rafmacalaba/datause-encoder-data huggingface dataset:
**<u>Table 7: IV regressions for impact of title on agricultural productivity</u>**

||<br>**Output value**<br>**(ZMK/ha)**|**Purchased inputs**<br>**(ZMK/ha)**|**Profit (ZMK/ha)**|
|---|---|---|---|
|**Panel A: All formal documents**||||
|Parcel with formal document|-0.0235|0.00865|-0.00315|
||(0.0925)|(0.111)|(0.00366)|
|Parcel with chief certificate|-0.0887|-0.0792|-0.00522**|
||(0.0592)|(0.0708)|(0.00234)|
|State land with no title|0.0110|-0.0698|0.00309|
||(0.144)|(0.172)|(0.00569)|
|Rented-in land|-0.0607<br>|-0.186***<br>|0.000515<br>|
||(0.0514)|(0.0615)|(0.00203)|
|ln parcel area in ha|-0.497***<br>(0.0174)|-0.516***<br>(0.0208)|-0.00814***<br>(0.000689)|
|Log head's age|<br>-0.143***|<br>-0.111*|<br>-0.00306|
||(0.0504)|(0.0603)|(0.00200)|
|Male headed household|<br>0.127***|<br>-0.0850*|<br>0.00595***|
||(0.0396)|(0.0474)|(0.00157)|
|Head is literate?|<br>0.0930***|<br>0.0694*|<br>0.00300**|
||(0.0340)|(0.0407)|(0.00134)|
|Member of farmers group|<br>0.0506*|<br>0.146***|<br>-0.00250**|
||(0.0295)|(0.0353)|(0.00117)|
|Leader in local organization|<br>0.0734**|<br>0.0557|<br>0.000915|
||(0.0325)|(0.0389)|(0.00129)|
|Log value of assets in ZMK|<br>0.245***|<br>0.236***|<br>0.00412***|
||(0.0101)|(0.0120)|(0.000398)|
|R-squared|0.331|0.261|0.0799|
|<br>Sargan statistic|0.0000614|2.755|0.00195|
|Chi-sq(1) p-value|0.994|0.0970|0.965|
|**Panel B: Formal documents by provenance**||||
|<br>State land with title (_β1_)|0.00114|0.00814|-0.00214|
|<br>|(0.0938)|(0.112)|(0.00372)|
|Prev. cust. land with title (_β2_)|-0.234|0.0283|-0.0118|
||(0.294)|(0.352)|(0.0116)|
|Parcel with chief certificate|-0.0851|-0.0798|-0.00507**|
||(0.0595)|(0.0712)|(0.00236)|
|State land with no title|<br>-0.0131|<br>-0.0688|<br>0.00210|
||(0.145)|(0.174)|(0.00576)|
|Rented-in land|-0.0651|-0.185***|0.000331|
||(00518)|(00620)|(000205)|
|ln parcel area in ha|.<br>-0.495***|.<br>-0.516***|.<br>-0.00806***|
||(0.0176)|(0.0210)|(0.000696)|
|Log head's age|-0.144***|-0.111*|-0.00311|
||(0.0504)|(0.0603)|(0.00200)|
|Male headed household|0.129***<br>|-0.0851*<br>|0.00604***<br>|
||(0.0396)|(0.0475)|(0.00157)|
|Head is literate?|<br>0.0916***|<br>0.0695*|<br>0.00294**|
||(0.0340)|(0.0407)|(0.00135)|
|Member of farmers group|<br>0.0510*|<br>0.146***|<br>-0.00249**|
||(00295)|(00354)|(000117)|
|Leader in local organization|.<br>0.0726**|.<br>0.0557|.<br>0.000882|
|<br>Log value of assets in ZMK|(0.0325)<br>0.245***|(0.0389)<br>0.236***|(0.00129)<br>0.00413***|
||(0.0101)|(0.0120)|(0.000399)|
|Rd|<br>0332|<br>0260|<br>00778|
|-square<br>Sargan statistic|.<br>000225|.<br>2754|.<br>0000174|
|<br>Chi-sq(1) p-value|.<br>0.962|.<br>0.0970|.<br>0.989|
|<br>F-test:_β1_=_β2_|0.620|0.00317|0.670|
|p-value|0.431|0.955|0.413|
|**Panel C: State vs customary land (OLS regressions)**||||
|State land|-0.00422<br>(0.0320)|0.00850<br>(0.0384)|0.000330<br>(0.00126)|

