EN
IT
Obiettivi Formativi
OBIETTIVI FORMATIVI:
Il corso mira a fornire agli studenti gli strumenti concettuali e operativi per comprendere e utilizzare l'approccio evidence-based nella progettazione, implementazione e valutazione delle politiche pubbliche. Attraverso lo studio di casi concreti, tecniche di valutazione e l'analisi critica di studi empirici, gli studenti saranno in grado di comprendere i processi decisionali supportati da evidenze empiriche. L’'insegnamento si propone inoltre di rafforzare le capacità di analisi, comunicazione e valutazione delle evidenze disponibili.
CONOSCENZA E CAPACITÀ DI COMPRENSIONE:
Al termine del corso, lo studente sarà in grado di:
Comprendere il significato e l'importanza dell'approccio evidence-based nelle politiche pubbliche.
Conoscere i principali metodi di valutazione delle politiche: esperimenti randomizzati, quasi-esperimenti, regressioni e approcci qualitativi.
Distinguere tra correlazione e causalità nei contesti di policy.
Conoscere esempi rilevanti di evidence-based policy in settori chiave (istruzione, lavoro, salute, ambiente).
CAPACITÀ DI APPLICARE CONOSCENZA E COMPRENSIONE:
Lo studente sarà in grado di integrare conoscenze teoriche e pratiche per comprendere le sfide nel campo delle politiche pubbliche. Inoltre sapra' analizzare criticamente le politiche pubbliche attraverso l'uso di strumenti empirici e dati concreti.
AUTONOMIA DI GIUDIZIO:
Lo studente acquisirà la capacità di:
Valutare l'affidabilità e la validità di uno studio empirico.
Riconoscere potenziali bias metodologici e limiti delle evidenze disponibili.
Formulare raccomandazioni per policy in modo indipendente e critico, considerando contesto e sostenibilità.
ABILITÀ COMUNICATIVE:
Al termine del corso, lo studente saprà:
Comunicare in modo chiaro ed efficace i risultati di un'analisi empirica sia in forma scritta che orale.
Sviluppare una presentazione critica di lavoro scientifico.
CAPACITÀ DI APPRENDIMENTO:
Lo studente svilupperà:
La capacità di apprendere e aggiornarsi in autonomia sui principali strumenti di valutazione evidence-based, anche dopo la conclusione del corso.
L'attitudine a integrare conoscenze teoriche e pratiche per affrontare nuove sfide nel campo delle politiche pubbliche.
La competenza nel consultare la letteratura scientifica internazionale e fonti di dati ufficiali per orientarsi tra studi, ricerche e valutazioni di impatto.
Learning Objectives
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
The course aims to provide students with both conceptual and operational tools to understand and apply the evidence-based approach in the design, implementation, and evaluation of public policies. Through the analysis of real-world cases, evaluation techniques, and critical assessment of empirical studies, students will develop an informed understanding of decision-making processes supported by empirical evidence. The course also seeks to enhance students’ analytical, communication, and evidence-assessment skills.
KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING:
By the end of the course, students will be able to:
Understand the meaning and relevance of the evidence-based approach in public policy.
Become familiar with the main methods of policy evaluation: randomized experiments, quasi-experiments, regressions, and qualitative approaches.
Distinguish between correlation and causation in policy contexts.
Recognize relevant examples of evidence-based policies across key sectors (e.g., education, labor, health, environment).
APPLYING KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING:
Students will be able to integrate theoretical and practical knowledge to understand and address challenges in the field of public policy. Moreover, they will be capable of critically analyzing public policies using empirical tools and real-world data.
MAKING JUDGEMENTS:
Students will develop the ability to:
Evaluate the reliability and validity of empirical studies.
Identify potential methodological biases and limitations in the available evidence.
Formulate policy recommendations independently and critically, taking into account context and sustainability.
COMMUNICATION SKILLS:
By the end of the course, students will be able to:
Clearly and effectively communicate the results of empirical analyses in both written and oral form.
Develop and present a critical overview of academic or policy-related research.
LEARNING SKILLS:
Students will develop:
The ability to independently learn and update their knowledge on core evidence-based evaluation methods, even after completing the course.
