瞄准影响还是瞄准贫困
Targeting Impact versus Deprivation
American Economic Review · 2025 · [{"name": "Johannes Haushofer", "affiliation": ["Cornell University", "Brooks Automation (Germany)"]}, {"name": "Paul Niehaus", "affiliation": ["University of California San Diego"]}, {"name": "Carlos Paramo", "affiliation": ["University of California, Berkeley"]}, {"name": "Edward Miguel", "affiliation": ["University of California, Berkeley"]}, {"name": "Michael Walker", "affiliation": ["Center for Effective Global Action", "University of California, Berkeley"]}]
中文摘要
大量文献考察了如何以最佳方式将反贫困项目瞄准给在某种意义上（例如消费）最为贫困的人群。本文考察这一目标与瞄准受此类项目影响最大的人群之间可能存在的权衡。我们以肯尼亚一个非政府组织的现金转移项目为背景，利用机器学习方法的最新进展和动态结果数据，学习能够同时瞄准这两个目标的代理家计调查。在标准社会福利准则下，除非规划者的偏好具有极强的再分配倾向，否则仅以贫困程度为依据进行瞄准在这一情境下并不具有吸引力。（JEL C45, D63, I31, I38, L31, O15）
Abstract
A large literature has examined how best to target antipoverty programs to those most deprived in some sense (e.g., consumption). We examine the potential trade-off between this objective and targeting those most impacted by such programs. We work in the context of an NGO cash transfer program in Kenya, employing recent advances in machine learning methods and dynamic outcome data to learn proxy means tests that jointly target both objectives. Targeting solely on the basis of deprivation is not attractive in this setting under standard social welfare criteria unless the planner’s preferences are extremely redistributive. (JEL C45, D63, I31, I38, L31, O15)