using Household Grants to Benchmark the Cost Effectiveness of a USAID
Workforce Readiness Program》
---
作者：
Craig McIntosh and Andrew Zeitlin
---
最新提交年份：
2020
---
分类信息：
一级分类：Economics 经济学
二级分类：General Economics 一般经济学
分类描述：General methodological, applied, and empirical contributions to economics.
对经济学的一般方法、应用和经验贡献。
--
一级分类：Quantitative Finance 数量金融学
二级分类：Economics 经济学
分类描述：q-fin.EC is an alias for econ.GN. Economics, including micro and macro economics, international economics, theory of the firm, labor economics, and other economic topics outside finance
q-fin.ec是econ.gn的别名。经济学，包括微观和宏观经济学、国际经济学、企业理论、劳动经济学和其他金融以外的经济专题
--
---
英文摘要：
We use a randomized experiment to compare a workforce training program to cash transfers in Rwanda. Conducted in a sample of poor and underemployed youth, this study measures the impact of the training program not only relative to a control group but relative to the counterfactual of simply disbursing the cost of the program directly to beneficiaries. While the training program was successful in improving a number of core outcomes (productive hours, assets, savings, and subjective well-being), cost-equivalent cash transfers move all these outcomes as well as consumption, income, and wealth. In the head-to-head costing comparison cash proves superior across a number of economic outcomes, while training outperforms cash only in the production of business knowledge. We find little evidence of complementarity between human and physical capital interventions, and no signs of heterogeneity or spillover effects.
---
PDF链接：
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.01749
京公网安备 11010802022788号