The capacity to integrate theory and practice in addressing new public policy challenges.
Competence in consulting international academic literature and official data sources to navigate studies, research, and impact evaluations.
Prerequisiti
teoria economica di base e nozioni di econometria
Prerequisites
basic knowledge of economics and of econometrics
Programma
Modulo 1 – Introduzione all'Evidence-Based Policy (EBP)
Definizione e fondamenti dell'approccio evidence-based
Il ruolo delle evidenze empiriche nelle decisioni politiche
Preparare una valutazione
Modulo 2 – Metodi di valutazione delle politiche pubbliche
Panoramica generale dei metodi di impatto
Esperimenti randomizzati controllati (RCT): logica, esempi e limiti
Quasi-esperimenti: differenze nelle differenze, regressione discontinua, matching, variabili strumentali
Modulo 3 – Applicazioni di EBP
Politiche educative: classi ridotte, insegnamento e rendimento scolastico
Politiche di genere: differenze di genere
Politiche di genere II: violenza di genere
Politiche per il lavoro: formazione, sussidi, e inserimento
Politiche sanitarie: prevenzione, comportamenti e accesso
Politiche ambientali: incentivi e cambiamenti comportamentali
Program
Module 1 – Introduction to Evidence-Based Policy (EBP)
Definition and foundations of the evidence-based approach
The role of empirical evidence in policy decision-making
Designing an evaluation
Module 2 – Methods for Public Policy Evaluation
General overview of impact evaluation methods
Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs): logic, examples, and limitations
Quasi-experimental methods: difference-in-differences, regression discontinuity, matching, instrumental variables
Module 3 – Applications of EBP
Education policies: class size, teaching, and academic performance
Gender policies I: gender differences
Gender policies II: gender-based violence
Labor market policies: training, subsidies, and job placement
Health policies: prevention, behaviors, and access
Environmental policies: incentives and behavioral change
Testi Adottati
Slides della docente
Books
Slides from the instructor
Bibliografia
1.) Gertler, P.J., Martinez, S. Premand, P. Rawlings, L.B. and Vermeersch, C. M. J. (2011). Impact Evaluation in Practice. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
2.) Angrist, J.D. and Pischke J.-S. (2010). The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design is Taking the Con out of Econometrics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2): 3-30.
3.) Evidence-based policy, a cura di De Blasio, Nicita, Pammolli 2020, Il Mulino
4) Tutti i papers presentati durante le lezioni:
Abadie, Alberto, and Javier Gardeazabal. 2003. "The Economic Costs of Conflict: A Case Study of the Basque Country." American Economic Review, 93(1): 113–132.
Abadie, Alberto, Alexis Diamond, and Jens Hainmueller. 2010. "Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California's Tobacco Control Program." Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(490): 493–505.
Abadie, Alberto, Alexis Diamond, and Jens Hainmueller. 2015. "Comparative Politics and the Synthetic Control Method." American Journal of Political Science, 59(2): 495–510.
Angrist, Joshua D. 1990. "Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records." American Economic Review, 80(3): 313–336.
Angrist, Joshua D. 2006. "Instrumental Variables Methods in Experimental Criminological Research: What, Why and How." Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2(1): 23–44.
Angrist, Joshua D., Erich Battistin, and Daniela Vuri. 2017. "In a Small Moment: Class Size and Moral Hazard in the Italian Mezzogiorno." American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 9(4): 216–249.
Angrist, Joshua D., Eric Bettinger, Erik Bloom, Elizabeth King, and Michael Kremer. 2002. "Vouchers for Private Schooling in Colombia: Evidence from a Randomized Natural Experiment." American Economic Review, 92(5): 1535–1558.
Angrist, Joshua D., Guido W. Imbens, and Donald B. Rubin. 1996. "Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables." Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91(434): 444–455.
Angrist, Joshua D., and Alan B. Krueger. 1991. "Does Compulsory School Attendance Affect Schooling and Earnings?" Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4): 979–1014.
Angrist, Joshua D., and Victor Lavy. 1999. "Using Maimonides' Rule to Estimate the Effect of Class Size on Scholastic Achievement." The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(2): 533–575.
