Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Aug 1;50(8):1172-1196.
doi: 10.1080/00220388.2014.919383.

Cash transfer programme, productive activities and labour supply: Evidence from randomized experiment in Kenya

Solomon Asfaw  1 , Benjamin Davis  1 , Josh Dewbre  1 , Sudhanshu Handa  2 , Paul Winters  3
Affiliations

Cash transfer programme, productive activities and labour supply: Evidence from randomized experiment in Kenya

Solomon Asfaw et al. J Dev Stud. .

Abstract

This paper reports analysis of the impact of Kenya's Cash Transfer for Orphans and Vulnerable Children Programme on the household decisions on productive activities using data from a randomized experimental design. Results show that the programme had a positive and significant impact on food consumption coming from home production, accumulation of productive assets, especially on the ownership of small livestock and on formation of nonfarm enterprise, especially for females. The programme has provided more flexibility to families in terms of labour allocation decisions, particularly for those who are geographically isolated. The programme was also found to have reduced child labour, an important objective of the programme. However we find very little impact of the programme on direct indicators of crop production.

Keywords: Kenya; cash transfers; difference in difference; impact evaluation; productive impact; propensity score.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Map of the evaluation sites
Figure 2
Figure 2
Kernel density of the propensity score for the treated and control groups, household level weighting
Figure 3
Figure 3
Kernel density of the propensity score for the treated and control groups, individual level weighting
Figure 4
Figure 4
Impact of the programme on labour supply (participation) by age and sex of adult individuals, 2011.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Alzúa ML, Cruces G, Ripani L. Welfare Programs and Labor Supply in Developing Countries: Experimental Evidence from Latin America. Centro de Estudios Distributivos, Laborales y Sociales, Universidad Nacional de La Plata; 2010. Documento de Trabajo No. 95.
    1. Ardington C, Case A, Hosegood V. Labor Supply Responses to Large Social Transfers: Longitudinal Evidence from South Africa. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. 2009;1(1):22–48. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barrientos A, DeJong J. Child Poverty and Cash Transfers. Report 4. Childhood Poverty Research and Policy Centre; London: 2004.
    1. Becker G. A Theory of the Allocation of Time. The Economic Journal. 1965;299(75):493–517.
    1. Berhane G, Hoddinott J, Kumar N, Taffesse AS. The impact of Ethiopia’s productive safety nets and household asset building programme: 2006-2010. IFPRI; Washington DC., USA: 2011.

LinkOut - more resources