26
|Maternity leave|||-0.359|||4.008***|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|(logs)*Female owner<br>present Y:1 N:0|||||||
||||(0.641)|||(1.369)|
|Maternity leave|||-6.803**|||-7.677**|
|(logs)*Fertility rate|||||||
||||(2.670)|||(3.538)|
|Maternity leave|||-0.022|||0.015|
|(logs)*Gender parity<br>in workplace laws|||||||
||||(0.044)|||(0.053)|
|Maternity leave|||21.310|||60.408|
|(logs)*Gender parity<br>in primary education<br>enrollment|||(42.210)|||(45.956)|
|Wage rate (real,|||-0.003|||-0.011|
|logs)*Gender parity in<br>workplace laws|||(0.009)|||(0.012)|
|Industry fixed effects|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|
|Year fixed effects|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|
|Constant|-50.668|-179.257***|-418.128*|-68.407|-187.211***|-370.531|
||(35.469)|(45.362)|(227.814)|(42.387)|(59.374)|(299.058)|
|Number of|57,410|57,410|57,410|14,932|14,932|14,932|
|observations|||||||
|R-squared|0.200|0.295|0.299|0.255|0.333|0.338|

OLS estimation method. Huber-White robust standard errors clustered on country-year pair (ES round) in brackets. *** (1%), ** (5%), * (10%).

74
<!-- Start of picture text --> 600 1200<br>500 + 1000<br>209 ———_______—s—sssssssSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSsssssSdt F7*te<br>100. i 200<br>—=>=6=—Rnwx———————————————TTTTTi O<br>FPSo O LMPAv wm PPP© wo 0 MP2 ab PLpO -db SF.O LPSnb ab LK6 -o SL0<br>— Dil extraction volume (m tons) (left axis)<br>—Gas extraction volume (b cub meters) (right axis)<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 120<br>100 —<br>80 75.29<br>60 a<br>40<br>20<br>0<br>2007 2008 2009 2010 2012<br><!-- End of picture text --> <!-- Start of picture text --> 200<br>180<br>- a<br>~ Vi<br>.100 —_\ a<br>80<br>aed on — nm uy Ps nm 1 my uy Mand mm cc nm uy Mead mn<br>ao ao — ca ca ca ca | | | i | ol uel ue a) a) el<br>oa oa oo oa oo ao ao oa oa oa oa oo oa oo ao ao oa<br>ie | ml md | | Lie | Lie | ie | ie | ie | i | | | Lie | Lie | ie|<br><!-- End of picture text -->
According to Schumpeter (1934), entrepreneurship is a driving force of innovation and, more generally, an engine for economic development (Audretsch, Keilbach and Lehmann 2006; Koellinger and Thurik 2012; for a comprehensive survey, see Van Praag and Versloot 2007). As detailed by Wennekers and Thurik (1999) and Dejardin (2011), new firm formation may play a crucial role in fostering competition, inducing innovation and supporting the emergence of new sectors. Ultimately, new firms may substantially contribute to job creation provided that the net effect of new entrants brings about overall market growth (MalchowMøller, Schjerning, and Sørensen 2011).

The relationship between the rate of new firm creation and economic development is, however, heterogeneous across countries. The distinction between advanced and developing countries (DCs) is particularly important in this respect. Wennekers et al. (2005) showed that the link between entrepreneurial dynamics and economic performance is not monotonic. On the contrary, they found evidence of a U-shaped relationship between the level of development and the rate of entrepreneurship (see also Ligthelm 2011, 163). This finding suggests that entrepreneurship does not yield the same effects in every place. Based on this contribution, Amoròs and Cristi (2008) analyzed the Latin American evidence by adopting an interpretative framework based on Porter’s (1990) scheme of country economic development, which identifies three stages: factor-driven, efficiency-driven and innovative-driven. These authors provided further support for the U-shaped hypothesis. In particular, they showed that Latin American countries are clustered in the downward part of the curve.

