Embedded Files
1. Ackerman, Frank (2004). Priceless Benefits, Costly Mistakes: What’s Wrong With Cost-Benefit Analysis? , post-autistic economics review, issue no. 25, 18 May 2004, pp. 2-7, www.btinternet.com/~pae_news/review/issue25.htm.
2. Adler, Matthew D. Posner, Eric A. (2007). Happiness Research and Cost-Benefit Analysis. Institute for Law & Economics University of Pennsylvania Law School Research Paper No. 07-15, University of Chicago Olin Law and Economics Program Research Paper No. 345
3. Betty Jane Richmond, Laurie Mook, Jack Quarter (2003).Social Accounting for Nonprofits Two Models, Nonprofit Management & Leadership, vol. 13, no. 4, Summer 2003
4. Brown, L. David and Mark Moore (2001). Accountability, Strategy, and International Nongovernmental Organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 30(3): 569- 87
5. Coelli T.J. A Guide to DEAP Version 2.1: A Data Envelopment Analysis (Computer) Program. Centre for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis (CEPA) University of New England Working Papers
6. Dercon, Stefan (2001). Assessing Vulnerability to Poverty. Paper prepared for the DFID, www.econ.ox.ac.uk/members/stefan.dercon/assessing%20vulnerability.pdf
7. Ebrahim, A. (2003a). Accountability in Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs. World Development No. 31, Vol. 5. p. 813-829.
8. Ebrahim, Alnoor (2003b).Making Sense of Accountability: Conceptual Perspectives for Northern and Southern Nonprofits. Nonprofit Management and Leadership 14(2): 191- 212.
9. Forsund, Finn R. & Sarafoglou, Nikias . On the Origins of Data Envelopment Analysis. Mamorandom No 24/2000, Department of Economics, University of Oslo. ISSN: 0801-1117
10. Frank, Robert H. (2000). Why is Cost-Benefit Analysis so Controversial?. The Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 29, No. 2, Cost-Benefit Analysis: Legal, Economic, and Philosophical Perspectives (Jun., 2000), pp. 913-930.
11. Haq, Mahbub-ul- (1995). The Birth of Human Development Index. In: Reflections on Human Development Index. Oxford University Press.
12. Johnson, C. (2001). Towards Accountability: Narrowing the Gap Between NGO Priorities and Local Realities in Thailand. Working Paper 149. London, Overseas Development Institute
13. Jordan, L., (2005). Mechanisms for NGO Accountability., GPPi Research Paper Series No. 3, Global Public Policy Institute, Berlin, Germany.
14. Prahbu,Seeta.‘UNDP Learning Resource Center’ cited in “An Introduction to Human Development and Capability Approach” edited by Severine Deneulin & Lila Shahani
15. Sen., Amartya 1985. Commodities and Capabilities.
16. ----, 1992. Inequality Reexamined. New York: Oxford UP.
17. ----, 1999. Development as Freedom. New York: Oxford UP.
18. Stiglitz, Joseph, Evaluation as an incentive. p 287-290 in “Evaluation and Development, The Institutional Dimension”.
19. UNDP (1990): Human Development Report, “Defining and Measuring Human Development”.
20. World Bank (2000): World Development Report 2000/2001: “Attacking Poverty.”
21. World Bank, (2007), Understanding Poverty.
22. World Bank, Impact Evaluation- the Experience of the Independent Evaluation group Of the World Bank, Report prepared by Howard White (IEGSG)
Proposal Title:
Social Accounting and Data Envelopment Analysis as (NGOs) Efficiency Evaluation Methods: A Comparative Study
Supervisors:
Dr Asad Zaman
Brief Summary of Significance of Research:
Conventionally the desirability and efficiency of development projects or resource allocations are determined in terms of monetary benefits they accrue relative to monetary costs incurred instead of their impact on human life in general. I will try to workout a project evaluation methodology from 'human welfare perspective' with special reference to welfare oriented NGOs, drawing on the method of "Social Accounting" and the concepts of "Amartya Sen Capability Approach to development".
References:
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse