REGULAR ARTICLE
The impact of rural electrification on income and education: Evidence from Bhutan
Santosh Kumar,
Ganesh Rauniyar,
Corresponding Author
Santosh Kumar
Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas, USA
Correspondence
Santosh Kumar, Department of Economics and International Business, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX 77341-2118, USA.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorGanesh Rauniyar
Independent Evaluator, Paraparaumu, New Zealand*
Search for more papers by this authorSantosh Kumar,
Ganesh Rauniyar,
Corresponding Author
Santosh Kumar
Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas, USA
Correspondence
Santosh Kumar, Department of Economics and International Business, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX 77341-2118, USA.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorGanesh Rauniyar
Independent Evaluator, Paraparaumu, New Zealand*
Search for more papers by this author*Formerly with the Independent Evaluation Department, Asian Development Bank, Manila, The Philippines.
Abstract
We investigate the impact of a rural electrification program on household income and children's schooling in rural Bhutan. Using propensity score matching, we find that electrification had a statistically significant impact on nonfarm income and education. Nonfarm income increased by 61 percent and children gained 0.72 additional years of schooling and 9 minutes of study time per day. We do not observe significant effects on farm income. Results are consistent and robust to different matching algorithms. Our findings indicate that investments in reducing energy deficit may help improve human welfare in Bhutan.
REFERENCES
- Asian Development Bank. (2010). Does electrification improve the quality of rural life (IES: BHU 2010–27). Manila: Independent Evaluation Department, Asian Development Bank.
- Barron, M., & Torero, M. (2017). Household electrification and indoor air pollution. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 86, 81–92.
- Becker, S. O., & Caliendo, M. (2007). Sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects. Stata Journal, 7(1), 71–83.
- Becker, S. O., & Ichino, A. (2002). Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55.
- Bensch, G., Kluve, J., & Peters, J. (2011). Impacts of Rural Electrification in Rwanda. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 3(4), 567–588.
- Bernard, T., & Torero, M. (2015). Social interaction effects and connection to electricity: Experimental evidence from rural Ethiopia. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 63(3), 459–484.
- Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(1), 31–72.
- Chakravorty, U., Pelli, M., & Beyza, M. U. (2014). Does the quality of electricity matter? Evidence from rural India. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 107(A), 228–247.
- Dasso, R., & Fernandez, F. (2015). The effects of electrification on employment in rural Peru. IZA Journal of Labor and Development, 4, 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40175-015-0028-4.
10.1186/s40175-015-0028-4 Google Scholar
- Dehejia, R. H., & Wahba, S. (2002). Propensity score matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(1), 151–161.
- Dinkelman, T. (2011). The effects of rural electrification on employment: Evidence from South Africa. American Economic Review, 101(7), 3078–3108.
- Donaldson, D. (2010). Railroads of the Raj: Estimating the impact of transportation infrastructure. NBER working paper no. 16487.
- Donaldson, D., & Hornbeck, R. (2016). Railroads and American Economic Growth: A “Market Access” Approach. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(2), 799–858.
- Duflo, E., & Pande, R. (2007). Dams. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(2), 601–646.
- Faber, B. (2014). Trade integration, market size, and industrialization: Evidence from China's national trunk highway system. The Review of Economic Studies, 81(3), 1046–1070.
- Grogan, L., & Sadanand, A. (2013). Rural electrification and employment in poor countries: Evidence from Nicaragua. World Development, 43(C), 252–265.
- World Bank. (2008). The welfare impact of rural electrification: A reassessment of the costs and benefits. Washington, DC: The World Bank Group.
10.1596/978-0-8213-7367-5 Google Scholar
- International Energy Agency. (2013). World energy outlook. Paris: International Energy Agency.
- Khandker, S. R., Barnes, D. F., & Samad, H. A. (2012). The welfare impacts of rural electrification in Bangladesh. The Energy Journal, 33(1), 187–206.
- Khandker, S. R., Barnes, D. F., & Samad, H. A. (2013). Welfare impacts of rural electrification: A panel data analysis from Vietnam. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 61(3), 659–692.
- Khandker, S. R., Samad, H. A., Ali, R., & Barnes, D. F. (2014). Who benefits most from rural electrification? Evidence in India. The Energy Journal, 35(2), 75–96.
- Kumar, S., & Vollmer, S. (2013). Does access to improved sanitation reduce childhood diarrhea in rural India? Health Economics, 22(4), 410–427.
- Lechner, M. (2001). Identification and estimation of causal effects of multiple treatments under the conditional independence assumption. In M. Lechner & F. Pfeiffer (Eds.), Econometric evaluation of labour market policies. Heidelberg: Physica.
10.1007/978-3-642-57615-7_3 Google Scholar
- Lipscomb, M., Mobarak, A. M., & Barham, T. (2013). Development effects of electrification: Evidence from the topographic placement of hydropower plants in Brazil. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(2), 200–231.
- Mu, R., & Van de Walle, D. (2011). Rural roads and local market development in Vietnam. The Journal of Development Studies, 47(5), 709–734.
- Olken, B. (2009). Do television and radio destroy social capital? Evidence from Indonesian villages. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(4), 1–33.
- Peters, J., & Sievert, M. (2016). Impacts of rural electrification revisited-the African context. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 8(3), 327–345.
- Psacharopoulos, G., & Patrinos, H. A. (2004). Returns to investment in education: A further update. Education Economics, 12(2), 111–134.
10.1080/0964529042000239140 Google Scholar
- Rauniyar, G., Orbeta, A., Jr, & Sugiyarto, G. (2010). Impact of water supply and sanitation on human welfare in rural Pakistan. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 3(1), 62–102.
- Ravallion, M. (2008). Evaluating anti-poverty programs. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
- Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational studies. New York: Springer.
10.1007/978-1-4757-3692-2 Google Scholar
- Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55.
- Rud, J. P. (2012). Electricity provision and industrial development: Evidence from India. Journal of Development Economics, 97(2), 352–367.
- Smith, J. A., & Todd, P. E. (2005). Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of non-experimental estimators? Journal of Econometrics, 125(1–2), 305–353.
- UNDP. (2015). Energy access. New York: UNDP. Retrieved from http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/ourwork/climate-and-disaster-resilience/sustainable-energy/energy-access.html
- Van de Walle, D., Ravallion, M., Mendiratta, V., & Koolwal, G. (2017). Long-term gains from electrification in rural India. World Bank Economic Review, 31(2), 385–411.
- World Bank. (2013). Bhutan poverty analysis 2012. Washington, DC: World Bank.
- World Bank. (2015). World development indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.
10.1596/978-1-4648-0484-7_world_development_indicators Google Scholar
