Skip to Main Navigation

Social and economic impacts of rural road improvements in the state of Tocantins, Brazil (英语)

The aim of this paper is to provide feedback on the question of socioeconomic benefits from rural road development and the impact of transport infrastructure on the poor, particularly the poorest and the bottom 20 percent of the population. This paper relies on impact evaluation methodologies, which are traditionally used in social sectors but less so in the transport sector. The study, including first surveys, was launched in 2003 under the Tocantins Sustainable Regional Development Project. The paper highlights the context that led to the project’s design, which included an impact evaluation of the works envisaged under the project. The paper also highlights some of the main challenges faced by this impact evaluation and how these challenges were addressed for the present study. It then provides details about the data collected during the surveys and the key relevant characteristics of the population targeted by the surveys. It discusses the possible estimation methods envisioned to undertake the study and provides the main results of the assessment based on these methods. The analysis shows that improved rural roads changed people’s transport modal choice. People used more public buses and individual motorized vehicles after the rural road improvements. The paper also finds that the project increased school attendance, particularly for girls. Although the evidence is relatively weak in statistical terms, it indicates that the project contributed to increasing agricultural jobs and household income in certain regions.


  • 作者

    Iimi,Atsushi, Lancelot,Eric R., Manelici,Isabela, Ogita,Satoshi

  • 文件日期


  • 文件类型


  • 报告号


  • 卷号


  • Total Volume(s)


  • 国家


  • 地区


  • 发布日期


  • Disclosure Status


  • 文件名称

    Social and economic impacts of rural road improvements in the state of Tocantins, Brazil

  • 关键词

    rural road improvement;number of school children;rural road infrastructure;social and economic development;Visiting Friends and Relatives;appliance ownership;access to school;propensity score matching;rural accessibility;improved accessibility;access to health;Transport and ICT;demand for mobility;road improvement works;treatment group;baseline survey;rural dweller;household income;rainy season;frequency of travel;infant mortality rate;per capita expenditure;rural road construction;average exchange rate;gross domestic product;household income variable;Early childhood education;public bus service;vehicle ownership rate;public transport service;adult literacy rate;demand for transport;linear probability model;consumer price index;per capita income;average travel time;amount of debt;local business association;average household income;reduction in travel;human development index;route to school;access to grid;transport policy maker;mode of transportation;theory of change;level of motorization;impact of transport;analysis of poverty;impact evaluation methodology;rural population;standard error;personal travel;school attendance;estimation method;estimation result;road condition;summary statistic;baseline data;statistical significance;simple average;dry season;infrastructure access;tap water;local resident;household consumption;survey data;health condition;road accessibility;color tv;school bus;estimate impact;physical accessibility;elementary school;road section;statistical sense;school boy;school girl;causal chain;attending school;interaction effect;short-term impact;short term impact;living standard;gas stove;road investment;washing machine;development path;rural area;outcome indicator;explanatory variable;household size;instrumental variable;road sector;household characteristic;cottage industry;agricultural product;Job Creation;agricultural production;public consultation;rural community;Toll Road;purchasing food;public policy;indigenous people;Indigenous Peoples;home appliance;project's impact;survey respondent;regulatory decision;income increase;transport accessibility;vulnerable group;transport condition;cross-section data;panel data;open access;household interview;productive activity;welfare improvement;agricultural sector;health interventions;unanticipated event;agricultural labor;state modernization;government administration;social characteristic;agricultural market;research grant;secondary level;basic infrastructure;main road;counterpart fund;public good;evaluation framework;community survey;population distribution;urban population;public transportation mode;Public Goods;road development;total sample;test score;Population Density;socioeconomic impact;socioeconomic benefits;rural feeder;main transport;project execution;inclement weather;heavy rainfall;social policies;development policy;increasing impact;motorized vehicles;remote region;modal choice;agricultural jobs;population target;traffic road;social policy;rural transportation infrastructure;household benefit;transport mode;transport demand;living condition;subjective assessment;participatory approach;estimation technique;borrowing money;transport cost;rural inhabitant;positive impact;agricultural area;credit access;average debt;basic household;socioeconomic development;educational benefit;present study;health benefit;welfare measurement;long-term impact;social opportunities;poverty incidence;consumption increase;evaluation activity;modal change;empirical issue;increased demand;small municipality;Public Services;identification assumptions;road transport;standard deviation;population data;empirical model;municipal road;larger school;land distribution;average speed;household use;core infrastructure;household head;civil works;statistical technique;road length;independent variable;beneficiary household;culvert crossing;concrete bridge;regression equation;participatory planning;