Benefit incidence analysis offers an important perspective on budgets and can illuminate the distributional impacts of proposed reallocations of government resources among projects.

This paper provides a primer on benefit incidence analysis (BIA) for macroeconomists and a new data set on the benefit incidence of education and health spending covering 56 countries over 1960-2000, representing a significant improvement in quality and coverage over existing compilations. The paper demonstrates the usefulness of BIA in two dimensions. First, the paper finds, among other things, that overall education and health spending are poorly targeted; benefits from primary education and primary health care go disproportionately to the middle class, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, HIPCs and transition economies; but targeting has improved in the 1990s. Second, simple measures of association show that countries with a more propoor incidence of education and health spending tend to have better education and health outcomes, good governance, high per capita income, and wider accessibility to information. The paper explores policy implications of these findings.

It is generally accepted that government health expenditures should disproportionately benefit the poor. And yet in most developing countries the opposite is the case. This paper examines the implications of a central assumption of benefit incidence analysis, namely that the unit cost of a government-provided service bears no relation to the out-of-pocket payments paid by the patient. It argues that a more plausible assumption is that larger out-of-pocket payments for a given unit of utilization reflect more (or more costly) services being delivered. The paper compares -- theoretically and empirically -- the standard constant-cost assumption with two alternatives, namely that the cost of care in a specific episode of utilization is (a) proportional to or (b) linearly related to the amount of money paid out-of-pocket by the patient. An interesting special case of the linear relationship is where subsidies are focused on a basic unit of care and additional costs are met dollar-for-dollar by additional fees. The paper shows that if fees are more pro-rich than utilization, government spending will be least pro-rich under the constant-cost assumption and most pro-rich under the proportionality assumption. The linear assumption results in a concentration index for subsidies that lies between these two extremes. These results are borne out in an analysis of the incidence of government health spending in Vietnam (a country where fees are more pro-rich than utilization); indeed, under the constant-cost assumption, subsidies are pro-poor while they are pro-rich under the proportionality assumption. The paper also considers the biases created by not allowing for insurance reimbursements.

Two key policy goals in the health sector are equity and financial protection. New methods, data and powerful computers have led to a surge of interest in quantitative analysis that permits monitoring progress toward these objectives, and comparisons across countries. ADePT is a new computer program that streamlines and automates such work, ensuring that results are genuinely comparable and allowing them to be produced with a minimum of programming skills. This book provides a step-by-step guide to the use of ADePT for quantitative analysis of equity and financial protection in the health sect

Using case studies, economic theory and empirical research, the author of this work analyzes developments in project appraisal using the approach recommended by the World Bank. Considerations include: investment criteria; risk analysis; the social discount rate; and the basic needs approach.

This book pleads for a series of policy orientations leading towards pro-poor health and education spending.