对额外性的难以捉摸的追求

Paddy Carter, Nicolas Van de Sijpe, Raphael Calel
{"title":"对额外性的难以捉摸的追求","authors":"Paddy Carter, Nicolas Van de Sijpe, Raphael Calel","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3310521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) are frequently asked to demonstrate their additionality—meaning that they make investments that the private sector would not—but what evidence of additionality would look like is rarely articulated. This paper examines potential quantitative and qualitative evidence. We investigate whether it is possible to infer additionality from observational investment data, and show how the demand-led nature of DFIs’ business model can create bias in standard statistical techniques used to identify causal effects. Having established that rigorous evidence of additionality may continue to elude us, we discuss circumstantial evidence that would increase confidence that additionality is present, and propose a probabilistic approach to additionality.","PeriodicalId":405783,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Financial Institutions (Topic)","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Elusive Quest for Additionality\",\"authors\":\"Paddy Carter, Nicolas Van de Sijpe, Raphael Calel\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3310521\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) are frequently asked to demonstrate their additionality—meaning that they make investments that the private sector would not—but what evidence of additionality would look like is rarely articulated. This paper examines potential quantitative and qualitative evidence. We investigate whether it is possible to infer additionality from observational investment data, and show how the demand-led nature of DFIs’ business model can create bias in standard statistical techniques used to identify causal effects. Having established that rigorous evidence of additionality may continue to elude us, we discuss circumstantial evidence that would increase confidence that additionality is present, and propose a probabilistic approach to additionality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":405783,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PSN: Financial Institutions (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PSN: Financial Institutions (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3310521\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Financial Institutions (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3310521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

发展金融机构(dfi)经常被要求证明他们的额外性,这意味着他们做了私营部门不会做的投资,但额外性的证据是什么却很少被阐明。本文探讨了潜在的定量和定性证据。我们研究了是否有可能从观察性投资数据中推断出附加性,并展示了发展金融机构业务模式的需求主导性质如何在用于确定因果关系的标准统计技术中产生偏差。在确定了额外性的严格证据可能继续逃避我们之后,我们讨论了可以增加额外性存在的信心的间接证据,并提出了一种额外性的概率方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Elusive Quest for Additionality
Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) are frequently asked to demonstrate their additionality—meaning that they make investments that the private sector would not—but what evidence of additionality would look like is rarely articulated. This paper examines potential quantitative and qualitative evidence. We investigate whether it is possible to infer additionality from observational investment data, and show how the demand-led nature of DFIs’ business model can create bias in standard statistical techniques used to identify causal effects. Having established that rigorous evidence of additionality may continue to elude us, we discuss circumstantial evidence that would increase confidence that additionality is present, and propose a probabilistic approach to additionality.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信