The DOI matches its Crossref record; 113 of the 114 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 11 of the 40 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries
Open accessAbstract
Of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals articulated by the United Nations, number one is the elimination of extreme poverty by 2030. While future economic growth should continue to reduce poverty, it will not solve the problem by itself; thus, there is a potentially important role for national-level transfer programs that assist poor families in developing countries. Such programs are often run by developing country governments. Many countries have implemented transfer programs that seek to target beneficiaries: that is, to identify who is poor and then to restrict transfers to those individuals. Some people have begun to advocate for “universal basic income” programs, which dispense with trying to identify the poor and instead provide transfers to everyone. We begin by considering the universal basic income as part of the solution to an optimal income-taxation problem, focusing on the case of developing countries, where there is limited income data and inclusion in the formal tax system is low. We examine how the targeting of transfer programs is conducted in these settings, and provide empirical evidence on the tradeoffs involved between universal basic income and targeted transfer schemes using data from Indonesia and Peru—two countries that run nationwide transfer programs that are targeted to the poor. We conclude by linking our findings back to the broader policy debate on what tools should be preferred for redistribution, as well as the practical challenges of administ…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
64 Own interpretation · 17 Own result · 14 Sources not found · 7 No basis given · 6 No full text of the sources · 5 Partly supported · 4 Supported · 4 Own method · 3 Not checked yet · 2 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“3) as emphasized by Saez (2002), it is not the case that a universal basic income has no labor supply distortions, since there is still a tax on labor income, and in particular adding the universal basic income to the tax schedule requires adjusting the tax schedule elsewhere.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Universal Basic Income and the Tax Schedule
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Saez (2002) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (p. 2) describes an equity–efficiency trade-off, labor-supply responses to income transfers, and guaranteed income that is taxed away at high rates. This supports the point that transfers can involve labor-supply distortions, but the readable passages do not specifically discuss a universal basic income or say that adding one requires adjusting the tax schedule elsewhere. (LLM, conf=0.77)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: A universal basic income program is fully financed by a progressive income tax schedule.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Given that a universal basic income would need to be financed through taxation, one can recast universal basic transfers as a particular feature of a tax schedule, as described by Saez (2002) and illustrated by Figure 1.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Universal Basic Income and the Tax Schedule
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Saez (2002) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (p. 2) describes income-transfer programs through optimal tax formulas, including a negative income tax with guaranteed income support; the figures on p. 40 are labeled transfer and tax schedules. This supports treating transfers as part of a tax schedule, but the readable passages do not specifically describe a universal basic transfer or its tax financing. (LLM, conf=0.78)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Using data from Colombia, Camacho and Conover (2011) show that over time as the formula became known, there was substantial bunching of reporting right below the eligibility cutoff.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Camacho and Conover (2011) source
The section on alternative explanations reports a sharp discontinuity at the eligibility threshold in a Colombian municipality after 1998; Figure B2 identifies that as the period after the score algorithm was released to municipal officials. The Empirical section also compares concentrations of survey scores just below and above the threshold, supporting the description of bunching. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“While more sophisticated prediction methods (like more flexible prediction equations, machine learning methods, and so on) can improve on these predictions (McBride and Nichols 2016), the fundamental tradeoff between inclusion and exclusion error that we document here remains.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > The Inclusion versus Exclusion Error Tradeoff
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites McBride and Nichols 2016 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation is attached to the assertion that more sophisticated methods can improve predictions; the sentence presents the inclusion–exclusion tradeoff as the citing authors’ own finding. The indexed passages provide repository metadata and an abstract, but no passage from the paper’s full text establishes the prediction-improvement assertion. Searches for machine-learning improvements and inclusion–exclusion error found no decisive full-text passage. (LLM, conf=0.72)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Indonesian BLT program and the Peruvian Juntos program each target roughly one-third of the population.
