Cost effectiveness of anticipatory action: Lesotho, Madagascar, and Mozambique

Simple item page
cg.authorship.typesCGIAR single centreen
cg.contributor.affiliationInternational Food Policy Research Instituteen
cg.contributor.donorNorwegian Agency for Development Cooperationen
cg.contributor.donorCGIAR Trust Funden
cg.contributor.initiativeFragility, Conflict, and Migrationen
cg.coverage.countryLesothoen
cg.coverage.countryMadagascaren
cg.coverage.countryMozambiqueen
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2LSen
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2MGen
cg.coverage.iso3166-alpha2MZen
cg.coverage.regionAfricaen
cg.coverage.regionSub-Saharan Africaen
cg.coverage.regionEastern Africaen
cg.creator.identifierAlan de Brauw: 0000-0002-5045-8939en
cg.howPublishedGrey Literatureen
cg.identifier.projectIFPRI - Markets, Trade, and Institutions Uniten
cg.identifier.publicationRankNot rankeden
cg.placeWashington, DCen
cg.reviewStatusInternal Reviewen
cg.subject.impactAreaNutrition, health and food securityen
cg.subject.impactAreaPoverty reduction, livelihoods and jobsen
dc.contributor.authorde Brauw, Alanen
dc.date.accessioned2025-02-24T19:54:54Zen
dc.date.available2025-02-24T19:54:54Zen
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/173370
dc.titleCost effectiveness of anticipatory action: Lesotho, Madagascar, and Mozambiqueen
dcterms.abstractAn important question when conducting anticipatory action programs relates to its cost-effectiveness. By cost effectiveness, we refer to the relative costs and benefits of anticipatory action in general relative to a more standard approach to post-shock aid. In this context, we largely want to know what would happen to potential beneficiary households in two different scenarios: 1) if they receive anticipatory action transfers, and 2) if they instead receive unconditional post-shock transfers of the same size. The idea is that we assume there is a fixed budget envelope, and the same amount of assistance could be provided as either anticipatory action or as post-shock transfers. The resulting measurement estimates the difference in benefits and losses to providing anticipatory action relative to post-shock assistance, providing a conclusion on the overall net benefits or losses of this approach. Since we assume a fixed budget envelope, we invert the process of measuring cost effectiveness by measuring the net benefits of anticipatory action relative to post-shock transfers. This analysis uses the conceptual framework developed by de Brauw and Bloem (2024) to identify classes of potential benefits and costs for anticipatory action relative to unconditional post-shock transfers. The model suggests the main benefit to anticipatory action is that households can better protect their productive asset holdings, whether livestock or other farm implements, which implies their future incomes will be higher than they would be otherwise. There are also potential gains for households during the negative shock, implying those households may be less food insecure, for example, while the shock is occurring.1 On the other hand, the framework suggests that a specific cost to anticipatory action is the cost of getting it wrong (i.e., giving people benefits when the shock does not materialize for those people).en
dcterms.accessRightsOpen Accessen
dcterms.audienceCGIARen
dcterms.bibliographicCitationDe Brauw, Alan. 2025. Cost effectiveness of anticipatory action: Lesotho, Madagascar, and Mozambique. CGIAR Initiative on Fragility, Conflict, and Migration Technical Report. Montpellier: CGIAR System Organization. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/173370en
dcterms.extent17 p.en
dcterms.issued2025-02-24en
dcterms.languageenen
dcterms.licenseCC-BY-NC-4.0en
dcterms.publisherCGIAR System Organizationen
dcterms.relationhttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/158220en
dcterms.relationhttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/131283en
dcterms.subjectcost analysisen
dcterms.subjectshocken
dcterms.subjectassetsen
dcterms.subjectincomeen
dcterms.subjecthouseholdsen
dcterms.typeReporten

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
AA Cost-Effectiveness in FCM Final Approved.pdf
Size:
917.01 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Report
Download

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.75 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

IFPRI Reports
CGIAR Initiative on Fragility, Conflict, and Migration