政策看重什么?
What Do Policies Value?
Review of Economic Studies · 2025 · [{"name": "Daniel Björkegren", "affiliation": ["Columbia University"]}, {"name": "Joshua Blumenstock", "affiliation": ["Berkeley College", "University of California, Berkeley"]}, {"name": "Samsun Knight", "affiliation": ["University of Toronto"]}]
中文摘要
摘要 当一项政策优先考虑某个人而非另一个人时,这是因为他们受益更多,还是因为他们更受偏好?本文提出一种方法,用以揭示与观察到的分配决策相一致的价值观。我们估计每个人从某项干预中获益多少,然后将该分配与以下因素相协调:(i) 赋予不同个体的福利权重;(ii) 该干预的异质性处理效应;以及 (iii) 赋予不同结果的权重。我们通过分析墨西哥PROGRESA反贫困项目来展示这一方法。分析显示,尽管该项目优先考虑了某些子群体——例如土著家庭——但这些群体受益更多这一事实意味着,该项目实际上并未赋予他们更高的福利权重。我们还发现证据表明,该政策对不同结果的重视程度与家庭本身并不相同。PROGRESA案例说明了该方法如何使审计现有政策、以及设计更符合价值观的未来政策成为可能。
Abstract
Abstract When a policy prioritizes one person over another, is it because they benefit more, or because they are preferred? This paper develops a method to uncover the values consistent with observed allocation decisions. We estimate how much each person benefits from an intervention, and then reconcile the allocation with (i) the welfare weights assigned to different people; (ii) heterogeneous treatment effects of the intervention; and (iii) weights on different outcomes. We demonstrate this approach by analyzing Mexico’s PROGRESA anti-poverty programme. The analysis reveals that while the programme prioritized certain subgroups—such as indigenous households—the fact that those groups benefited more implies that the programme did not actually assign them a higher welfare weight. We also find evidence that the policy valued outcomes differently from households. The PROGRESA case illustrates how the method makes it possible to audit existing policies, and to design future policies that better align with values.
在 ireadpaper 查看全部 →