Banerjee, Abhijit, Esther Duflo, Nathanael Goldberg, Dean Karlan, Robert Osei, William Pariente, Jeremy Shapiro, Bram Thuysbaert, and Christopher Udry. 2015. "A Multifaceted Program Causes Lasting Progress for the Very Poor: Evidence from Six Countries." Science, 348(6236): 1260799.
Barrera-Osorio, Felipe, Leigh L. Linden, and Miguel Urquiola. 2007. "The Effects of User Fee Reductions on Enrollment: Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment." Unpublished manuscript, Columbia University.
Blattman, Christopher, Nathan Fiala, and Sebastian Martinez. 2014. "Generating Skilled Self-Employment in Developing Countries: Experimental Evidence from Uganda." The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(2): 697–752.
Callaway, Brantly, and Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna. 2021. "Difference-in-Differences with Multiple Time Periods." Journal of Econometrics, 225(2): 200–230.
Card, David. 1990. "The Impact of the Mariel Boatlift on the Miami Labor Market." Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 43(2): 245–257.
Card, David. 1995. "Using Geographic Variation in College Proximity to Estimate the Return to Schooling." In Aspects of Labour Market Behaviour: Essays in Honour of John Vanderkamp, edited by Louis N. Christofides, E. Kenneth Grant, and Robert Swidinsky. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Card, David, and Alan B. Krueger. 1994. "Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast-Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania." American Economic Review, 84(4): 772–793.
Carrell, Scott E., Mark Hoekstra, and James E. West. 2011. "Does Drinking Impair College Performance? Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Approach." Journal of Public Economics, 95(1–2): 54–62.
Cattaneo, Matias D., Sebastian Galiani, Paul J. Gertler, Sebastian Martinez, and Rocio Titiunik. 2009. "Housing, Health, and Happiness." American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(1): 75–105.
Cattaneo, Matias D., Nicolás Idrobo, and Rocío Titiunik. 2020. A Practical Introduction to Regression Discontinuity Designs: Foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Janvry, Alain, Frederico Finan, and Elisabeth Sadoulet. 2012. "Local Electoral Incentives and Decentralized Program Performance." The Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(3): 672–685.
Di Tella, Rafael, and Ernesto Schargrodsky. 2004. "Do Police Reduce Crime? Estimates Using the Allocation of Police Forces After a Terrorist Attack." American Economic Review, 94(1): 115–133.
Duflo, Esther. 2001. "Schooling and Labor Market Consequences of School Construction in Indonesia: Evidence from an Unusual Policy Experiment." American Economic Review, 91(4): 795–813.
Evans, David, Stephanie Hausladen, Katrina Kosec, and Natasha Reese. 2014. Community-Based Conditional Cash Transfers in Tanzania: Results from a Randomized Trial. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Galiani, Sebastian, Paul Gertler, and Ernesto Schargrodsky. 2005. "Water for Life: The Impact of the Privatization of Water Services on Child Mortality." Journal of Political Economy, 113(1): 83–120.
Gertler, Paul. 2004. "Do Conditional Cash Transfers Improve Child Health? Evidence from PROGRESA's Control Randomized Experiment." The American Economic Review, 94(2): 336–341.
Goodman-Bacon, Andrew. 2021. "Difference-in-Differences with Variation in Treatment Timing." Journal of Econometrics, 225(2): 254–277.
Kearney, Melissa S., and Phillip B. Levine. 2019. "Early Childhood Education by MOOC: Lessons from Sesame Street." American Economic Review, 109(9): 3318–3357.
Kremer, Michael, Jessica Leino, Edward Miguel, and Alix Peterson Zwane. 2011. "Spring Cleaning: Rural Water Impacts, Valuation, and Property Rights Institutions." The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(1): 145–205.
Lee, David S. 2008. "Randomized Experiments from Non-random Selection in U.S. House Elections." Journal of Econometrics, 142(2): 675–697.
Levy, Dan, and Jim Ohls. 2010. "Evaluation of Jamaica's PATH Conditional Cash Transfer Programme." Journal of Development Effectiveness, 2(4): 421–441.
