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
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: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Are User Fees Regressive? the Welfare Implications of Health Care Financing Proposals in Peru
By Paul J. Gertler, Luis Locay, ...
-
Population Policies, Fertility, Women's Human Capital, and Child Quality
-
By Nistha Sinha
-
Contraception as Development? New Evidence from Family Planning in Colombia
By Grant Miller
-
By Shareen Joshi and T. Paul Schultz
-
Teenage Childbearing in Latin American Countries
By Jairo Núñez and Carmen Elisa Flórez
-
By Nistha Sinha and Joanne Yoong
-
By Nistha Sinha and Joanne Yoong