Addressing persistent inequalities in income and other dimensions of wellbeing is a key policy objective of the Sustainable Development Goal 10. Multilateral and bilateral donor agencies have been directing their efforts towards promoting good governance, human and economic development, fighting hunger and reducing inequality. 

The increase in development funding towards inequality reduction is accompanied by a need to monitor progress on the SDG 10 but most importantly, by the need to evaluate the contribution of development towards achieving this goal. However, measuring the distributional impacts of development cooperation projects is a challenging task due to a myriad of factors, including the effects that domestic redistributive policies, the structure of labour markets and other factors, such as institutions, have on inequality. The methodology developed by Morabito et al. enables the analysis of the potential contributions of development projects on inequality by looking primarily at the extent to which they disproportionally benefit the most vulnerable through a mix of analytical tools (a scoreboard, a statistical analysis of development projects based on the Equity Tool, a fiscal incidence analysis).

This methodology has first been tested on three development projects funded by AFD in Cameroon, Colombia and Tunisia as part of the first phase of the Research Facility on Inequalities. 

 

This project was part of the first phase of the Research Facility on Inequalities, coordinated by AFD and funded by the European Commission's Directorate-General for International Partnerships over the 2017-2020 period. The first phase of the Facility has led to the conduct of 22 research projects and the publication of around 100 research papers and policy briefs.

A second phase of the research project was launched in 2022 with the aim to extend the initial phase, to further test the validity of the methodology with respect to income and other forms of inequalities and to develop the guidelines for an inequality marker.

The initial phase of the  project aimed at piloting the application of the methodology developed by the researchers on three projects funded by the AFD: 

• A programme supporting urban housing improvements in Tunisia;
• A programme focusing on capacity-building of Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Cameroon;
• A budget support operation aimed at supporting a health sector reform in Colombia.

The objective was to test the methodology and evaluate the relevance of its results, and, based on these findings, to review and adjust the methodology itself.

The second phase of the project aimed:

• To develop the guidelines for an inequality marker for development cooperation ;
• To further test the methodology on four AFD and EU development programmes:
  • A programme promoting sustainable access to electricity for the unserved poor rural populations in Benin;
  • A programme improving the health and living conditions of the inhabitants of the rural district of Isingiro (Uganda) and its refugee camps;
  • A programme facilitating trade between Ethiopia and Djibouti and enabling businesses and producers, as well as the most vulnerable populations, to benefit from these improvements;
  • A programme contributing to the adaptation of the communities to climate change in Vietnam. 

The initial study identified whether programmes’ beneficiaries of the three selected interventions belonged to the bottom 40% of the wealth distribution, through a mix of analytical tools:

• First, a scoreboard that assessed whether or not inequality reduction was a central objective of development programmes; 
• Second, the Equity Tool, which helped assess the position of direct beneficiaries within the national (urban or rural) wealth distribution;
• Third, the Commitment for Equity Tool, which helped estimate the distributional impact of general or sectoral budget support.

The methodological steps of the second phase of the research project were the following:

• Refining and upgrading the inequality markers and the scoreboard to provide clear benchmarks and indicators, aligned with evaluation approaches used by the European Commission, to assess whether development interventions focus on the poorest bottom 40% individuals, households or vulnerable groups that are targeted by specific development policies;
• Extending the scope of the Equity Tool questionnaire to include questions that capture the distribution of projects beneficiaries among vulnerable groups (women, ethnic, religious minorities, etc.);
• Applying the revised methodology to the four case studies.

Results of the first phase of the project:



Overall, the results underscore the importance of considering a pro-poor targeting ex-ante when designing development cooperation interventions that explicitly (or implicitly) aim to contribute to the reduction of inequalities in partner countries. The main strength of the methodology is that it allows an assessment of the potential reach of interventions for the bottom 40 percent of the income distribution. Therefore, the information provided thanks to this methodology can be critical to fine-tune policies before they are implemented and maximize their redistributive impact.



You may find the research paper here: The distributional impacts of development cooperation projects

 

Results of the second phase of the project:



The second phase of this project resulted in :

• The elaboration of guidelines for the implementation of the methodology, which were used to develop the European Commission's Inequality Marker. The I-Marker assesses whether, and to what extent, inequality reduction is an objective of development intervention. For this purpose, a set of criteria has been developed to establish if: - I-0: Inequality reduction is not targeted; - I-1: Inequality reduction is a significant objective; - I-2: Inequality reduction is the principal objective. The I-Marker focuses on the bottom (poorest) 40% or socio-economically disadvantaged individuals, households or groups. Watch the video on the Inequality Marker for more information ;
• A report on the testing of the methodology on the four case studies (available soon).

