Pro-Poor Policies in Sudan and South Sudan: Distributional Impact of Public Spending and Taxation

African Development Review 28(S2): 191-218, October 2016

Posted: 29 Apr 2012 Last revised: 5 Jan 2017

See all articles by David E. Sahn

David E. Sahn

Cornell University

Stephen D. Younger

Tulane University - CEQ Institute

Date Written: March 7, 2014

Abstract

Using the 2009 National Baseline Household Survey, we examine the incidence of actual and proposed public expenditures in Sudan and South Sudan. Key results for Sudan are that public spending to support agriculture, if broad-based, is likely to be pro-poor, while petrol subsidies are not. For South Sudan, transfer payments, including in-kind food aid, are very poorly targeted. In both countries, subsidies for basic education services are pro-poor.

Suggested Citation

Sahn, David E. and Younger, Stephen D., Pro-Poor Policies in Sudan and South Sudan: Distributional Impact of Public Spending and Taxation (March 7, 2014). African Development Review 28(S2): 191-218, October 2016 , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2047250 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2047250

David E. Sahn

Cornell University ( email )

B16 MVR Hall
Ithaca, NY 14853
United States
607-255-8931 (Phone)
607-255-0178 (Fax)

HOME PAGE: http://courses.cit.cornell.edu/des16

Stephen D. Younger (Contact Author)

Tulane University - CEQ Institute ( email )

6823 St Charles Ave
New Orleans, LA 70118
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
582
PlumX Metrics