Leveling The Intra-Household Playing Field: Compensation And Specialization In Child Labor Allocation

Macours, Karen; Carpio, Ximena Del

doi:10.1596/1813-9450-4822

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A shift from wage employment to entrepreneurial activities occurred in Mexico (Gertler et al, 2006). Child labor declined in Mexico, Nicaragua, and the Philippines as the CCT allowed children to stay in school rather than work in farms (Del Carpio & Macours, 2009; DSWD, 2014; Skoufias & Parker, 2001). 3…”

Section: Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do the intended and unintended beneficiaries respond to the Philippines' conditional cash transfer program?

Quimbo

Kraft

Molato‐Gayares³

et al. 2021

Review Development Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We distinguish the effects of the Philippines’ conditional cash transfers (CCT) between the intended (poor) and unintended (nonpoor) beneficiaries. We use a proxy means test similar to what was officially used and apply it on a nationally representative sample of households to identify some poor households who are excluded and nonpoor households included in the program on account of inherent leakages in program implementation. To evaluate the CCT’s impact, we matched the poor beneficiaries with poor households excluded from the program and nonpoor beneficiaries with nonpoor households outside CCT. For the poor households, we find a reduction in wages of working children who presumably now spend more time in school in compliance with the program's conditionalities, indicating less child labor. For nonpoor households, we find some indication that program participation led to moral hazard as evidenced by lower income from salaries and wages. Since the reduction in income is greater than the increase in transfers received by nonpoor households, their savings declined.

show abstract

Section: Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do the intended and unintended beneficiaries respond to the Philippines' conditional cash transfer program?

Quimbo

Kraft

Molato‐Gayares³

et al. 2021

Review Development Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most of the out-of-school children identified as eligible to receive EpC were 5-7 years old and had never been to school, indicating that EpC was not successful at recruiting older out-of-school children who had either dropped out or had never enrolled. Prior research in Nicaragua indicates that labor competes with children's participation in school (e.g., Del Carpio & Macours, 2009). When the EpC model was first tested in Nicaragua, one of the recommendations was to add components such as income generation and technical training for families of working children to compensate for income lost when children leave work to return to school (Macro International Inc. 2009).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Espacio para Crecer ("Room to Grow") After-School Program for At-Risk Youth

Glazerman,

Bagby,

Murray

2015

AEA Randomized Controlled Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report presents findings from the impact evaluation of Espacios para Crecer (EpC), an afterschool program that involved training and support of educators in the EpC methodology and the delivery of appropriate support materials. EpC facilitators were trained on methods, techniques and activities to facilitate learning and create a positive social environment, to support social development and academic leveling, and to assess and provide differentiated responses to meet children's individual needs. EpC are an important component of a larger project implemented in the Caribbean coast of Nicaragua called Community Action for Reading and Security (CARS).A two-arm randomized control trial was used to examine impact of the EpC intervention on children's reading skills. In the treatment group, children were exposed to the EpC intervention; and in the control group, children were not exposed to EpC afterschool activities. Treatment and control group participants could have been exposed to other activities offered by CARS, such as education program for parents and community engagement activities aiming to spur community discussions around education. A distinguishing feature of this evaluation is that we randomly assigned-children or communities-to the treatment or control group depending on the size of the community. In larger communities (with more eligible children), we randomly assigned children. In communities with fewer children, it was not possible to form two separate groups, so the communities were the unit of random assignment, with all children in the community assigned together to the treatment or control group. The evaluation followed two cohorts of students for approximately one and a half years of exposure to the EpC program. We collected base-year data to measure children's literacy skills, but could do so only in one of the cohorts and, in some cases, after exposure to the intervention had already begun. We collected follow-up data for each cohort (in 2016 for Cohort 1 and in 2017 for Cohort 2).Evaluation findings show that that the experimental design worked well in small communities, but not as well in the larger ones, due to lower take-up of and compliance with the program. Findings show that in these small communities, EpC had positive impacts on children's reading outcomes, but not on school attachment or social-emotional outcomes. Impacts were statistically significant for girls and for children who were out of school at intake, but not for boys and children who were already enrolled in school. Cost-effectiveness estimates for the EpC intervention ranged from $45, at steady state, to $358, including startup costs, per 0.1 standard deviations in literacy score improvement. This page has been left blank for double-sided copying.

show abstract

“…Our paper contributes to a large literature on the role of cash transfers in alleviating poverty. There is strong evidence that a regular flow of cash transfers can cushion the negative income effects of shocks and thus limit the use of costly coping mechanisms, albeit partially (Janvry et al, 2006;Del Carpio and Macours, 2010;Hou, 2010;Macours et al, 2012;Aker et al, 2016;N. D. Jensen et al, 2017;Asfaw et al, 2017;Knippenberg and Hoddinott, 2017;Adhvaryu et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the months following the cyclone, both papers found that households that received the cash transfers recovered more quickly than those who did not, using a regression discontinuity design (Mansur et al, 2017;Ivaschenko et al, 2020). In the aftermath of a slow-onset climate shock (a drought), Del Carpio and Macours (2010) and Macours et al (2012) use a cluster randomised control trial to show that a bi-monthly conditional cash transfer implemented by the Nicaraguan government had positive persistent impacts on child health, development, and labour. In a different domain, a randomised control trial implemented in Sri Lanka several months after the 2004 tsunami found that a one-off cash grant to firms facilitated business recovery and investment (De Mel et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anticipatory cash transfers in climate disaster response

Pople¹

2020

AEA Randomized Controlled Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the face of increasing climate volatility and stretched aid budgets, more effective ways to support households in times of crisis are needed. This paper examines the welfare impact of an anticipatory cash transfer provided to households forecasted to experience extreme floods in Bangladesh. Evidence on the impact of a one-off transfer in a disaster are limited, despite the widespread use of such transfers in crises, reflecting more broadly a dearth of evaluations in the humanitarian sector. To assess impact, we exploit administrative constraints experienced during the programme roll-out caused by the quick onset of the flood and restrictions on movement as a result of Covid-19, to compare treated households with otherwise comparable households which did not receive the cash transfer. We find that the anticipatory cash transfer was mostly spent on food and water, and that treated households were 36% less likely to go a day without eating during the flood. Three months after the flood, households that had received the transfer reported significantly higher child and adult food consumption and wellbeing. They also experienced lower asset loss, engaged in less costly borrowing after the flood, and reported higher earning potential. Our results are robust to alternate control group definitions and model specifications. These benefits from the anticipatory cash transfer occurred before a traditional humanitarian response would normally arrive, highlighting the benefits of being early. We find that small changes in timing matter: receiving the cash a day earlier resulted in a small and marginally significant increase in welfare.

show abstract

Leveling The Intra-Household Playing Field: Compensation And Specialization In Child Labor Allocation

Cited by 6 publications

References 6 publications

How do the intended and unintended beneficiaries respond to the Philippines' conditional cash transfer program?

How do the intended and unintended beneficiaries respond to the Philippines' conditional cash transfer program?

Evaluation of Espacio para Crecer ("Room to Grow") After-School Program for At-Risk Youth

Anticipatory cash transfers in climate disaster response

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About