- Could not verify
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“we found that citizens vastly preferred the community based-approach to a data-based proxy-means test.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Community-Based Targeting
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Alatas, Banerjee, Hanna, Olken, and Tobias 2012 source
The Introduction reports that community targeting produced higher satisfaction and 60 percent fewer complaints than the proxy-means test. Section IV.C (Satisfaction) also reports that surveyed individuals were much more satisfied with the community method and more likely to consider it appropriate. These findings support the paraphrase of a strong preference, though the study measured satisfaction rather than asking respondents to choose directly between methods. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“A substantial fraction of households who are eligible for a government benefit program do not enroll in the program.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Differential Costs of Take-Up and Self-Targeting
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Moffitt (2003) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Summaries of the Chapters (p. 9) report a declining Medicaid participation rate among eligible children, which supports the existence of eligible nonparticipants. Our copy does not establish that a substantial fraction of eligible households fail to enroll across government benefit programs. (LLM, conf=0.74)
- Not matchedcites Currie (2006a)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Furthermore, there was no detectable elite capture (Alatas, Banerjee, Hanna, Olken, and Tobias 2012).”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Community-Based Targeting
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Alatas, Banerjee, Hanna, Olken, and Tobias 2012 source
The Introduction states that the experiment found no evidence of elite capture in the community treatment. Section V, “Elite Capture,” reports little evidence of capture, including no significant difference in targeting error rates between whole-community and elite-only meetings. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In Alatas et al. (2012), we showed that communities appear to target based on earning potential, rather than actual earnings.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Community-Based Targeting
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Alatas et al. (2012) source
Section VIII.B reports suggestive evidence that communities may target on ability to earn rather than actual earnings. It finds that households with characteristics associated with lower earning potential were ranked poorer conditional on actual consumption, consistent with the citing sentence’s qualified wording. (LLM, conf=0.88)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
In the paper
“We found no systematic evidence that any of these programs reduced labor supply.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Banerjee, Hanna, Kriendler, and Olken 2017 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In both Indonesia and Peru, to reach 80 percent of the intended beneficiaries (exclusion error of 20 percent), the government would need to tolerate an inclusion error of between 22 and 31 percent.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > The Inclusion versus Exclusion Error Tradeoff
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Indonesian BLT program and the Peruvian Juntos program each target roughly one-third of the population.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 35
- Probably not a substantial claim. 19
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Bah, Bazzi, Sumarto, and Tobias (2018) calculate that inclusion error in the 2008 Indonesian BLT program was roughly 34 percent, which is higher than the social optimum, but still substantially more narrowly targeted than a universal basic income.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Welfare Comparisons
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Bah, Bazzi, Sumarto, and Tobias (2018) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The available passages (section labeled “117 downloads,” no page number) discuss targeting registries and undercoverage, but do not address the claimed BLT inclusion-error estimate. Searches for “2008 BLT,” “34 percent,” “inclusion error,” “social optimum,” and “universal basic income” found no passage that verifies the estimate or comparisons. (LLM, conf=0.72)
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The simulations described in this section (particularly Figures 4 and 5) are broadly similar to other analyses of targeting performance, such as Ravallion (2009), Alatas, Banerjee, Hanna, Olken, and Tobias (2012), and particularly Klasen and Lange (2016).”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Comparing Targeted Programs to a Universal Basic Income: Examples from Indonesia and Peru
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ravallion (2009)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Alatas, Banerjee, Hanna, Olken, and Tobias (2012) source
Section IV.B describes simulations of how different targeting methods affect the poverty rate and poverty gaps across transfer sizes. That makes this paper an example of the targeting-performance analysis identified in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not matchedcites Klasen and Lange (2016)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“He also discusses the conditions under which an optimal income tax schedule is likely to feature a universal basic incomeessentially, when intensive labor supply elasticities (the effects of changes in wages on hours of existing workers) are larger than extensive labor supply elasticities (the effect of changes in wages on hours of workers entering or leaving the labor force).”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Universal Basic Income and the Tax Schedule
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Saez (2002) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (p. 2) says that when labor-supply responses are concentrated on the intensive margin, the optimal program is a negative income tax with substantial guaranteed income. It does not call this a universal basic income, and it says the optimum also depends on the income distribution and the government's redistributive preferences. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: A universal basic income program is fully financed by a progressive income tax schedule.
- Partly supported
In the paper
“Mailing identification cards to the beneficiaries resulted in treatment villages receiving 26 percent more subsidized rice compared to control villages-and reduced "leakage" (rice that, as far as we can tell, was not distributed to anyone) by between 33 and 58 percent.”
