close× Call Us
Title Monitoring and Managing Forest Resources in Liberia
Post date 12/21/2017
C1 Background and Explanation of Rationale

This experiment is part of the EGAP metaketa on natural resource governance, examining the effects of community monitoring as a tool to promote efficient and sustainable natural resource use. In our case, we examine the effects of monitoring on the use of community forests in rural Liberia.

C2 What are the hypotheses to be tested?

As noted in the pre-analysis plan, our hypotheses concern the effects of community monitoring (CM) and are as follows:
(H1) CM reduces logging by families within the communities (see the pre-analysis plan for more on "families" in this context).
(H2) CM reduces monitoring costs.
(H3) CM increases citizens’ expected value from outside deals and revenue sharing. We can also use the model to determine how these changes affect welfare:
(H4) CM increases families welfare.
(H5) CM increases the chief’s welfare.
(H6) The negative effect of CM on logging by families is amplified by factors that increase the expected value from outside deals.
Note as well that the results of this study will be used to test hypotheses posed in the metaketa meta-pre-analysis plan, which is being filed separately.

C3 How will these hypotheses be tested? *

We will test these hypotheses with two-sided significance tests on treatment effect estimates from regressions that adjust for randomization stratum (in our case district) fixed effects, and that weight by the inverse of treatment assignment. The weighting accounts for the fact that we use a restricted randomization that imposes a covariate balance constraint on the treatment assignment. The covariates that we balanced in this restricted randomization include population density, nightlight emissions, elevation, average annual precipitation, average temperature, previous forest loss, distance from Monrovia, and distance from a primary road.

C4 Country Liberia
C5 Scale (# of Units) 120
C6 Was a power analysis conducted prior to data collection? Yes
C7 Has this research received Insitutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee approval? Yes
C8 IRB Number NYU UCAIHS #IRB­FY2017­912
C9 Date of IRB Approval 9/1/2017
C10 Will the intervention be implemented by the researcher or a third party? Parley Liberia
C11 Did any of the research team receive remuneration from the implementing agency for taking part in this research? No
C12 If relevant, is there an advance agreement with the implementation group that all results can be published? Yes
C13 JEL Classification(s) Q23, Q57, P48