Such heterogeneous evidence at the aggregate level can be better understood when the focus is shifted to the micro foundations of entrepreneurship. Since the seminal contribution by Baumol (1990), we have known that “Schumpeterian” innovative entrepreneurs coexist with “defensive and necessity entrepreneurs.” The latter are those who enter a new business because of market opportunities and innovative ideas but merely because they need income to 2
<!-- Start of picture text --> 0.80<br>=—®— 2004 Enlargement Countries<br>0.75 i =—® Pre-2004 Countries<br>I<br>I<br>0.70 I<br>I<br>0.65 i<br>I<br>0.60<br>|<br>I<br>0.55 |<br>0.50 Ii<br>I<br>I<br>0.45<br>I<br>0.40<br>2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012<br><!-- End of picture text -->
is suggested that this is the first of many bottlenecks to a fair and transparent system (Litvack, 1999; van de Walle, 2002). Often, communities are urged to collect funds through fees and levees themselves, which is obviously hardest for the most deprived communities. It is not surprising that statistics show a large gap between eligible households and actual beneficiaries (van de Walle, 2002).

As we have shown in previous sections, poverty has become much more spatially concentrated over time in Vietnam. We have noted in the introductory section that this is likely a common consequence of spatial concentration of economic growth due to agglomeration externalities. Absent an effective means to redistribute incomes to lagging regions this process is likely to result in a growing spatial concentration of poverty. Geographic targeting of resources to combat poverty offer one possible means to attenuate such a process.

To assess effectiveness of geographic targeting in Vietnam, we consider the geographic distribution of a hypothetical budget to the population of Vietnam. We assume that we have no information about the poverty status of this population other than the geographic location of residence and the level of poverty in each location. As a benchmark case we make the extreme assumption of no knowledge whatsoever about the spatial distribution of poverty – in which case our given budget is distributed uniformly to the entire population.<sup>5</sup> We set up a series of comparisons to this benchmark, where we assume knowledge about poverty levels in progressively smaller sub-populations. For a given level of disaggregation, we ask how knowledge about poverty outcomes across localities can be incorporated into the design of a transfer scheme so as to improve the overall targeting performance relative to the benchmark case. In light of the observations made above concerning the evolving spatial distribution of poverty (in Vietnam and beyond), we ask whether and how our conclusions differ between 1999 and 2009.

> 5 Actually, comparing this no-knowledge benchmark against the successfulness of the geographic targeting approach that Vietnam exercised a decade ago as assessed by Baulch and Minot (2002), it is not that extreme. They found that only 20% of the poor were reached. If the total population gets distributed an equal part of the budget, 100% the poor would be reached by definition. The only thing is that the amount received is probably so little in that scenario that it is questionable how many people would get lifted out of poverty.

23
As for our measure of parents‟ participation in the local accountability system, we found that 50% of the surveyed parents participated in the last elections of parent class representatives. Table 2 reports the geographical distribution of parental participation, which ranges from 33% in the Shkoder county to 63% in the Vlore county. Further disaggregation to the district level shows an even greater variation in the proportion of participating parents, ranging from 18% in the Shkoder district to 95% in the Delvine region (See Table 2 in Appendix). The county-level and district-level differences in participation are significant at the 1 percent level.

**Table 2**

**Parental participation in the “short-route” by county**

|||**Participation in the elections of**<br>**parent class representatives in 2009**|
|---|---|---|
|**Total**||**0.50**|
|**County**|||
|Vlore||0.63|
|Berat||0.58|
|Diber||0.58<br>|
|Fier||0.57|
|Kukes||0.56|
|Lezhe||0.50|
|Tirane||0.50|
|Durres||0.48|
|Gjirokaster||0.47|
|Korce||0.46|
|Elbasan||0.42|
|Shkoder||0.33|
||Data source:|_School Stakeholder Survey_|

# **4.3 Cooperative behavior in the public goods experiment**

Three-quarters of the parents invested in the group account rather than the private account in the public goods game. There are only two public goods experiments that are comparable to ours. Cardenas et al. (2009) find that the percentage of contributors to the group account in 6 Latin American capitals ranged between 12.3% in Bogota‟ to 47.3% in Caracas. In two different neighborhoods in Colombia, Attanasio et al. (2009) find that 6.6% and 33% of the participants invested in the group account.<sup>25</sup> However, the public goods games used in both of these studies involved much smaller MPCRs, 0.10 in Cardenas et al. and 0.08 in Attanasio et al., and require a larger number of contributors to the group account in order for each contributor to earn at least as much as he/she would earn by investing in the

> 25 The authors relate these different percentages to the fact that in the previous two years the latter neighbourhood had been receiving a conditional cash transfer that had a community engagement component.

14
**Thble 2. The Meaning of Poverty**

|**_Rank_**|**_Melan_**|_Apung_|_MacaChico_|_Jauin Era_|_Bellai4sia_|**_Membnilal_**|_Vilano_|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|I|land,<br>animals:<br>too little|land,<br>animals:<br>too little|land,<br>animals:<br>too little|land, animals:<br>too little|land, animals,<br>capital: too<br>little|employment<br>possibilities:<br>lacking|Land, credit:<br>too little or<br>not accessible|
|2|elderly and<br>widows:<br>alone<br>without help|elderly and<br>widows:<br>alone<br>without help|income and<br>debt:vicious<br>circle|Local<br>employment<br>possibiiities:<br>lacking|Local<br>employment<br>and commerce<br>possibilities:<br>lacking|own business:<br>not possible to<br>open|Roads, services:<br>bad|
|3|basic needs:<br>unmet|food: too<br>little|basic needs:<br>unmet<br>(housing)|<br>basic needs:<br>unmet (health)|crop prices:<br>too low|Land, animals<br>too little|plant diseases<br>and humnan<br>illness: rampant|
|4|_|destiny:<br>born<br>poor|_||Consumption<br>goods: lacking;<br>services: poor<br>(transport)|Consumption<br>goods: lacking;<br>services: poor<br>(health)|destiny: born<br>poor|

Source: Field interviews fbr Rural Qualitative Assessment (1994).

In six of the seven communities, limited access to land is viewed as the most important component of poverty, and when respondents were asked to compare their situation with that of their neighbors, and to compare their community with other communities, land was the most commonly-employed yardstick. In large part, access to land also defines the relationship of the individual and household to the community and to the larger society.

# _S.-1. The Sierm Conununities_

Land and animals: Little land and few animals are the most important indicators of living conditions for the Sierra communities."3 In the Sierra, land has both cultural and economic significance to indigenous communities. The earth is regarded as a "supernatural symbol of procreation, fecundity, protector of the weak, the infirm and is propitiated accordingly".'<sup>4</sup> Land provides the context within which community and family relations are expressed. In these communities, 'landless peasant' is a contradiction in terms. Economically, land is the primary source of subsistence; the precise manner in which the household obtains its sustenance depends on the size and productive quality of its holdings. When appropriate techniques are employed, and when the holding is of sufficient size and productive quality, a surplus can be sold. When it is not, as in case of most of the households in the four Sierra communities, other sources of nonagricultural income must be sought.

- **13** _'Poverty is because of the land; the person who doesn't have any must obligatorily leave to do day labor._ (household interview Maca Chico, #1).

- 4 Gustavo Caceres quoted in: 'Mujer Andina, Condiciones de Vida y Participaci6n', Quito.

17
<!-- Start of picture text --> art<br>& bes 2.<br>Sve FI Daresalaam<br>N at Gt D ood risk zones<br>y Mayvis he<br>a RStes Legend<br>\ s Pres ( Rivers<br>mba \ (J Wards |<br>) e Dy i | — Macium ris<br>a 0 YY Miccing<br>4.012 3 4km [ Ps data<br><!-- End of picture text -->
# Research Compoonents of World Bank Education Projects, since 1982.

|Area|Country andLoan/Cred<br>Huiber|Appro|Research Coqponents|Current Status of Studies,<br>including<br>ICompleted Documents/Data|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|LAC|GuatemalaLH2328-GW|1983|Basic Education.<br>Studies to:<br>(i)continue<br>school mappingproject;<br>(ii)<br>language planning;<br>(iii)<br>curricultu<br>development planning;<br>(iv) improvements in information<br>base to<br>cover teachers, administrators,<br>and school<br>physical facilities;<br>(v) data collection to improve monitoring and<br>evaluation systems. (paras. 3.26-3? pp.21-2)|(i)-(iv):<br>Reports with results<br>have not been<br>I<br>received by the Bank.<br>(v):<br>Goverrment decided nottoinitiate<br>this study.|
|LAC<br>LAC|Haiti CR 1305-HA<br>Haiti CR 1592-HA|1983<br>1985|Basic Education Project. Evaluation<br>study to<br>focus on:(1)classroom conditions;<br>(ii) effectiveness<br>of curricutum;<br>(iii) effectiveness<br>of production<br>and<br>distribution of educationat<br>materials;<br>(iv) effectiveness<br>of training and supervision<br>programs.<br>(v) Monitor effects of introduction<br>of Teacher<br>Charter, and reaction of private sector to<br>educational reform (para. 4.33 p.3<sup>1</sup>).<br>Fourth Education and Training. Studies on:<br>(i) possibility<br>of training entrepreneurs;<br>(ii) training needs of women in labor market;<br>(iii) audiovisual<br>program to encourage women<br>to participate invocational<br>education.|Studies carried out by Institut Pedagogique Hational<br>and MOE:<br>(i) L'Institut Pedagogique<br>National (1980).<br>"La reforme de l'enseignesment<br>primaire en Haiti<br>- problemes de l'experimentation"<br>(doc.<br>4G04597)<br>(ii)<br>RapportauSecretaire<br>d'Etat<br>a l'Enseignement<br>Primaire et Professionetle<br>(1983). "Rapport sur la<br>situation des classes d'application fonctiorwant<br>dans la cadre detareforme."<br>(doc.#G04659)<br>(iii) L'lnstitut<br>Pedagogique Hational (1986).<br>"Evaluation<br>of classroom results 1984-5."<br>(doc. # G04728)<br>See LAC files- supervision reports.<br>Documents relating to supervision<br>mission 09/88<br>(doc. U G21957-75)|

62
Eckholm, Erik and Joseph Kahn.<sup>"Asia WorriesaboutGrowthof China'sEconomic</sup> Power." The New York Times 24<sup>Nov.2002:10.<http://www.djinteractive.com>.</sup> Edwards, Sebastian. "Capital Mobility<sup>and EconomicPerformance:Are Emerging</sup> Economies Different?" NBER Working<sup>Paper8076.Cambridge,MA:NationalBureau of</sup> Economic Research, 2001.

Eichengreen, Barry. International<sup>MonetaryArrangementsfor the Twenty-FirstCentury.</sup> Washington, DC: Brookings Institution,<sup>1994.</sup> Eichengreen, Barry. Toward a New<sup>International Financial Architecture.Washington,</sup> DC: Institute for International<sup>Economics,1999.</sup> Eichengreen, Barry. "Hanging<sup>Together?On Monetary and Financial Cooperationin</sup> Asia." Unpublished manuscript<sup>preparedforthe World Bank conferenceon East Asia</sup> after the crisis. October 2001.

