10/04/23

Aspirations in Rural Ethiopia – Some Findings from a Randomized Field

Experiment

Tanguy Bernard1, Stefan Dercon2, Kate Orkin2, Fanaye Tadesse1, Alemayehu Seyoum Taffesse1 and Ibrahim Worku1

1International Food Policy Research Institute, 2 University of Oxford

May 2, 2013Africa House

New York University

1

Motivation Elements of the aspirations framework Aspirations project Field experiment – design and findings

Outline

10/04/23 2

Conceptual – ‘opportunities’

Empirical – Why do the poor not ‘invest’?

Ethiopians and fatalism?

Focus 1 - ‘external circumstances’ and ‘opportunities’.

Low returns to investments; Unexploited opportunities due to lack of information or

knowledge; Social constraints;

Focus 2 - constraints associated with the manifested attributes of decision makers

Identity issues: sense of self; Psychological issues: impatience, commitment, and psychological

barriers

Aspirations failure perspective

Motivation – why aspirations

10/04/23 3

10/04/23

Aspirations:

A desire or an ambition to achieve something An aim and implied effort to reach it A set of future-regarding preferences

Related concepts

Economics : Satisficing Psychology : Self-efficacy, locus of control Anthropology : Aspiration failures

Common elements

Goals and aspirations are important determinants of success; Evolution through time in response to circumstances; Role of social comparisons and learning from relevant others,

An individual-level yet culturally (collectively) determined attribute towards exploration of individual-group symbiosis

Elements of the Aspirations Perspective

4

Elements of the Aspirations Perspective

10/04/23

What are Aspirations?

Aspirations have two distinctive aspects:

• Future-oriented - are goals that can only be satisfied at some future time (differ from immediate gratifications);

• Motivators - are goals individuals are willing, in principle, to invest time, effort or money in to attain (different from idle daydreams and wishes)

Note: the ‘willingness to invest’ is ‘potential’, or ‘conditional’

Aspirations and expectations – preference vs. beliefs;

5

Elements of the Aspirations Perspective

Why are aspirations important/useful?

Aspirations (or the capacity to aspire):

Reflect bounded rationality;

Are socially determined (social interaction);

Are distributed unevenly within communities.

Condition individual behaviour and well-being

Useful device in analysing and/or addressing poverty 10/04/23 6

Elements of the Aspirations PerspectiveHow do aspirations condition individual behaviour?

Aspiration window:

an individual’s cognitive world, his/her zone of ‘similar’, ‘attainable’ individuals;

Reflects the information and economic opportunities of the local environment;

Multi-dimensional (‘similarity’);

Aspiration gap:

difference between the aspired ‘state’ and current ‘state’ Conditions future-oriented behaviour - inverted U relationship

between gap and effort

A possible outcome is an aspiration failure - lack of pro-active behaviour (or ‘under-investment’) towards filling the aspiration gap

10/04/23 7

Conceptual Schema

10/04/23 8

Elements of the Aspirations PerspectiveMeasurement Issues

• Aspirations are not directly observable

– Revealed by observed behaviour: interpretation issues (linking aspirations and behaviour)

– Elicited using subjective questions: measurement issues

• Limits to subjective assessment:

– Subjects: subjects’ willingness to report private knowledge, evaluation apprehension, and subject role playing

– Instruments (attributes of): order of questions (anchoring), the number of categories on the rating scale (odd-even), the adjectives that are used as the endpoints of the rating scale, and the adverbs that describe scale categories.

(e.g. Delavande et al. (2009), Bertrand and Mullainathan (2001) for reviews)

10/04/23 9

Elements of the Aspirations Perspective

Identification issues

• individual characteristics affect aspirations, aspiration windows and behaviour (e.g. schooling levels, wealth, and family background),

Particularly the endogeneity of the aspiration window a key hurdle

• aspirations ‘cause’ success – a person with higher aspirations may be more successful.

