13/04/2023
Learning with Others - A Randomized Field Experiment on the Formation of Aspirations in
Rural Ethiopia
Tanguy Bernard1, Stefan Dercon2, Kate Orkin2, and Alemayehu Seyoum Taffesse1
1International Food Policy Research Institute, 2 University of Oxford
July 18, 2013Eleventh International Conference on the Ethiopian Economy
Ethiopian Economic Association
1
Motivation Elements of the aspirations framework Aspirations project Field experiment – design and findings
Outline
13/04/2023 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
13/04/2023 3
13/04/2023
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
13/04/2023
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
13/04/2023 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
13/04/2023 7
Conceptual Schema
13/04/2023 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)
13/04/2023 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 data13/04/2023 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 experiment Exogenous 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)
13/04/2023 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
13/04/2023 12
Surveyed : Treatment, 6 households (12 individuals) in every villagePlacebo, 6 households (12 individuals) in every villageControl, 6 households (12 individuals) in every village
Non-Surveyed : Treatment, 18 households (36 individuals)/ intense treatment villagePlacebo, 18 households (36 individuals)/ intense placebo village
Treatment village Placebo village
16 Screening sites, 4 villages/screening site (2 Intense Treatment, 2 Intense Placebo),
36 households/village (18 households surveyed, 18 households not surveyed)
Field Experiment – Design
13/04/2023 13
On going experiment
13/04/2023 14
Field Experiment – Basic Features
13/04/2023 15
All
villages
Intense-treatment
villages
Intense-placebo villages
# villages 64 32 32# individuals 1,942 1,011 931
of which:
Treatment individuals 610 324 303
Control individuals 625 343 311
Placebo individuals 620 344 317
Avg # peers invited to treatment 0.83 1.23 0.39
(std.dev) (0.92) (0.96) (0.63)Avg # peers invited to placebo 0.77 0.38 1.20(std.dev) (0.89) (0.61) (0.95)
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
13/04/2023 16
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
13/04/2023 17
Field Experiment - Compliance and Potency 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
13/04/2023 18
Field Experiment - Compliance and Potency 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 40.19
We 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
13/04/2023 19
Impact on Aspirations - Estimation strategy
•
13/04/2023 20
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 parenthesis13/04/2023 21
Treatment and Placebo Effects on Expectations
* 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
13/04/2023 22
Treatment and Placebo Effects on Future-Oriented Behaviour
* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01; Screening site fixed effects not reported; Robust standard errors in parenthesis
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Treatment-3.33 -3.83
(12.61) (12.67)
Placebo-8.46 -8.85
(16.91) (16.865)
# peers w/treatment18.48 24.91
(7.97)** (10.6)**
# peers w/placebo-9.63 -9.47
(8.49) (6.73)
Baseline time allocation - Work
0.69 0.61 0.70 0.60
(0.02)*** (0.03)*** (0.02)*** (0.03)***
Constant138.1 167.7 156.0 141.7
(79.4)* (81.8)** (87.2)* (74.9)*
R2 0.3 0.18 0.3 0.18
N 1,280 1,317 1,280 1,317
13/04/2023 23
Treatment effects on time allocation - work
Treatment and Placebo Effects on Future-Oriented Behaviour
* p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01; Screening site fixed effects not reported; Robust standard errors in parenthesis
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Treatment19.97 19.84
(12.93) (13.04)
Placebo26.39 26.83
(12.79)** (13.01)**
# peers w/treatment-0.74 -10.87
(6.60) (6.28)*
# peers w/placebo1.79 3.35
(6.52) (5.71)
Baseline time allocation - Work
0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31
(0.03)*** (0.03)*** (0.03)*** (0.03)***
Constant522.6 549.2 519.8 560.2
(34.2)*** (33.3)*** (34.9)*** (33.8)***
R2 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07
N 1,284 1,322 1,284 1,322
13/04/2023 24
Treatment effects on time allocation - leisure
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
13/04/2023 25
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 parenthesis13/04/2023 26
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
13/04/2023 27
Observations
"Weak" treatment, but:
Documentaries affected aspirations, expectations, time allocation, 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;
It is not obvious why some effects are direct (savings) while others are indirect (time allocation);
Further analysis; Expanding coverage – Malawi, Pakistan via IFPRI;
13/04/2023 28