Are the Welfare Losses from Imperfect Targeting Important?

Emmanuel Skoufias and David P. Coady

Economica, 2007, vol. 74, issue 296, 756-776

Abstract: We quantify and compare the size of the welfare losses arising from the use of alternative ‘imperfect’ welfare indicators as substitutes for the conventionally preferred consumption indicator. We find that the size of the welfare losses associated with different indicators varies considerably. An asset‐based index and the share of food as targeting indicators were found to have the highest welfare losses relative to all other targeting indicators examined. Our preferred welfare index implies that the losses from the two best targeting indicators (i.e. reported expenditures and reported income) are statistically significant but very low (less than 5%).

Date: 2007
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (30)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.2006.00567.x

Related works:
Working Paper: Are the welfare losses from imperfect targeting important? (2002)
Working Paper: Are the welfare losses from imperfect targeting important? (2002)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:econom:v:74:y:2007:i:296:p:756-776

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0013-0427

Access Statistics for this article

Economica is currently edited by Frank Cowell, Tore Ellingsen and Alan Manning

More articles in Economica from London School of Economics and Political Science Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().