Assessing the causal impact of Chinese aid on vegetative land cover in Burundi and Rwanda under conditions of spatial imprecision
Development Engineering, ISSN: 2352-7285, Vol: 4, Page: 100038
2019
- 15Citations
- 251Usage
- 31Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations15
- Citation Indexes12
- 12
- CrossRef1
- Policy Citations3
- Policy Citation3
- Usage251
- Downloads231
- Abstract Views20
- Captures31
- Readers31
- 31
Article Description
There has been considerable debate regarding the efficacy of international aid in meeting the dual goals of human development and environmental sustainability. Many donors have sought to engage with this challenge by introducing environmental safeguard and monitoring initiatives; however, evidence on the success of these interventions is limited. Evaluating aid is a particular challenge in the case of donors that do not disclose information on the nature, geographic location, or extents of their interventions. In such cases, new methods that extract and geoparse data on the activities of opaque donors through the manual interpretation of thousands of news and other articles allow us to investigate the impacts of these activities. However, residual spatial uncertainty in these data remains a potential source of bias. In this article, we apply and discuss a Geographic Simulation and Extrapolation (GeoSIMEX) approach to mitigate the spatial imprecision inherent in geoparsed data. In conjunction with GeoSIMEX, we test and contrast multiple approaches to reducing the imprecision of aid, including high-assumption cases in which other covariates (i.e., nighttime lights) are leveraged to allocate aid. In our application, we find that methods which do not account for spatial imprecision find statistically significant relationships between Chinese aid and vegetation change; after accounting for spatial uncertainty, findings are similar for Rwanda and inconclusive for Burundi.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352728517301173; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.deveng.2018.11.001; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85062685646&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2352728517301173; https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S2352728517301173?httpAccept=text/xml; https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S2352728517301173?httpAccept=text/plain; https://dul.usage.elsevier.com/doi/; https://scholarworks.wm.edu/aspubs/631; https://scholarworks.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1638&context=aspubs; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.deveng.2018.11.001
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know