- Also stated in: § Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers · plain
“Mailing identification cards to the beneficiaries resulted in treatment villages receiving 26 percent more subsidized rice compared to control villages-and reduced”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Banerjee, Hanna, Kyle, Olken, and Sumarto (2018)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“so while the regressions have a good amount of explanatory power, they also lead to prediction errors: exclusion errors of excluding some who should have been eligible (households with true per-capita consumption below the poverty line) and inclusion errors of including some who should not have been eligible (households with true per-capita consumption above it).”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Predicting Income with Proxy Measures
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Indonesia spends roughly $42 million every three years for updating its Unified DataBase, with annual operating costs of about $1.1 million (for further information, see Bah, Nazara, and Satriawan 2015).”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Figure 4 Tradeoffs between Inclusion Error and Exclusion Error by Varying Eligibility Cutoff (exclusion error is the portion of intended beneficiaries excluded; inclusion error is the portion not intended to be beneficiaries who are included)
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bah, Nazara, and Satriawan 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The Indonesian BLT program and the Peruvian Juntos program each target roughly one-third of the population.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Peru spends roughly $10.8 million every three years with annual operating costs of about $1.1 million (Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas 2008).”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Figure 4 Tradeoffs between Inclusion Error and Exclusion Error by Varying Eligibility Cutoff (exclusion error is the portion of intended beneficiaries excluded; inclusion error is the portion not intended to be beneficiaries who are included)
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The Indonesian BLT program and the Peruvian Juntos program each target roughly one-third of the population.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“for Peru, the socially optimal program targets approximately 18 percent of the population, with inclusion error of 6.4 percent and exclusion error of 52.4 percent.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Welfare Comparisons
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Figure 6 shows the resulting measure of horizontal equity and how it varies as we vary the cutoff c, and hence the inclusion error, of the program.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the community approach did a much better job of identifying those households who selfassessed themselves to be poor, and was only slightly worse at identifying the poor based on per-capita consumption levels.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Community-Based Targeting
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“While they found that the conditions increased school enrollments, they noted that the unconditional program actually had a larger effect on reducing teen pregnancy.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Conditional Transfers
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baird, McIntosh, and Özler (2011) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As the figures show, doubling the amount of noise in the proxy-means test formula reduces the implied marginal tax rate for the poor, but it increases the implied marginal tax rate somewhat for the middle-class, who face some probability of receiving the benefits (due to inclusion error) that is declining in their income.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The process for allocating beneficiaries under the community approach was completely public and transparent-unlike the proxy-means test that relies on secret formulas to produce a list of eligible and ineligible households that villagers do not really understand.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Community-Based Targeting
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“But in developing countries, governments do not observe income for the vast majority of the population who work in the informal sector, which typically includes most of the poor.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Jensen (2016)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Deciding how to parse the tradeoffs between inclusion error, exclusion error, and per-capita benefits requires specifying a social welfare function that allows the government to evaluate the social benefits from these different decision rules while holding the overall size of the transfer constant.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Welfare Comparisons
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, a universal basic income is inherently transparent, in the sense that everyone is entitled to a transfer.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, it is necessary to put a weight on inclusion errors, while remembering that just because someone is above the cutoff line does not imply that the social value of them receiving a transfer is zero-indeed, generically such a transfer still has a positive value.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Welfare Comparisons
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Peru's Juntos is at roughly 6.4 percent inclusion error, according to Robles, Rubio, and Stampini (2015), suggesting that the rate of inclusion error is close to the social optimum as calculated here.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Welfare Comparisons
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Robles, Rubio, and Stampini (2015) source
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As discussed above, a universal basic income program does not eliminate this issue entirely, although the relevant distortions to think about for a universal basic income are the increases in marginal income tax rates required to finance the universal basic income.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both surveys contain the complete set of asset variables used in targeting, as well a measure of actual per-capita consumption for the household, so we can use these datasets to examine targeting accuracy.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Predicting Income with Proxy Measures
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this setting, the labor supply distortion will involve the implied tax rates from the phase-out of the program for those who are eligible, but will also be smoothed out by the error rate in the formula for those who have equivalent income (or consumption) but are not designated as eligible by the formula.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This perspective suggests that any tax-and-transfer system that has the feature that α(0) > 0 can be thought of as including a universal basic income.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Universal Basic Income and the Tax Schedule
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both datasets are used for targeting in the respective countries.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Predicting Income with Proxy Measures
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Also, these graphs ignore the very real problems of incomplete take-up by those who are deemed eligible, which could affect both the targeted programs and universal transfers.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > The Inclusion versus Exclusion Error Tradeoff
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A universal basic income program is comparatively straightforward to implement-each individual receives a fixed transfer, regardless of income-so the main challenge is to ensure that each person receives the transfer only once.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this case, one can tax back some of the transfer on households below the income tax exemption through the consumption tax, but the fact that the tax is generally proportional to consumption limits the flexibility in doing so.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > What about Poor Countries, Where Tax Systems Are Less Developed?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These distortions can, in theory, reduce the quantity of work, either because income effects decrease the incentive to work, or because phasing out the transfer over some income range decreases the after-tax-and-transfer effective marginal wage in that range.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because targeting surveys are infrequent, actual targeting errors may be higher than what we report here, and so one may want to account for this factor in determining where to place the cutoff.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Welfare Comparisons
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Household income status changes over time.