This project highlighted the importance of identifying direct and indirect beneficiaries of the projects, but also, more broadly, of having a complete understanding of the development cooperation interventions, which are being analyzed, especially their objectives and conditionalities. 

Equally important is the involvement of key stakeholders to communicate the objectives, scope and limitations of the studies. In some cases, the inclusion of a qualitative component in the form of interviews, consultations, or eventually field missions, may be required to ensure the successful implementation and completion of studies.

Contact:

• Anda David, Research Officer, AFD

Contacto:

• Anda David, encargada de investigación, AFD

In 2015, the private sector accounted for 13% of students in higher education in Vietnam and 60% in India. To the extent that these figures are reliable (higher education institutes not always being registered in some countries), they indicate the significance the private sector has taken on at this level of education. In Peru and Mexico, nearly 7 out of 10 universities are private. The development of the private sector seems to have in part involved a movement toward democratization of access to higher education in the past 15 years. But this movement is not necessarily synonymous with reduction in inequalities in access or with conditions of academic success becoming more equal. For example, in the poorest quintile of Mexico, only 1% of the age 15-24 segment pursue studies in higher education, compared to 32% in the wealthiest quintile. 

This project is part of the first phase of the Research Facility on Inequalities, coordinated by AFD and funded by the European Commission's Directorate-General for International Partnerships over the 2017-2020 period. The first phase of the Facility has led to the conduct of 22 research projects and the publication of around 100 research papers and policy briefs.

The objectives in this research program are to:

• describe trends in both public and private higher education;
• identify to what extent and the way in which public policies take inequalities in higher education into consideration, and if so which inequalities;
• identify to what extent and the way in which these public policies take into account the growth and/or consolidation of the private sector of higher education, as well as its role in reducing or increasing inequalities at this level;
• detect whether the actors of private-sector higher education include the fight against inequalities in their objectives and, if so, how and why. 

This multidisciplinary research program (covering sociology, economics, demography and educology) is original in that it analyzes data from different sources and of different types using a purposive sample of so-called developing or emerging countries: India and Vietnam for Asia; Mexico and Peru for Latin America; Senegal, Mali and the Democratic Republic of the Congo for Africa.

This work will help establish an international research network on the theme of higher education and inequalities. The countries were selected based on the different degrees of development of their system of public and private higher education and the way this teaching is structured (co-existence between public and private, porosity between the two sectors, competition, etc.). They also differ in terms of their social structure (unequal development of the middle classes, for example). The study will compare these regions and countries: the material collected in the various countries will be of the same nature and will be analyzed using the same methodological approaches.

This research will give rise to conferences and seminars, a collective publication, country-documents, policy briefs, and research articles. The expected outcomes are:

• development of a typology on the current  public and private offer of higher education in the selected countries;
• development of a conceptual framework and typologies on inequalities and private higher education;
• identification, in the different countries, of policies whose goal has been to work to reduce inequalities in higher education in the course of the past 15 years;
• qualitative analysis of the criteria for access to public or private higher education, for the different categories of students or populations concerned, the conditions in which they study, the processes of certifying school diplomas, etc.;
• identification of the factors of production of inequalities in higher education, and the indicators that might be used to measure and correct them.
  
   

You may find the research papers here (in French):

- Inégalités et enseignement supérieur : entre politiques publiques et développement du secteur privé en Argentine 



- Universités privées au Mexique: entre reproduction, production et réduction des inégalités 



- Le paradoxe de l'enseignement supérieur privé au Sénégal: réduire les inégalités tout en les maintenant

 

- Des inégalités éducatives à la mise en question de l'opposition public/privé dans l'enseignement supérieur congolais, un défi documentaire et conceptuel 



- Enseignement supérieur au Vietnam: privatisation, démocratisation et inégalités 



- Complexité et inégalités de l'offre universitaire privée au Pérou. Regard sur la diversité sociodémographique des étudiants et des conditions d'insertion professionnelle des diplômés d'universités privées 



- L'expansion de l'enseignement supérieur privé et le creusement des inégalités sociales 



- Enseignement supérieur et inégalités sociales en Inde

Contact :



Linda Zanfini, Research Officer, AFD

Rohen d’Aiglepierre, Research Officer, AFD

Étienne Gérard, Research Director, IRD and Director of the CEPED (since 2014)

Contactos:

• Linda Zanfini, encargada de investigación, AFD
• Rohen d’Aiglepierre, coordinador de investigación, AFD
• Étienne Gérard, director de investigación en el IRD y director del Ceped (desde 2014)