KedhapIE – Estimasi Variabel Instrumental untuk Evaluasi Dampak Kebijakan Publik

Summary

This video lecture discusses the importance of impact evaluation for public policy, particularly in education. The speaker explores how evaluating the effectiveness of government programs, such as the Bantuan Operasional Sekolah (BOS), can help assess their success in achieving targeted outcomes. The lecture covers key methods like instrumental variable estimation to address bias and selection issues in evaluating the effects of policies on student performance. It also highlights the importance of considering cost-effectiveness, targeting, and the socio-economic impact of educational subsidies. Ultimately, the BOS program is found to positively influence student performance, especially for poorer students.

Takeaways

• 😀 Evaluating public policy impacts is essential to determine whether government programs and policies are achieving their intended goals and improving the target population's conditions.
• 😀 Impact evaluation goes beyond monitoring, requiring an understanding of the causal effects of policies and interventions on the target population.
• 😀 A good impact evaluation design involves considering counterfactuals, such as how the target population would fare without the intervention.
• 😀 Evaluating public policy should focus on outcomes like improved well-being or educational attainment, rather than just input metrics like the number of resources allocated.
• 😀 Randomized control trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for impact evaluation, but when randomization isn't possible, instrumental variable (IV) estimation methods can be used to address issues like selection bias.
• 😀 Instrumental variable estimation (IV) helps isolate the treatment effect by using a variable that affects the treatment but doesn't directly affect the outcome, thus reducing biases.
• 😀 A well-designed impact evaluation question should focus on three elements: the intervention, the outcome to be measured, and the target population.
• 😀 In the case of Indonesia's school operational assistance (BOS) program, a key goal is to assess how it affects educational outcomes like student performance on exams.
• 😀 Evaluation studies comparing the impact of different conditional cash transfer programs across countries indicate that the magnitude of the effect on educational outcomes varies but can be significant in certain contexts.
• 😀 In the context of the BOS program, using an instrumental variable approach (e.g., head of village involvement) allows for a more accurate assessment of the program's impact on student performance, avoiding biases from selection or other confounding factors.

Q & A

Why is it important to evaluate public policy and programs?

It is important to evaluate public policies and programs to determine whether the intended targets have been met, assess any changes in the target population, and evaluate whether the program design can be improved or discontinued. Additionally, it helps assess the cost-effectiveness of the program and whether government spending has been used efficiently.

What does 'impact evaluation' focus on in the context of public policy?

Impact evaluation focuses on assessing the effects or outcomes of a specific policy or program, such as determining whether a school subsidy program has improved student performance. It aims to understand the causal effects of an intervention by comparing the outcomes of those who received the intervention with those who did not.

What is a 'counterfactual' in impact evaluation, and why is it necessary?

A counterfactual is a scenario that represents what would have happened if an individual or group had not received the intervention or treatment. In impact evaluation, the counterfactual is necessary because it allows for comparing the actual outcomes with those of a hypothetical group that didn't receive the intervention, helping isolate the effect of the policy or program.

What is the key difference between impact evaluation and other forms of monitoring and evaluation?

The key difference is that impact evaluation specifically requires the use of a counterfactual, which is used to isolate the causal effects of a policy or program. Unlike general monitoring and evaluation, which focuses on outputs and progress, impact evaluation aims to measure actual changes or outcomes caused by the intervention.

What challenges arise when evaluating policy impacts, and how can they be addressed?

Challenges include issues like selection bias (where participants are not randomly assigned), endogeneity (where factors influencing the outcome are correlated with the intervention), and individual heterogeneity (where different participants respond differently to the same intervention). These challenges can be addressed using statistical techniques like instrumental variables estimation, which help isolate the causal effect by accounting for confounding variables.

What role do instrumental variables (IV) play in impact evaluation?

Instrumental variables are used to address problems like selection bias and endogeneity by finding variables that are related to the treatment or intervention but not directly related to the outcome. This allows for more accurate estimation of the causal effects of the intervention.

What is a randomized control trial (RCT), and why is it considered a gold standard in impact evaluation?

A randomized control trial (RCT) is an experimental method in which participants are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups. It is considered the gold standard in impact evaluation because randomization minimizes selection bias and ensures that any differences in outcomes can be attributed to the intervention.

In the context of the school operational assistance (BOS) program, how was impact measured?

Impact was measured by evaluating the effect of the BOS program on student performance, specifically their exam scores. The evaluation used instrumental variables to address biases in the data and provide a more accurate estimate of how receiving the BOS subsidy affected student outcomes.

How does the study of BOS compare to other similar subsidy programs worldwide?

The study of BOS in Indonesia is comparable to similar conditional cash transfer programs in other countries, such as Mexico's 'Programa Oportunidades.' These programs are designed to improve educational attainment by providing financial support to low-income families, and evaluations of such programs often look at enrollment rates, dropout rates, and academic performance.

What were the main findings regarding the BOS program's effect on student performance?

The evaluation found that the BOS program successfully improved student performance, as measured by exam scores. The impact was more significant for students from poorer households. The study also highlighted that the program's effects varied based on the level of poverty, with more significant improvements seen among students from the poorest families.