Martinez, Sebastian, Sophie Naudeau, and Vitor Pereira. 2012. The Promise of Preschool in Africa: A Randomized Impact Evaluation of Early Childhood Development in Rural Mozambique. Washington, DC: World Bank and Save the Children.
Mu, Ren, and Dominique van de Walle. 2011. "Rural Roads and Local Market Development in Vietnam." The Journal of Development Studies, 47(5): 709–734.
Schultz, T. Paul. 2004. "School Subsidies for the Poor: Evaluating the Mexican Progresa Poverty Program." Journal of Development Economics, 74(1): 199–250.
Sun, Liyang, and Sarah Abraham. 2021. "Estimating Dynamic Treatment Effects in Event Studies with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects." Journal of Econometrics, 225(2): 175–199.
Todd, Petra E., and Kenneth I. Wolpin. 2006. "Assessing the Impact of a School Subsidy Program in Mexico: Using a Social Experiment to Validate a Dynamic Behavioral Model of Child Schooling and Fertility." The American Economic Review, 96(5): 1384–1417.
Willis, Robert J., and Sherwin Rosen. 1979. "Education and Self-Selection." Journal of Political Economy, 87(5, Part 2): S7–S36.
Bibliography
1.) Gertler, P.J., Martinez, S. Premand, P. Rawlings, L.B. and Vermeersch, C. M. J. (2011). Impact Evaluation in Practice. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
2.) Angrist, J.D. and Pischke J.-S. (2010). The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design is Taking the Con out of Econometrics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2): 3-30.
3.) Evidence-based policy, a cura di De Blasio, Nicita, Pammolli 2020, Il Mulino
4) All the papers used during the lessons: Abadie, Alberto, and Javier Gardeazabal. 2003. "The Economic Costs of Conflict: A Case Study of the Basque Country." American Economic Review, 93(1): 113–132.
Abadie, Alberto, Alexis Diamond, and Jens Hainmueller. 2010. "Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California's Tobacco Control Program." Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(490): 493–505.
Abadie, Alberto, Alexis Diamond, and Jens Hainmueller. 2015. "Comparative Politics and the Synthetic Control Method." American Journal of Political Science, 59(2): 495–510.
Angrist, Joshua D. 1990. "Lifetime Earnings and the Vietnam Era Draft Lottery: Evidence from Social Security Administrative Records." American Economic Review, 80(3): 313–336.
Angrist, Joshua D. 2006. "Instrumental Variables Methods in Experimental Criminological Research: What, Why and How." Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2(1): 23–44.
Angrist, Joshua D., Erich Battistin, and Daniela Vuri. 2017. "In a Small Moment: Class Size and Moral Hazard in the Italian Mezzogiorno." American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 9(4): 216–249.
Angrist, Joshua D., Eric Bettinger, Erik Bloom, Elizabeth King, and Michael Kremer. 2002. "Vouchers for Private Schooling in Colombia: Evidence from a Randomized Natural Experiment." American Economic Review, 92(5): 1535–1558.
Angrist, Joshua D., Guido W. Imbens, and Donald B. Rubin. 1996. "Identification of Causal Effects Using Instrumental Variables." Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91(434): 444–455.
Angrist, Joshua D., and Alan B. Krueger. 1991. "Does Compulsory School Attendance Affect Schooling and Earnings?" Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4): 979–1014.
Angrist, Joshua D., and Victor Lavy. 1999. "Using Maimonides' Rule to Estimate the Effect of Class Size on Scholastic Achievement." The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(2): 533–575.
Banerjee, Abhijit, Esther Duflo, Nathanael Goldberg, Dean Karlan, Robert Osei, William Pariente, Jeremy Shapiro, Bram Thuysbaert, and Christopher Udry. 2015. "A Multifaceted Program Causes Lasting Progress for the Very Poor: Evidence from Six Countries." Science, 348(6236): 1260799.
Barrera-Osorio, Felipe, Leigh L. Linden, and Miguel Urquiola. 2007. "The Effects of User Fee Reductions on Enrollment: Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment." Unpublished manuscript, Columbia University.
Blattman, Christopher, Nathan Fiala, and Sebastian Martinez. 2014. "Generating Skilled Self-Employment in Developing Countries: Experimental Evidence from Uganda." The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(2): 697–752.
