Agricultural Spillover Effects of Cash Transfers: What Does LEWIE Have to Say?

Thome, Karen; Filipski, Mateusz; Kagin, Justin; Taylor, J. Edward; Davis, Benjamin

doi:10.1093/ajae/aat039

Cited by 28 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast to the funding argument, it has been found that the emergence of a significant number of social transfer programmes in developing countries has been facilitated by revenues from natural resources which buffer the pressure on taxes ). Similar evidence on these effects is obtained by simulations provided by Thome et al (2013) on Kenya's cash transfer for Orphan and Vulnerable Children (CT-OVC). Employing a LEWIE approach, they find that local production increases by 1.14 shillings for each shilling transferred to beneficiary households.…”

supporting

confidence: 72%

Social transfers and growth: The missing evidence from luminosity data

Villa¹

2014

WIDER Working Paper

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of social transfers on growth are still unclear. The limitations of aggregated data at sub-national levels have confined the analysis to the use of simulation models and household surveys. As an alternative, this paper contributes to the empirical literature by assessing the effects of Colombia's Familias en Accion, a human development cash transfer programme, on municipality level growth rates during its initial stage of implementation between 2000 and 2004. The natural experiment that resulted from the scaling-up of the intervention facilitated the set-up of a difference-in-differences analysis. The lack of sub-national GDP accounts is tackled by using luminosity data generated by satellites orbiting the earth, which have demonstrated to be a suitable proxy for economic growth and per capita growth. The results show that the programme can generate large positive effects on municipality level economic growth rates. Robustness checks confirm the reliability of these findings.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 72%

Social transfers and growth: The missing evidence from luminosity data

Villa¹

2014

WIDER Working Paper

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All of these assumptions are relaxed in the actual LEWIE model. We use a model with similar features to the one used in Thome et al (). The household behavioral equations include household group‐specific production and consumption functions.…”

Section: The Lewie Model and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of treatment beyond the treated: a general equilibrium impact evaluation of Lesotho's cash grants program

Filipski

Taylor

Thome

et al. 2015

Agricultural Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Africa's social cash transfer programs target the most resource-constrained households, unlikely to expand supply in response to transfer-induced demand. We propose a local economy-wide impact evaluation model and use it to evaluate local spillovers from Lesotho's Child Grants Program. We report Monte-Carlo confidence bounds around impact-simulation results. We find significant spillovers to nonrecipient households and significant real income multipliers, although the latter are dampened if factor supply constraints generate excessive inflationary pressures. Our findings raise questions about how to measure the impacts of cash transfers. Evaluations focusing only on eligible households are likely to significantly understate program impacts. JEL classifications: C6, D1, D5, D4, O1

show abstract

“…The positive effects of social protection programmes are not a given. In Kenya, a recent model-based impact assessment showed that rural households receiving a cash transfer were benefiting from the increased income; the target population were households living in the greatest poverty 10 . But the recipients were not necessarily able to take advantage of the increased demand for goods and services that resulted from the rise in income within the community associated with the social protection programme because they lacked the necessary assets and labour hours to expand their activities.…”

Section: Social Protection To Combat Hungermentioning

confidence: 99%