• Success ‘causes’ aspirations – a successful person may revise his/her aspiration to a higher level, or

experiment, panel data10/04/23 10

The “Aspirations” project

Step 1 – correlates of aspiration-related conceptsStep 2 – test and validate a measurement strategyStep 3 – assess validity of the “aspiration window” hypothesis

An experimentExogenous shock to aspirations: Mini-documentaries of local success stories screened to randomly selected individuals. Placebo: local TV show.3 rounds of data• Baseline pre-treatment (Sept-Dec 2010)• Aspirations retest immediately after treatment• Follow-up (Mar-May 2011)

10/04/23 11

Field Experiment - Aspirations Measures

200,000 ETB ~ value of one harvest of chat from one hectare

100,000 ETB ~ value of one harvest of chat from half a hectare

0 ETB

10/04/23 12

Surveyed : Treatment, 6 households (12 individuals)/villagePlacebo, 6 households (12 individuals)/villageControl, 6 households (12 individuals)/village

Non-Surveyed : Treatment, 18 households (36 individuals)/ treatment villagePlacebo, 18 households (36 individuals)/ placebo village

Treatment village Placebo village

16 Screening sites, 4 villages/screening site (2 Treatment, 2 Control),

36 households/village (18 households surveyed, 18 households not surveyed)

Field Experiment – Design

10/04/23 13

On going experiment

10/04/23 14

Field Experiment – Baseline Correlates of Aspirations

  Income aspiration

Wealth aspiration

Education aspiration

Social status aspiration

Aspiration index

Age -0.000 0.001 0.002 0.006 0.003

  (0.000) (0.002) (0.003) (0.003)** (0.001)**

Age² 0.000 -0.000 -0.000* -0.000* -0.000

  (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000)***

Gender (Male=1) 0.008 0.062 0.258 0.096 0.104

(0.002)*** (0.036)* (0.051)*** (0.049)** (0.021)***

Education (Read/write=1) -0.000 0.068 0.333 0.312 0.152

(0.002) (0.070) (0.051)*** (0.073)*** (0.027)***

R2 0.03 0.01 0.08 0.04 0.07

N 1,964 1,967 1,932 1,957 1,865

* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01; Screening site fixed effects included but not reported; Robust standard errors in parentheses

10/04/23 15

Balance

Sample balanced on gender, literacy, age and most outcomes

* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01

  AllTreatment

(T)Placebo

(P)Control

(C)

% compliance by treatment status 95 93.8 96.2 100

 

Education (Read/write

=1)

Gender (% male)

Age (completed years)

Baseline Standarized ---- Aspiration

Income WealthChildren's Education

Social Status

Aggregate

Difference: T-C, p-value

0.02 0.32 0 0.84 0.15 0.86 0.1 0.14 0.03 0.35 0.05 0.43 0.09 0.08* 0.04 0.12

Difference: P-C, p-value

0.02 0.32 0 0.93 0.05 0.94 0 0.89 0.05 0.15 0.01 0.83 0.04 0.55 0.01 0.5

10/04/23 16

Field Experiment - Compliance and Power of Treatment

 Treatment(standard

error)

Placebo(standard

error)

Difference(p-value)

Liked a lot what I saw?0.95 0.73 0.22

(0.02) (0.01) (0.00)***

Discussed it a lot with my neighbours0.87 0.71 0.15

(0.01) (0.02) (0.00)***

Discussed it at least once with neighbours over the past two weeks

0.32 0.21 0.11

(0.02) (0.02) (0.00)***

Content generated a lot of discussion within community

0.92 0.72 0.20

(0.01) (0.02) (0.00)***

Assessment of Documentaries and Placebo

* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01

10/04/23 17

Field Experiment - Compliance and Power of Treatment

 

 

 

 

How does his/her present condition fares compared to yours today?

He/she is worse off

We’re about the same

He/she is better off

How did his/her initial condition fared compared

to yours five years ago?

He/she was worse off 9.35 1.40 40.19We were about the same 4.83 2.49 12.15

He/she was better off 6.70 1.71 21.18

Table 5 – Relevance of documentaries

Cell proportions are reported. The totals of all cells add up to 100. N=642

10/04/23 18

Impact on Aspirations - Estimation strategy

10/04/23 19

Treatment and Placebo Effects on Aspirations

  (1) (2) (3) (4)

Treatment0.027   0.026  

(0.018)   (0.018)  

Placebo  0.016   0.015  (0.018)   (0.018)

# peers w/treatment0.026     0.021

(0.010)***     (0.009)**

# peers w/placebo  0.001 -0.022  

  (0.010) (0.012)*  

Baseline aspiration0.132 0.157 0.132 0.157

(0.062)** (0.050)*** (0.062)** (0.050)***

Constant 0.053 0.038 0.095 0.018

(0.035) (0.036) (0.037)*** (0.037)R2 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.08N 1,210 1,258 1,210 1,258

* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01; Screening site fixed effects not reported; Robust standard errors in parenthesis10/04/23 20

Treatment and Placebo Effects on Aspirations

* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01; Screening site fixed effects not reported; Robust standard errors in parenthesis