- Rests on an assumption: Governments conduct targeting surveys infrequently.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is necessary to put a weight on the implied reduction in per-capita transfer to the very poorest that is required to accommodate the increased number of beneficiaries.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Welfare Comparisons
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“violations of horizontal equity can also lead to significant political problems.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In Indonesia and Peruthe two countries that we explore in detail below-Jensen reports that 87.5 percent and 79 percent of the countries' employed populations, respectively, have incomes below the tax exclusion thresholds.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > What about Poor Countries, Where Tax Systems Are Less Developed?
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Jensen
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is also necessary to take a stand on how much more the poor value a given dollar than the rich (that is, the difference in marginal utilities for poor and rich), which is given by the curvature on the utility function.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Welfare Comparisons
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Transfer programs using proxy-means tests will have errors in the prediction algorithm-and so they do not treat all people with the same utility of receiving the benefits identically.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the NREGA program, for example, any Indian in a rural area is entitled to 100 days of work at the official minimum wage, and currently about 180 million people per year are employed through the program, making it one of the largest (if not the largest) anti-poverty programs in the world today.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Differential Costs of Take-Up and Self-Targeting
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“For example, from 1696 to 1851, Britain imposed a tax on windows, which were easily observable to the taxman-but this led to the construction of buildings with very few windows, low light, and poor ventilation (Glantz 2008;Oates and Schwab 2015).”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Normal prediction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Glantz 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Oates and Schwab 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Currie (2006b) shows that take-up is incomplete even in programs with universal eligibility in the United States, and a developing country setting raises additional issues.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Differential Costs of Take-Up and Self-Targeting
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Currie (2006b)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If households are aware that increasing their income or consumption may reduce their chances of being eligible for benefits, they may reduce their labor supply accordingly, though documenting to what extent this happens empirically remains an important direction for future research.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While some government programs are universal, such as publicly funded primary schools that are free to the families using them, most cash transfer programs today involve some type of targeting mechanism.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Summing Up
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, an additional benefit is that some of the poorest households may live at the very margins of society and therefore be off the government's radar screen, and may be missed by enumerators trying to do the universal door-to-door screen.When beneficiaries can come to apply, such households can make themselves known.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Differential Costs of Take-Up and Self-Targeting
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Conditional cash transfer programs have spread throughout the world, and now are present in more than 63 countries, reaching tens of millions of households annually (Bastagli et al. 2016).”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Conditional Transfers
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bastagli et al. 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These conditions also may help make the programs more politically palatable, since voters in many countries may prefer that individuals do something in return for receiving aid.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Conditional Transfers
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Community targeting has important limitations-in particular, it does not readily allow for comparisons across locations, and if implemented at scale, could lead households to take actions to hide their income from their neighbors.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Community-Based Targeting
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is a universal entitlement-there is no poverty screening, and there is a guarantee to everyone who wants the work.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Differential Costs of Take-Up and Self-Targeting
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, universal transfer programs will give out the same net transfer quite high up the income distribution-and therefore the choice between a universal basic income program and transfers targeted through other means implies a very substantial tradeoff between eliminating exclusion error and giving much smaller transfers on a per-beneficiary basis.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Summing Up
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: In developing countries, incomes are unobserved for very large parts of the population.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reason was that the unconditional program (unlike the conditional program) still provided cash transfers to girls who dropped out of school anyway and were at the highest risk of pregnancy, and the cash transfers reduced the likelihood of early pregnancy for these girls.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Conditional Transfers
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More noise in the proxy-means test formula, making the proxymeans formula less predictive, tends to smooth out the phase-out region, and will thus tend to reduce the implicit tax rate that a population faces from a targeted benefit.”
§ Universal Basic Incomes versus Targeted Transfers: Anti-Poverty Programs in Developing Countries ■ > Other Challenges with Targeted Transfers
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
A universal basic income program is fully financed by a progressive income tax schedule.
“We assume that a universal basic income program is fully financed by a progressive income tax schedule.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
A universal basic income is financed entirely through income taxes (individual or corporate).