Callaway, Brantly, and Pedro H. C. Sant'Anna. 2021. "Difference-in-Differences with Multiple Time Periods." Journal of Econometrics, 225(2): 200–230.
Card, David. 1990. "The Impact of the Mariel Boatlift on the Miami Labor Market." Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 43(2): 245–257.
Card, David. 1995. "Using Geographic Variation in College Proximity to Estimate the Return to Schooling." In Aspects of Labour Market Behaviour: Essays in Honour of John Vanderkamp, edited by Louis N. Christofides, E. Kenneth Grant, and Robert Swidinsky. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Card, David, and Alan B. Krueger. 1994. "Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast-Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania." American Economic Review, 84(4): 772–793.
Carrell, Scott E., Mark Hoekstra, and James E. West. 2011. "Does Drinking Impair College Performance? Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Approach." Journal of Public Economics, 95(1–2): 54–62.
Cattaneo, Matias D., Sebastian Galiani, Paul J. Gertler, Sebastian Martinez, and Rocio Titiunik. 2009. "Housing, Health, and Happiness." American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(1): 75–105.
Cattaneo, Matias D., Nicolás Idrobo, and Rocío Titiunik. 2020. A Practical Introduction to Regression Discontinuity Designs: Foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Janvry, Alain, Frederico Finan, and Elisabeth Sadoulet. 2012. "Local Electoral Incentives and Decentralized Program Performance." The Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(3): 672–685.
Di Tella, Rafael, and Ernesto Schargrodsky. 2004. "Do Police Reduce Crime? Estimates Using the Allocation of Police Forces After a Terrorist Attack." American Economic Review, 94(1): 115–133.
Duflo, Esther. 2001. "Schooling and Labor Market Consequences of School Construction in Indonesia: Evidence from an Unusual Policy Experiment." American Economic Review, 91(4): 795–813.
Evans, David, Stephanie Hausladen, Katrina Kosec, and Natasha Reese. 2014. Community-Based Conditional Cash Transfers in Tanzania: Results from a Randomized Trial. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Galiani, Sebastian, Paul Gertler, and Ernesto Schargrodsky. 2005. "Water for Life: The Impact of the Privatization of Water Services on Child Mortality." Journal of Political Economy, 113(1): 83–120.
Gertler, Paul. 2004. "Do Conditional Cash Transfers Improve Child Health? Evidence from PROGRESA's Control Randomized Experiment." The American Economic Review, 94(2): 336–341.
Goodman-Bacon, Andrew. 2021. "Difference-in-Differences with Variation in Treatment Timing." Journal of Econometrics, 225(2): 254–277.
Kearney, Melissa S., and Phillip B. Levine. 2019. "Early Childhood Education by MOOC: Lessons from Sesame Street." American Economic Review, 109(9): 3318–3357.
Kremer, Michael, Jessica Leino, Edward Miguel, and Alix Peterson Zwane. 2011. "Spring Cleaning: Rural Water Impacts, Valuation, and Property Rights Institutions." The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(1): 145–205.
Lee, David S. 2008. "Randomized Experiments from Non-random Selection in U.S. House Elections." Journal of Econometrics, 142(2): 675–697.
Levy, Dan, and Jim Ohls. 2010. "Evaluation of Jamaica's PATH Conditional Cash Transfer Programme." Journal of Development Effectiveness, 2(4): 421–441.
Martinez, Sebastian, Sophie Naudeau, and Vitor Pereira. 2012. The Promise of Preschool in Africa: A Randomized Impact Evaluation of Early Childhood Development in Rural Mozambique. Washington, DC: World Bank and Save the Children.
Mu, Ren, and Dominique van de Walle. 2011. "Rural Roads and Local Market Development in Vietnam." The Journal of Development Studies, 47(5): 709–734.
Schultz, T. Paul. 2004. "School Subsidies for the Poor: Evaluating the Mexican Progresa Poverty Program." Journal of Development Economics, 74(1): 199–250.
Sun, Liyang, and Sarah Abraham. 2021. "Estimating Dynamic Treatment Effects in Event Studies with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects." Journal of Econometrics, 225(2): 175–199.
