62 CHAPTER 4
Whether such results would be found in African contexts is unknown. There are some reasons to believe that they would not, or would not be as strong, with some evidence from Malawi (discussed later). However, the mag- nitude of the impacts found in Asia and Latin America and the importance of strengthening human capital make the issue worth exploring carefully. Research comparing UCTs with CCTs was planned in Kenya, Uganda, and Zam- bia (Kenya, OVPMHA 2006; Uganda, MGLSD 2007), though it did not end up achieving this as anticipated.1 A study by Baird, McIntosh, and Özler (2010) in Malawi used an experimental design to isolate the impact of conditionality, comparing a CCT with a UCT for adolescent girls (discussed earlier in relation to the HIV risk reduction objective). The study randomly assigned communi- ties to treatment or control status, and then the treatment group was further randomly divided into three groups: adolescent girls receiving a conditional transfer, girls receiving an unconditional transfer, and girls receiving no trans- fer. The conditionality was school attendance on 80 percent of the number of days school was in session for the previous month. The authors found that the UCT had a strong effect on schooling rates and that conditionality had limited added impact. The impact on school attendance, defined as attending school regularly at least one term, was identical (4 percent) for the CCT and the UCT. Looking at attendance defined as regular attendance during all three terms, the CCT had a higher impact than the UCT (6.6 percent versus 4.7 percent, respectively); however, the difference is not statistically significant. One possible explanation for this is that some beneficiaries with different treatment statuses came into contact (for example, in school and at monthly cash transfer meeting) with one another. Although the study found little evi- dence of spillover effects, the unconditional arm of the intervention could be considered a “light social marketing/information campaign that ‘promotes’ schooling” (Baird, McIntosh, and Ozler, 2010, 36). The study also randomly assigned a transfer size (from US$5 to $15 per
month) to estimate the elasticity of schooling outcomes with respect to trans- fer size and found that the effect on school enrollment is very small and does not vary by treatment status and that increasing the total transfer size is not more effective when the transfer is conditional.2 Therefore, the authors con- clude that small UCTs can have approximately the same impact as larger CCTs
1Zambia had planned to test a “hard” conditionality and a “soft” conditionality, one not enforced, but due to administrative costs it planned instead to apply only a soft conditionality of school attendance and issue an under-five health card (Zambia, MCDSS/TWG 2007b). There is some ques- tion as to the extent to which hard conditions, where adopted, will be applied in other country
programs, a point to look out for in assessing results. 2All dollar amounts in the monograph are U.S. dollars.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224 |
Page 225 |
Page 226 |
Page 227 |
Page 228 |
Page 229 |
Page 230 |
Page 231 |
Page 232 |
Page 233 |
Page 234 |
Page 235 |
Page 236 |
Page 237