Project Plan VIDA-PEEP, IFAD Impact Assessment Surveys 2017
Bolivia, 2017
Get MicrodataIdentification
BOL_2017_PPV-IIAS_v01_M_v01_A_OCS
Project Plan VIDA-PEEP, IFAD Impact Assessment Surveys 2017
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Bolivia | BOL |
Other Household Survey [hh/oth]
The project was designed around two main components. The first component aimed at increasing means of production and at strengthening productive assets and management practices. This would be achieved through financial support to communities for the implementation of rural development projects and to municipalities for the realization of production infrastructure projects. The second component consisted of community training and capacity building focused on organizational and productive capacity. It included campaigns aimed at documenting unregistered people in targeted municipalities which would lead to increased social inclusion and access to basic and financial services. In Bolivia, such documentation has been shown to mitigate cases of political and social exclusion (Harbitz and Tamargo 2009).
This impact assessment looks at the effects of rural development projects funded by Plan VIDA on the livelihood of rural households residing in beneficiary communities (i.e., Component 1). In particular, the evaluation focuses on a specific category of projects - Community Based Productive Investments (Proyectos Inter Comunales - PICs) - which account for more than 90 per cent of total beneficiary households reached by Plan VIDA at completion and also constitute the vast majority of the recipients of capacity building activities (i.e., Component 2).
This impact assessment investigated whether the Plan VIDA project, with its unique mechanisms, contributed to well-being of beneficiaries, measured through key outcome indicators of economic mobility, resilience and nutrition to respond to IFAD's strategic objectives and goals and to Bolivia's National Development Plan.
To answer these questions, the ex-post evaluation applied a quasi-experimental design approach that combines statistical methods and qualitative analysis to identify a valid counterfactual. As sufficient data were not collected at baseline of the project, the research team relied on one round of data collected between August and September 2017 that is, about eight months after project completion. Data were collected from 2,751 household including beneficiaries of the project, indirect beneficiaries (those in the same community but not direct recipients of intervention), and households which serve as a control group.
For more information, please, click on the following link <https://www.ifad.org/en/web/knowledge/-/publication/impact-assessment-plan-vida-bolivia>.
Sample survey data [ssd]
Households
Scope
The survey collected information about households' socioeconomic characteristics, livelihood and income-generating activities, food consumption, social capital, and experience of climatic and economic shocks.
Coverage
Regional coverage.
Producers and sponsors
| Name | Affiliation |
|---|---|
| International Fund for Agricultural Development | United Nations |
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| International Fund for Agricultural Development | Funding |
Sampling
A qualitative survey was conducted prior to the quantitative data collection and consisted in a number of Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and Focus Groups Discussions (FGDs) with key project stakeholders (Plan VIDA staff and implementers, members of the CPAP, etc.) as well as with participant and non-participant households. The original scope was to gain additional information to improve the design of the quantitative impact assessment, especially the sampling framework and the identification of a valid control group. In particular, the qualitative exercise focused on acquiring a better understanding of: (i) project targeting and the selection process of beneficiary communities; (ii) the characteristics of participant and non-participant communities as well as of direct and indirect beneficiaries (to be able to shed some light on possible self-selection mechanisms); (iii) potential spillover and unintended effects.
For the quantitative data, a two-stage sampling strategy was employed to ensure that the most appropriate communities and respondents were selected to be the control group. To sample control communities the community selection procedure used to identify beneficiary communities was replicated. The following steps were thus undertaken: first a high resolution map for Cohabamba and Potosí, the two areas of project intervention, was obtained divided by municipality and communities; second the beneficiary communities were located and key data on road access, population, and poverty level were reported for each participant village; third a random selection of 90 beneficiary communities was selected; fourth a set of villages similar to the selected treated villages with regard to the above mentioned criteria and located within a polygon of 10 km was also mapped; fifth a selection/validation exercise was conducted to verify selected control villages to associate with treated villages on the basis of additional criteria based on key informants' and Plan VIDA implementers' knowledge of the area. The result of this exercise consisted in the selection of 90 treated and 90 control communities.
The sample comprised a total of 180 communities (half treatment and half control) with 15 households interviewed in each community in order to reach the total estimated sample size of 2,700 households. However, due to some communities being particularly small (less than 15 households), an extra 31 communities were used as back-up options for the original sample in order to comply with the calculated sample size. Cross-sectional quantitative data was therefore collected for a total of 2,751 households from 211 communities.
More details on the sampling procedure can be found in the IA plan and reports, attached in the documentations tab.
No weights
Survey instrument
The Questionnaire is attached in the documentations tab.
Note: some variables have missing labels. Please, refer to the questionnaire for more details.
Data collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2017-08 | 2017-09 |
- Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]
Data Access
| Is signing of a confidentiality declaration required? | Confidentiality declaration text |
|---|---|
| yes | The users shall not take any action with the purpose of identifying any individual entity (i.e. person, household, enterprise, etc.) in the micro dataset(s). If such a disclosure is made inadvertently, no use will be made of the information, and it will be reported immediately to FAO. |
Micro datasets disseminated by FAO shall only be allowed for research and statistical purposes. Any user which requests access working for a commercial company will not be granted access to any micro dataset regardless of their specified purpose. Users requesting access to any datasets must agree to the following minimal conditions:
- The micro dataset will only be used for statistical and/or research purposes;
- Any results derived from the micro dataset will be used solely for reporting aggregated information, and not for any specific individual entities or data subjects;
- The users shall not take any action with the purpose of identifying any individual entity (i.e. person, household, enterprise, etc.) in the micro dataset(s). If such a disclosure is made inadvertently, no use will be made of the information, and it will be reported immediately to FAO;
- The micro dataset cannot be re-disseminated by users or shared with anyone other than the individuals that are granted access to the micro dataset by FAO.
The use of the dataset should be referenced in any publication, using the following citation:
International Fund for Agricultural Development. Project Plan VIDA-PEEP, IFAD Impact Assessment Surveys, Bolivia, 2017. Dataset downloaded from https://microdata.fao.org.
Disclaimer and copyrights
The user of the data acknowledges that the original collector of the data, the authorized distributor of the data, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.
Metadata production
DDI_BOL_2017_PPV-IIAS_v01_M_v01_A_OCS
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Office of Chief Statistician | Food and Agriculture Organization | Metadata producer |
| Development Economics Data Group | The World Bank | Metadata adapted for World Bank Microdata Library |
2023-02-17
Metadata version
Version 01 (February 2023): This metadata was downloaded from the FAO website (https://microdata.fao.org/index.php/catalog) and it is identical to FAO version (BOL_2017_PPV-IIAS_v01_EN_M_v01_A_OCS). The following two metadata fields were edited - Document ID and Survey ID.