Todd, Petra E., and Kenneth I. Wolpin. 2006. "Assessing the Impact of a School Subsidy Program in Mexico: Using a Social Experiment to Validate a Dynamic Behavioral Model of Child Schooling and Fertility." The American Economic Review, 96(5): 1384–1417.
Willis, Robert J., and Sherwin Rosen. 1979. "Education and Self-Selection." Journal of Political Economy, 87(5, Part 2): S7–S36.
Modalità di svolgimento
Le lezioni si svolgeranno in presenza. La partecipazione degli studenti attraverso domande e' fortemente incoraggiata.
Teaching methods
The lessons will take place at the University. Participation of the students through questions is strongly encouraged.
Regolamento Esame
La valutazione complessiva dello studente tiene conto sia di una prova scritta individuale sia di una prova orale individuale su tutti gli argomenti svolti durante il corso. Per superare l'esame e' necessario aver conseguito un voto >18 in entrambe le prove.
Scala di valutazione:
o Non idoneo: importanti carenze e/o inaccuratezze nella conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti; limitate capacità di analisi e sintesi, frequenti generalizzazioni.
o 18-20: conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti appena sufficiente con possibili imperfezioni; capacità di analisi sintesi e autonomia di giudizio sufficienti.
o 21-23: Conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti routinaria; Capacità di analisi e sintesi corrette con argomentazione logica coerente.
o 24-26: Discreta conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti; buone capacità di analisi e sintesi con argomentazioni espresse in modo rigoroso.
o 27-29: Conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti completa; notevoli capacità di analisi, sintesi. Buona autonomia di giudizio.
o 30-30L: Ottimo livello di conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti. Notevoli capacità di analisi e di sintesi e di autonomia di giudizio. Argomentazioni espresse in modo originale.
Exam Rules
The student’s overall assessment is based on both an individual written exam and an individual oral exam covering all the topics addressed during the course. To pass the exam, students must obtain a grade above 18 in both components.
Grading scale:
o Unsuitable: major deficiencies and/or inaccuracies in knowledge and understanding of topics; limited ability to analyze and synthesize; frequent generalizations.
o 18-20: Barely sufficient knowledge and understanding of topics with possible imperfections; Sufficient ability to analyze synthesis and independent judgment.
o 21-23: Routine knowledge and understanding of topics; Correct analysis and synthesis skills with coherent logical argumentation.
o 24-26: Fair knowledge and understanding of topics; Good analytical and synthesis skills with rigorously expressed arguments.
o 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of topics; Remarkable skills of analysis, synthesis. Good independent judgment.
o 30-30L: Excellent level of knowledge and understanding of topics. Remarkable analytical and synthesis skills and independent judgment. Arguments expressed in an original way.
Modalità di frequenza
La frequenza di persona è fortemente consigliata.
Attendance Rules
In-person attendance is strongly recommended.
EN
IT
Obiettivi Formativi
OBIETTIVI FORMATIVI:
Il corso mira a fornire agli studenti gli strumenti concettuali e operativi per comprendere e utilizzare l'approccio evidence-based nella progettazione, implementazione e valutazione delle politiche pubbliche. Attraverso lo studio di casi concreti, tecniche di valutazione e l'analisi critica di studi empirici, gli studenti saranno in grado di comprendere i processi decisionali supportati da evidenze empiriche. L’'insegnamento si propone inoltre di rafforzare le capacità di analisi, comunicazione e valutazione delle evidenze disponibili.
CONOSCENZA E CAPACITÀ DI COMPRENSIONE:
Al termine del corso, lo studente sarà in grado di:
Comprendere il significato e l'importanza dell'approccio evidence-based nelle politiche pubbliche.
Conoscere i principali metodi di valutazione delle politiche: esperimenti randomizzati, quasi-esperimenti, regressioni e approcci qualitativi.
Distinguere tra correlazione e causalità nei contesti di policy.
Conoscere esempi rilevanti di evidence-based policy in settori chiave (istruzione, lavoro, salute, ambiente).
