Welfare Impacts of Rural Electrification: A Panel Data Analysis from Vietnam

Most past studies on the development impact of rural electrification have relied on cross-sectional surveys comparing households with and without electricity. This study tests the validity of the perceived correlation between welfare outcomes and rural electrification and quantifies electricity’s benefits on the basis of sound econometric techniques that control for endogeneity bias. The study used panel surveys conducted in rural Vietnam in 2002 and 2005, covering some 1,120 households in 41 communes; by 2005, all surveyed communes had connected to the grid, and four-fifths of their households had a connection. The econometric estimations suggest grid electrification’s positive effects on both household income and expenditure and education. We find differential returns to electricity for commune- and household-level connection: the former generates externality benefiting the poor more than the rich, farm more than nonfarm income, and girls over boys for schooling outcome; conversely, the latter benefits the rich more than the poor, nonfarm more than farm income, and boys over girls for schooling outcome. We recommend further study on rural electrification’s long-term benefits for the overall rural economy.

[1]  R. Sparrow,et al.  Does Electrification Spur the Fertility Transition? Evidence From Indonesia , 2015, Demography.

[2]  D. Barnes.  Electric Power for Rural Growth: How Electricity Affects Rural Life in Developing Countries , 2014 .

[3]  U. Chakravorty,et al.  Does the Quality of Electricity Matter? Evidence from Rural India , 2014, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[4]  Gayatri B. Koolwal,et al.  Long-Term Impacts of Household Electrification in Rural India , 2013 .

[5]  Markku Rahiala,et al.  Panel Data , 2011, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[6]  Douglas F. Barnes,et al.  Restoring Balance: Bangladesh's Rural Energy Realities , 2010 .

[7]  S. M. Fakhrul Islam,et al.  Economic and Social Impact Evaluation Study of the Rural Electrification Program in Bangladesh , 2010 .

[8]  Jason Abrevaya,et al.  The Effects of Birth Inputs on Birthweight , 2008 .

[9]  Christopher Timmins,et al.  The Impact of Piped Water Provision on Infant Mortality in Brazil: a Quantile Panel Data Approach , 2007 .

[10]  Martin Ravallion,et al.  Chapter 59 Evaluating Anti-Poverty Programs , 2007 .

[11]  Jason Abrevaya,et al.  The effects of birth inputs on birthweight : evidence from quantile estimation on panel data by , 2007 .

[12]  D. Barnes,et al.  PRODUCTIVE USES OF ENERGY FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT , 2005 .

[13]  M. Ravallion.  Evaluating Anti-Poverty Programs , 2005 .

[14]  R. Koenker.  Quantile regression for longitudinal data , 2004 .

[15]  Stephen Karekezi,et al.  Global Network on Energy for Sustainable Development , 2004 .

[16]  James P. Smith,et al.  Lost but Not Forgotten: Attrition and Follow-up in the Indonesia Family Life Survey , 2001 .

[17]  J. Behrman,et al.  Attrition in Longitudinal Household Survey Data: Some Tests for Three Developing-Country Samples , 1999 .

[18]  Moshe Buchinsky.  Recent Advances in Quantile Regression Models: A Practical Guideline for Empirical Research , 1998 .

[19]  W. Arulampalam,et al.  Unemployment persistence , 1998 .

[20]  James P. Ziliak,et al.  The Importance of Sample Attrition in Life Cycle Labor Supply Estimation , 1996 .

[21]  Shahidur R. Khandker.  Education Achievements and School Efficiency in Rural Bangladesh. World Bank Discussion Papers, 319. , 1996 .

[22]  F. Fluitman.  Socio-economic impact of rural electrification in developing countries: a review of evidence , 1983 .

[23]  G. Chamberlain.  Multivariate regression models for panel data , 1982 .

[24]  Rural Electrification And Development: Social And Economic Impact In Costa Rica And Colombia , 1978 .