“The discussion thus far has assumed that a universal basic income is financed entirely through income taxes (individual or corporate), which in developing countries are paid primarily by the very top earners.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Indonesian BLT program and the Peruvian Juntos program each target roughly one-third of the population.
“Both programs target roughly one-third of the population.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Household income status changes over time.
“In reality, income status varies over time.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Governments conduct targeting surveys infrequently.
“Because targeting surveys are infrequent”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most developing countries lack a complete, unduplicated list of all individuals.
“Most developing countries do not have such lists”
The paper relies on this without support.
In most developing-country settings, most people lack an address and a bank account.
“In most developing country contexts, most people do not have an address, let alone a bank account”
The paper relies on this without support.
Richer households are generally more likely than poor households to satisfy health and education conditions.
“in general, richer households are more likely to meet the health and education conditions than the poor”
The paper relies on this without support.
In developing countries, incomes are unobserved for very large parts of the population.
“where incomes are unobserved for very large portions of the population”
The paper relies on this without support.
People with better job options tend to avoid manual labor at minimum wage in hot conditions.
“people with better job options tend to prefer doing something other than performing manual labor for minimum wage in the hot sun”
Citations
Cites
An Exploration in the Theory of Optimum Income Taxation
Mirrlees, J. A. (1971) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2296779 · Cited by 4,416
Inequality at Work: The Effect of Peer Salaries on Job Satisfaction
Card, D., Mas, A., Moretti, E., & Saez, E. (2012) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.102.6.2981 · Cited by 1,029
Cash or Condition? Evidence from a Cash Transfer Experiment
Baird, S., McIntosh, C., & Ozler, B. (2011) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qjr032 · Cited by 834
Labor Supply Response to the Earned Income Tax Credit
Eissa, N., & Liebman, J. B. (1996) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2946689 · Cited by 823
Welfare, the Earned Income Tax Credit, and the Labor Supply of Single Mothers
Meyer, B. D., & Rosenbaum, D. T. (2001) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/00335530152466313 · Cited by 810
Optimal Income Transfer Programs: Intensive versus Extensive Labor Supply Responses
Saez, E. (2002) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355302760193959 · Cited by 727
Labor Supply Response to the Earned Income Tax Credit
Eissa, N., & Liebman, J. B. (1995) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w5158 · Cited by 717
Gertler, P. (2004) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/0002828041302109 · Cited by 703
Targeting the Poor: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia
Alatas, V., Banerjee, A., Hanna, R., Olken, B. A., & Tobias, J. (2012) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.102.4.1206 · Cited by 536
Self-citationMeans-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States
Moffitt, R. A. (2003) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226533575.001.0001 · Cited by 424
Why Can Modern Governments Tax So Much? An Agency Model of Firms as Fiscal Intermediaries
Kleven, H., Kreiner, C. T., & Saez, E. (2016) · Economica · doi:10.1111/ecca.12182 · Cited by 342
The Anatomy of Start-Stop Growth
Jones, B. F., & Olken, B. A. (2008) · Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest.90.3.582 · Cited by 301
Self-citationHsieh, C.-T., & Olken, B. A. (2014) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.28.3.89 · Cited by 296
Self-citationMachine Learning and Mobile Phone Data Can Improve the Targeting of Humanitarian Assistance
Aiken, E., Bellue, S., Karlan, D., Udry, C., & Blumenstock, J. E. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04484-9 · Cited by 220
Self-Targeting: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia
(2016) · doi:10.1086/685299 · Cited by 217
Self-citationSocial protection response to the COVID-19 crisis: options for developing countries
Gérard, F., Imbert, C., & Orkin, K. (2020) · Oxford Review of Economic Policy · doi:10.1093/oxrep/graa026 · Cited by 203
Transfer Program Complexity and the Take-Up of Social Benefits
Kleven, H. J., & Kopczuk, W. (2011) · American Economic Journal: Economic Policy · doi:10.1257/pol.3.1.54 · Cited by 199
The Power of Social Pensions: Evidence from China's New Rural Pension Scheme
Huang, W., & Zhang, C. (2021) · American Economic Journal Applied Economics · doi:10.1257/app.20170789 · Cited by 189
Debunking the Stereotype of the Lazy Welfare Recipient
Banerjee, A., Hanna, R., Kreindler, G. E., & Olken, B. A. (2015) · The World Bank Research Observer · doi:10.1093/wbro/lkx002 · Cited by 183
Self-citationDo Conditional Cash Transfers for Schooling Generate Lasting Benefits?