  (1) (2) (3) (4)

Treatment0.051   0.049  

(0.023)**   (0.023)*  

Placebo  0.021   0.018

  (0.021)   (0.021)

# peers w/treatment0.024     0.032

(0.010)**     (0.010)***

# peers w/placebo  0.015 0.007  

  (0.011) (0.014)  

Baseline expectations0.401 0.074 0.402 0.075

(0.056)*** (0.032)** (0.057)*** (0.032)**

Constant-0.047 -0.070 -0.028 -0.093

(0.046) (0.048) (0.048) (0.047)

R2 0.16 0.06 0.16 0.06

N 1,093 1,141 1,093 1,141

10/04/23 21

Treatment and Placebo Effects on Future-Oriented Behaviour

  Savings Savings Deposits Deposits Withdrawals Withdrawals

  (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Treatment186.9   63.5   33.7  

(106.4)*   (22.3)***   (17.2)*  

Placebo  126.1   17.9   4.6

  (95.1)   (20.6)   (9.3)

# peers with treatment34.3   -37.1   -5.4  

(85.9)   (11.9)***   (6.7)  

# peers with placebo  -28.2   -7.0   7.7

  (46.9)   (10.5)   (6.2)

Baseline savings0.741 0.658 -0.011 0.137 0.004 0.016

(0.578) (0.513) (0.011) (0.198) (0.017) (0.019)

Constant-105.3 -24.9 80.9 24.1 55.2 32.7

(314.9) (271.4) (47.9)* (21.8) (108.1) (16.4)**

R2 0.16 0.29 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02

N 1,258 1,288 1,258 1,288 1,258 1,288

* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01; Screening site fixed effects and controls for age, age², gender and education not reported; Robust standard errors in parenthesis

Table 10 – Treatment effects on savings behaviour

10/04/23 22

Treatment and Placebo Effects on Future-Oriented Behaviour

Table A1 - Direct and indirect treatment effect on Locus of Control  LOC

othersLOC others LOC internal LOC

internalLOC chance LOC

chance

Treatment-0.027   0.083   -0.030  

(0.051)   (0.038)**   (0.044)  

Placebo 

  -0.015   -0.027   -0.028

  (0.050)   (0.039)   (0.043)

# peers w/treatment-0.056   -0.016   -0.059  

(0.028)**   (0.020)   (0.023)**  

# peers w/placebo  -0.002   -0.018   0.023

  (0.028)   (0.023)   (0.025)

Baseline LOC0.196 0.212 0.089 0.098 0.166 0.144

(0.031)*** (0.030)*** (0.030)*** (0.030)*** (0.027)*** (0.025)***

Constant1.720 1.736 2.726 2.684 1.900 1.911

(0.120)*** (0.127)*** (0.124)*** (0.123)*** (0.105)*** (0.104)***

R2 0.05 0.06 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.05

N 1,341 1,372 1,342 1,373 1,341 1,374

* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01; Screening site fixed effects not reported; Robust standard errors in parenthesis10/04/23 23

Treatment and Placebo Effects on Future-Oriented Behaviour

Table A2 - Direct and indirect treatment effect on Perception of Poverty

* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01; Screening site fixed effects not reported; Robust standard errors in parenthesis

  Poverty due to Fate Poverty Structural Poverty Individual

Treatment-0.108   0.033   0.088  

(0.048)**   (0.038)   (0.042)**  

Placebo  -0.005   0.058   0.072  (0.048)   (0.037)   (0.042)*

# peers w/treatment

-0.048   -0.046   -0.011  

(0.027)*   (0.021)**   (0.024)  

# peers w/placebo

  0.008   -0.012   -0.005  (0.029)   (0.023)   (0.025)

Baseline percept poverty

0.060 0.028 0.111 0.052 0.058 0.083

(0.031)* (0.031) (0.033)*** (0.030) (0.032)* (0.030)***

Constant2.397 2.506 2.465 2.723 2.907 2.869

(0.116)*** (0.120)*** (0.120)*** (0.114)*** (0.124)*** (0.119)***R2 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03N 1,339 1,368 1,337 1,368 1,339 1,370

10/04/23 24

Observations

"Weak" treatment, but:

Documentaries affected aspirations, expectations, savings behaviour, and perceptions more than the placebo even 6 months after treatment;

Direct and, even more visible, indirect (group) effects are detected – more of an aspiration window story rather than a role model one;

Further analysis; Expanding coverage – Malawi, Pakistan via IFPRI;

10/04/23 25

10/04/23 26