CAPACITÀ DI APPLICARE CONOSCENZA E COMPRENSIONE:
Lo studente sarà in grado di integrare conoscenze teoriche e pratiche per comprendere le sfide nel campo delle politiche pubbliche. Inoltre sapra' analizzare criticamente le politiche pubbliche attraverso l'uso di strumenti empirici e dati concreti.
AUTONOMIA DI GIUDIZIO:
Lo studente acquisirà la capacità di:
Valutare l'affidabilità e la validità di uno studio empirico.
Riconoscere potenziali bias metodologici e limiti delle evidenze disponibili.
Formulare raccomandazioni per policy in modo indipendente e critico, considerando contesto e sostenibilità.
ABILITÀ COMUNICATIVE:
Al termine del corso, lo studente saprà:
Comunicare in modo chiaro ed efficace i risultati di un'analisi empirica sia in forma scritta che orale.
Sviluppare una presentazione critica di lavoro scientifico.
CAPACITÀ DI APPRENDIMENTO:
Lo studente svilupperà:
La capacità di apprendere e aggiornarsi in autonomia sui principali strumenti di valutazione evidence-based, anche dopo la conclusione del corso.
L'attitudine a integrare conoscenze teoriche e pratiche per affrontare nuove sfide nel campo delle politiche pubbliche.
La competenza nel consultare la letteratura scientifica internazionale e fonti di dati ufficiali per orientarsi tra studi, ricerche e valutazioni di impatto.
Learning Objectives
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
The course aims to provide students with both conceptual and operational tools to understand and apply the evidence-based approach in the design, implementation, and evaluation of public policies. Through the analysis of real-world cases, evaluation techniques, and critical assessment of empirical studies, students will develop an informed understanding of decision-making processes supported by empirical evidence. The course also seeks to enhance students’ analytical, communication, and evidence-assessment skills.
KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING:
By the end of the course, students will be able to:
Understand the meaning and relevance of the evidence-based approach in public policy.
Become familiar with the main methods of policy evaluation: randomized experiments, quasi-experiments, regressions, and qualitative approaches.
Distinguish between correlation and causation in policy contexts.
Recognize relevant examples of evidence-based policies across key sectors (e.g., education, labor, health, environment).
APPLYING KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING:
Students will be able to integrate theoretical and practical knowledge to understand and address challenges in the field of public policy. Moreover, they will be capable of critically analyzing public policies using empirical tools and real-world data.
MAKING JUDGEMENTS:
Students will develop the ability to:
Evaluate the reliability and validity of empirical studies.
Identify potential methodological biases and limitations in the available evidence.
Formulate policy recommendations independently and critically, taking into account context and sustainability.
COMMUNICATION SKILLS:
By the end of the course, students will be able to:
Clearly and effectively communicate the results of empirical analyses in both written and oral form.
Develop and present a critical overview of academic or policy-related research.
LEARNING SKILLS:
Students will develop:
The ability to independently learn and update their knowledge on core evidence-based evaluation methods, even after completing the course.
The capacity to integrate theory and practice in addressing new public policy challenges.
Competence in consulting international academic literature and official data sources to navigate studies, research, and impact evaluations.