Behrman, J. R., Parker, S. W., & Todd, P. (2010) · The Journal of Human Resources · doi:10.3368/jhr.46.1.93 · Cited by 178
Manipulation of Social Program Eligibility
Camacho, A., & Conover, E. (2011) · American Economic Journal: Economic Policy · doi:10.1257/pol.3.2.41 · Cited by 144
Means Testing versus Universal Provision in Poverty Alleviation Programmes
Besley, T. (1990) · Economica · doi:10.2307/2554085 · Cited by 139
How Relevant Is Targeting to the Success of an Antipoverty Program?
Ravallion, M. D. (2009) · The World Bank Research Observer · doi:10.1093/wbro/lkp009 · Cited by 124
The invisible safety net: protecting the nation's poor children and families
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-1242 · Cited by 114
Reverse thinking: taking a healthy diet perspective towards food systems transformations
Brouwer, I. D., van Liere, M. J., de Brauw, A., Domínguez-Salas, P., Herforth, A., Kennedy, G., Lachat, C. K., Omosa, E., Talsma, E. F., Vandevijvere, S., et al. (2021) · Food Security · doi:10.1007/s12571-021-01204-5 · Cited by 114
Cash transfers for pro-poor carbon taxes in Latin America and the Caribbean
Vogt‐Schilb, A., Walsh, B., Feng, K., Capua, L. D., Liu, Y., Zuluaga, D., Robles, M., & Hubacek, K. (2019) · Nature Sustainability · doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0385-0 · Cited by 106
Is More for the Poor Less for the Poor? The Politics of Means-Tested Targeting
Gelbach, J. B., & Pritchett, L. (2002) · Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy · doi:10.2202/1538-0653.1027 · Cited by 104
Banerjee, A., Hanna, R., Kyle, J., Olken, B. A., & Sumarto, S. (2018) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/696226 · Cited by 95
Self-citationBehrman, J. R., Parker, S. W., & Todd, P. E. (2011) · Journal of Human Resources · doi:10.1353/jhr.2011.0028 · Cited by 92
The Impact of Emergency Cash Assistance in a Pandemic: Experimental Evidence from Colombia
Vélez, J. L., & Querubín, P. (2021) · The Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest_a_01043 · Cited by 84
Ryan, N., & Sudarshan, A. (2021) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/717045 · Cited by 77
The Psychosocial Value of Employment: Evidence from a Refugee Camp
Hussam, R., Kelley, E., Lane, G., & Zahra, F. T. (2022) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.20211616 · Cited by 76
Mitigating poverty: The patterns of multiple carbon tax and recycling regimes for Peru
Malerba, D., Gaentzsch, A., & Ward, H. (2020) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111961 · Cited by 69
Geographic microtargeting of social assistance with high-resolution poverty maps
Smythe, I. S., & Blumenstock, J. E. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2120025119 · Cited by 65
The Gendered Poverty Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Colombia
Cuesta, J., & Pico, J. (2020) · European Journal of Development Research · doi:10.1057/s41287-020-00328-2 · Cited by 64
Optimal Environmental Targeting in the Amazon Rainforest
Assunção, J. J., McMillan, R. S., Murphy, J., & Souza-Rodrigues, E. (2022) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1093/restud/rdac064 · Cited by 60
How Relevant Is Targeting to the Success of an Antipoverty Program?
Ravallion, M. D. (2009) · doi:10.1596/4429 · Cited by 55
Golan, J., Sicular, T., & Umapathi, N. (2017) · doi:10.1596/29226 · Cited by 52
Optimal Income Taxation with Adverse Selection in the Labour Market
Stantcheva, S. (2014) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1093/restud/rdu005 · Cited by 51
Retooling Poverty Targeting Using Out-of-Sample Validation and Machine Learning
McBride, L., & Nichols, A. (2016) · The World Bank Economic Review · doi:10.1093/wber/lhw056 · Cited by 51
The COVID‐19 pandemic: Time for a universal basic income?