Eichengreen, Barry and Tamim Bayoumi.<sup>"Is Asia an Optimum Currency Area?"</sup> Exchange Rate Policies in Emerging<sup>AsianCountries. Eds.S. Collignon,J. Pisani-Ferry</sup> and Y.C. Park. London: Routledge,<sup>1999.347-366.</sup> Eichengreen, Barry and Harold<sup>James."MonetaryandFinancial Reformin Two Eras of</sup> Globalization (and In Between)." April<sup>2001.Prepared for the NBERConference on the</sup> History of Globalization, Santa Barbara,<sup>4-6 May 2001.</sup> Endo, Tadashi. "Corporate Bond Markets<sup>Development."Bond Market Developmentin</sup> Asia. Paris: OECD, 2001. 237-296.

Ethier, W. J. "The New Regionalism."<sup>EconomicJournal108(1998):1149-61.</sup> Fan, Gang. "Financial market liberalisation<sup>andeconomic stability in China." Financial</sup> Markets and Policies in East Asia.<sup>Ed. G.de Brouwer. London:Routledge, 2002.157-</sup> 168.

Feenstra, Robert C. and Gordon H.<sup>Hanson."Globalization, Outsourcing,and Wage</sup> Inequality." Papers and Proceedings<sup>of the Hundred and Eighth AnnualMeeting of the</sup> American Economic Association,<sup>January5-7, 1996,San Francisco,CA.The American</sup> Economic Review 86.2. (May<sup>1996):240-245.</sup> "Financial Structure for Sustainable<sup>Developmentin Post-Crisis Asia."Seminar jointly</sup> sponsored by ADBI and Wharton<sup>Schoolof the University of Pennsylvania on 26May</sup> 2000 in Tokyo. ADB Institute Executive<sup>SummarySeries, No. S23/00.</sup> Fischer, Stanley. "Exchange Rate Regimes:<sup>Is theBipolar View Correct?"Washington,</sup> DC: IMF, January 2001. Paper was<sup>preparedfor deliveryas the DistinguishedLecture on</sup> Economics in Government, jointly<sup>sponsored bythe American Economic Association</sup> 135
percent per year during 2004/5-2009/10, according to official estimates. Initially led by agriculture, growth has become more broad-based, with a rising contribution from the mining, services and manufacturing sectors. While growth has slowed recently, it still remains among the highest in the world. Based on official data, the population below the national absolute poverty line fell from 38.7 percent in 2004/2005 to 29.6 percent in 2011. Ethiopia achieved the MDG 4 and 6 targets (child mortality and combating HIV/AIDS) well ahead of schedule, and appears on track to reach most of its other MDGs later this year.

Ethiopia is also home to a great diversity of ecological zones and ethnic and linguistic groups. Its vast system of mountains and highland plateaus is bisected by the Great Rift Valley, itself surrounded by lowland steppes and semi-deserts. In the east are remote deserts containing some of the hottest human settlements on earth, while to the south there are tropical forests. With 93 officially recognized mother tongues and 98 ethnicities counted by the Ethiopian census, the country is also one of the most ethno-culturally diverse societies on earth. Detailed information on such environmental and social characteristics disaggregated to woreda level makes Ethiopia a rich context for the study of a broad range of development issues.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses theories of accountability in the federalism and aid literatures, focusing on their implications for antiinequality policies, before turning to empirical evidence on the same. Section 3 presents Ethiopia’s fiscal context, our data, and methods used in this study. Section 4 discusses recent trends in horizontal and vertical equity in service delivery, and then analyzes the effects of aidsupported block grants to woredas on horizontal equity across woredas, and vertical equity by wealth group. Section 5 concludes.

# **1. Upward vs Downward Accountability: Theory and Literature Review**

# _Theory_

This paper is located at the confluence of two large academic literatures, on federalism and accountability, and aid and accountability. The size of each literature, and also the fact that many aid recipients are either federations or have recently implemented decentralization (Manor 1999), both imply that we might expect to find a rich discussion taking place at this confluence. Oddly, this is not the case; the literatures acknowledge each other only infrequently and mostly in passing. In so (not) doing, they ignore the deep contradiction inherent in attempting to tackle 5