Prerequisiti
teoria economica di base e nozioni di econometria
Prerequisites
Basic knowledge of economics and of econometrics
Programma
Modulo 1 – Introduzione all'Evidence-Based Policy (EBP)
Definizione e fondamenti dell'approccio evidence-based
Il ruolo delle evidenze empiriche nelle decisioni politiche
Preparare una valutazione
Modulo 2 – Metodi di valutazione delle politiche pubbliche
Panoramica generale dei metodi di impatto
Esperimenti randomizzati controllati (RCT): logica, esempi e limiti
Quasi-esperimenti: differenze nelle differenze, regressione discontinua, matching, variabili strumentali
Modulo 3 – Applicazioni di EBP
Politiche educative: classi ridotte, insegnamento e rendimento scolastico
Politiche di genere: differenze di genere
Politiche di genere II: violenza di genere
Politiche per il lavoro: formazione, sussidi, e inserimento
Politiche sanitarie: prevenzione, comportamenti e accesso
Politiche ambientali: incentivi e cambiamenti comportamentali
Program
Module 1 – Introduction to Evidence-Based Policy (EBP)
Definition and foundations of the evidence-based approach
The role of empirical evidence in policy decision-making
Designing an evaluation
Module 2 – Methods for Public Policy Evaluation
General overview of impact evaluation methods
Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs): logic, examples, and limitations
Quasi-experimental methods: difference-in-differences, regression discontinuity, matching, instrumental variables
Module 3 – Applications of EBP
Education policies: class size, teaching, and academic performance
Gender policies I: gender differences
Gender policies II: gender-based violence
Labor market policies: training, subsidies, and job placement
Health policies: prevention, behaviors, and access
Environmental policies: incentives and behavioral change
Testi Adottati
Slides della docente
Books
Slides from the instructor
Bibliografia
1.) Gertler, P.J., Martinez, S. Premand, P. Rawlings, L.B. and Vermeersch, C. M. J. (2011). Impact Evaluation in Practice. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
2.) Angrist, J.D. and Pischke J.-S. (2010). The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design is Taking the Con out of Econometrics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2): 3-30.
3.) Evidence-based policy, a cura di De Blasio, Nicita, Pammolli 2020, Il Mulino
Bibliography
1.) Gertler, P.J., Martinez, S. Premand, P. Rawlings, L.B. and Vermeersch, C. M. J. (2011). Impact Evaluation in Practice. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
2.) Angrist, J.D. and Pischke J.-S. (2010). The Credibility Revolution in Empirical Economics: How Better Research Design is Taking the Con out of Econometrics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(2): 3-30.
3.) Evidence-based policy, a cura di De Blasio, Nicita, Pammolli 2020, Il Mulino
Modalità di svolgimento
Le lezioni si svolgeranno in presenza. La partecipazione degli studenti attraverso domande e' fortemente incoraggiata. Le presentazioni degli studenti saranno parte del programma di esame
Teaching methods
The lessons will take place at the University. Participation of the students through questions is strongly encouraged. Student presentations will be part of the examination program.
Regolamento Esame
La valutazione complessiva dello studente tiene conto sia di una prova scritta sia di una presentazione di un paper legato agli argomenti del corso a scelta dello studente ma concordato con la docente.
Scala di valutazione:
o Non idoneo: importanti carenze e/o inaccuratezze nella conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti; limitate capacità di analisi e sintesi, frequenti generalizzazioni.
o 18-20: conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti appena sufficiente con possibili imperfezioni; capacità di analisi sintesi e autonomia di giudizio sufficienti.
o 21-23: Conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti routinaria; Capacità di analisi e sintesi corrette con argomentazione logica coerente.
o 24-26: Discreta conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti; buone capacità di analisi e sintesi con argomentazioni espresse in modo rigoroso.
o 27-29: Conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti completa; notevoli capacità di analisi, sintesi. Buona autonomia di giudizio.
o 30-30L: Ottimo livello di conoscenza e comprensione degli argomenti. Notevoli capacità di analisi e di sintesi e di autonomia di giudizio. Argomentazioni espresse in modo originale.
Exam Rules
The overall student assessment takes into account both a written exam and a presentation of a paper related to the course topics, chosen by the student but agreed upon with the instructor.
Grading scale:
o Unsuitable: major deficiencies and/or inaccuracies in knowledge and understanding of topics; limited ability to analyze and synthesize; frequent generalizations.
o 18-20: Barely sufficient knowledge and understanding of topics with possible imperfections; Sufficient ability to analyze synthesis and independent judgment.
o 21-23: Routine knowledge and understanding of topics; Correct analysis and synthesis skills with coherent logical argumentation.
o 24-26: Fair knowledge and understanding of topics; Good analytical and synthesis skills with rigorously expressed arguments.
o 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of topics; Remarkable skills of analysis, synthesis. Good independent judgment.
o 30-30L: Excellent level of knowledge and understanding of topics. Remarkable analytical and synthesis skills and independent judgment. Arguments expressed in an original way.
Modalità di frequenza
La frequenza di persona è fortemente consigliata.
Attendance Rules
In-person attendance is strongly recommended.
Prof.ssa Lucia Leonelli