Johnson, A. F., & Roberto, K. J. (2020) · Public Administration and Development · doi:10.1002/pad.1891 · Cited by 46
Cash transfers as a response to COVID-19: Experimental evidence from Kenya
Brooks, W. J., Donovan, K., Johnson, T., & Oluoch-Aridi, J. (2022) · Journal of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2022.102929 · Cited by 46
Efficiency, Legitimacy, and Impacts of Targeting Methods: Evidence from an Experiment in Niger
Prémand, P., & Schnitzer, P. (2020) · The World Bank Economic Review · doi:10.1093/wber/lhaa019 · Cited by 45
Aggregate Effects from Public Works: Evidence from India
Cook, C. J., & Shah, M. (2020) · The Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.1162/rest_a_00993 · Cited by 44
Aiken, E., Bedoya, G., Blumenstock, J. E., & Coville, A. (2022) · Journal of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2022.103016 · Cited by 44
Social protection and multidimensional poverty: Lessons from Ethiopia, India and Peru
Borga, L., & D'Ambrosio, C. (2021) · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105634 · Cited by 43
Hsieh, C., & Olken, B. (2014) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w19966 · Cited by 43
Self-citationBanerjee, A., Hanna, R., Olken, B., & Sumarto, S. (2020) · Journal of Public Economics Plus · doi:10.1016/j.pubecp.2020.100001 · Cited by 42
Self-citationThe Window Tax: A Case Study in Excess Burden
(2015) · doi:10.1257/jep.29.1.163 · Cited by 38
Have Cash Transfers Succeeded in Reaching the Poor in Latin America and the Caribbean?
Robles, M., Rubio, M. G., & Stampini, M. (2015) · doi:10.18235/0000162 · Cited by 38
Do CCTs Improve Employment and Earnings in the Very Long-Term? Evidence from Mexico
Kugler, A. D., & Rojas, I. (2018) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w24248 · Cited by 35
Gundersen, C. (2021) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102096 · Cited by 32
The Macroeconomic Effects of Universal Basic Income Programs
(2021) · doi:10.26509/frbc-wp-202121 · Cited by 25
Financial support and financial well-being for vocational school students in China
Xie, X., Xie, M., Jin, H., Cheung, S., & Huang, C.-C. (2020) · Children and Youth Services Review · doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105442 · Cited by 25
Cash Transfers and Labor Supply: Evidence from a Large-Scale Program in IranPreprint
Salehi‐Isfahani, D., & Mostafavi-Dehzooei, M. H. (2017) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2896702 · Cited by 25
Welfare and Redistributive Effects of Social Assistance in the Global South
Niño‐Zarazúa, M. (2019) · Population and Development Review · doi:10.1111/padr.12308 · Cited by 23
Public Expenditure Review Summary
(2012) · doi:10.1596/27424 · Cited by 21
Analysis of testing‐based forward model selection
(2020) · doi:10.3982/ecta16273 · Cited by 17
Temporary Basic Income in Times of Pandemic: Rationale, Costs and Poverty-Mitigation Potential
Molina, G. G., Montoya-Aguirre, M., & Ortiz-Juárez, E. (2022) · Basic Income Studies · doi:10.1515/bis-2020-0029 · Cited by 17
Early childhood education and care: effects after half a century and their mechanisms
Kawarazaki, H. (2022) · Journal of Population Economics · doi:10.1007/s00148-022-00899-w · Cited by 17
Proxy Means Testing Vulnerability to Measurement Errors?
(2020) · doi:10.1080/00220388.2020.1715942 · Cited by 16
Assessing the Social Welfare Effects of Government Transfer Programs: Some International Comparisons
Kakwani, N., Wang, X., Xu, J., & Yue, X. (2021) · Review of Income and Wealth · doi:10.1111/roiw.12500 · Cited by 15
Data, discretion and institutional capacity: Evidence from cash transfers in Pakistan
Haseeb, M., & Vyborny, K. (2021) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2021.104535 · Cited by 14
McRae, S. D., & Wolak, F. A. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Economics and Management · doi:10.1016/j.jeem.2021.102541 · Cited by 14
Retooling Poverty Targeting Using Out-of-Sample Validation and Machine Learning
McBride, L., & Nichols, A. (2016) · doi:10.1596/1813-9450-7849 · Cited by 12
Strengths and limitations of relative wealth indices derived from big data in Indonesia
Sartirano, D., Kalimeri, K., Cattuto, C., Delamónica, E., García–Herranz, M., Mockler, A., Paolotti, D., & Schifanella, R. (2023) · Frontiers in Big Data · doi:10.3389/fdata.2023.1054156 · Cited by 12
Indonesia’s Single Registry for Social Protection Programmes
Bah, A., Nazara, S., & Satriawan, E. (2015) · doi:10.65425/641924 · Cited by 11
Bah, A., Bazzi, S., Sumarto, S., & Tobias, J. (2018) · doi:10.1596/1813-9450-8342 · Cited by 5
Targeting for Social Safety Nets: Evidence from Nine Programs in the SahelPreprint
Schnitzer, P., & Stoeffler, Q. (2022) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4017172 · Cited by 4
Justice, Inclusion, and Incentives
(2022) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4191231 · Cited by 4
Self-Targeting: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia
Alatas, V., Banerjee, A., Hanna, R., Olken, B., Purnamasari, R., & Wai‐Poi, M. (2017) · Harvard Dataverse · doi:10.7910/dvn/6zuiuc · Cited by 4
Self-citationPoverty, Inequality and Social Protection in Myanmar
(2021) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3894391 · Cited by 3
The material stock inequality in Chinese rural households
Yang, N., Gao, J., Han, F. L., Sun, M., Yang, D., Shi, F., & Zhang, L. (2023) · Sustainable Production and Consumption · doi:10.1016/j.spc.2023.08.006 · Cited by 3
Lee, S. (2020) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3613239 · Cited by 2
ROBOTLARIN KAMU GÜVENLİĞİNDE KULLANIMI: MEKÂNSAL BİR SINIFLANDIRMA
Ekmekçioğlu, A., & Yıldız, M. (2023) · SAVSAD Savunma ve Savaş Araştırmaları Dergisi · doi:10.54078/savsad.1200843 · Cited by 1
Findor, A., Hruška, M., Hlatky, R., et al. (2022) · Harvard Dataverse · doi:10.7910/dvn/6kcw8z · Cited by 1
Why Should We Integrate Income and Employment Support? A Conceptual and Empirical InvestigationPreprint
Asenjo, A., Escudero, V., & Liepmann, H. (2022) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4151281 · Cited by 1
Scarlato, M., & d'Agostino, G. (2019) · doi:10.1111/polp.12332
Debunking the Stereotype of the Lazy Welfare Recipient: Evidence from Cash Transfer Programs
Banerjee, A. V., Hanna, R., Kreindler, G. E., et al. (2017) · doi:10.1596/31221
Self-citationPolicies to Support Businesses through the COVID-19 Shock: A Firm Level Perspective
Cirera, X., Cruz, M., Davies, E., et al. (2021) · doi:10.1596/40038
Cumulative Impacts of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs: Experimental Evidence from Indonesia
Cahyadi, N., Hanna, R., Olken, B., et al. (2018) · doi:10.3386/w24670
Self-citationConsumption Smoothing and the Welfare Consequences of Social Insurance in Developing Economies
Chetty, R., & Looney, A. (2005) · doi:10.3386/w11709
The Welfare Effects of Eligibility Expansions: Theory and Evidence from SNAP
Anders, J., & Rafkin, C. (2022) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4140433
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Glantz Andrew E, 2008, Impact of the Window Duty on Tax Administration and Architecture, 1696
- 1982, American Economic Review, 72, 372
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Universal Basic Income in the United States and Advanced Countries
Hoynes, H. W., & Rothstein, J. (2019) · Annual Review of Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev-economics-080218-030237 · Cited by 260
Universal Basic Income in the Developing World
Banerjee, A., Niehaus, P., & Suri, T. (2019) · Annual Review of Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev-economics-080218-030229 · Cited by 225
Social protection response to the COVID-19 crisis: options for developing countries
Gérard, F., Imbert, C., & Orkin, K. (2020) · Oxford Review of Economic Policy · doi:10.1093/oxrep/graa026 · Cited by 203
Machine Learning and Mobile Phone Data Can Improve the Targeting of Humanitarian Assistance
Aiken, E., Bellue, S., Karlan, D., Udry, C., & Blumenstock, J. E. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04484-9 · Cited by 220
The Power of Social Pensions: Evidence from China's New Rural Pension Scheme
Huang, W., & Zhang, C. (2021) · American Economic Journal Applied Economics · doi:10.1257/app.20170789 · Cited by 189
Metadata
- Authors
- Hanna, R., & Olken, B. A.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Economic Perspectives
- Publisher
- American Economic Association
- Published
- 2018-11-01
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 201-226
- ISSN
- 0895-3309 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2888797381
- Cited by
- 299
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 46 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 46.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Journal of Economic Perspectives (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Development › Poverty, Education, and Child Welfare
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Fiscal Studies
- Keywords
- universal basic income, anti-poverty policy, extreme poverty, income tax, optimal taxation, targeting of the poor, redistribution, developing countries, Indonesia, Peru, poverty reduction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
