Raghunathan, Kalyani

Kosec, Katrina

Karachiwalla, Naureen

Narayanan, Sudha

Kyle, Jordan

In 2005, India passed the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA, “the Act”), a law guaranteeing all rural households 100 days of work at a minimum wage through the building of durable assets, which created one of the largest anti-poverty programs in the world. Now known as the Mahatma Gandhi NREGA (MGNREGA), a notable feature of the program is that it envisions a democratic, bottom-up process of choosing which durable assets would be built within a community. Toward this end, the Act gives citizens the right to participate in the process of identifying potential projects and delegates responsibility to village governments in selecting which assets to build. Yet, in the long history of public works programs, there has been limited research on how assets created under such workfare programs are selected, or how to increase the role of women or other marginalized groups in the decision-making process. The Act provides a list of permissible works that span natural resource management, individual and community assets, common infrastructure for women’s groups, and rural infrastructure more broadly. Given the scale of the program, the assets selected at the village level have tremendous potential to enhance rural resilience to unexpected shocks and crises, especially those related to climate change. This is important, as extreme weather events on the Indian subcontinent are increasing, both in frequency and in the magnitude of their impacts on agricultural productivity, household livelihoods, assets and incomes, and health and nutrition. These events, as well as their impacts on incomes, often affect women more severely (Mason and Agan 2015; Kosec et al. forthcoming). Understanding how to enhance women’s voice and agency within the process of selecting community assets is important for three major reasons. First, women and men may have different asset preferences (Chattopadhyay and Duflo 2004). Recent time-use survey data from India find that women spend far more time on unpaid domestic and care work than men (eight times as much) (India, NSO 2019). Thus, women may place relatively more value on projects that reduce effort in collecting fuel and water, for example. If their voices are not included in the asset selection process, the village could miss out on a range of development projects that would improve overall productivity, resilience, and well-being. Second, where projects are built affects who benefits from them. Households that had MGNREGA assets built on their own land or that live near an asset cultivate more land, use more inputs (including their own labor), and have higher agricultural output (Gehrke 2015; Muralidharan et al. 2021). Ensuring that women influence asset placement is thus critical. Third, greater participation and inclusivity in the process of selecting community development projects can increase the perceived legitimacy and satisfaction with projects, as well as willingness to contribute toward their construction and maintenance (Olken 2010). Within MGNREGA, households that report playing a greater role in project selection also report greater satisfaction with the usefulness, quality, and maintenance of the projects (Ranaware et al. 2015).

Women's voice and agency in choosing assets: A new study on MGNREGA in India

Kassim, Yumna

Gilligan, Daniel

El-Enbaby, Hoda

Kurdi, Sikandra

Women’s control over decision-making within their family, particularly regarding the use of household income, can play an important and long-lasting role in shaping their well-being and that of their children. Cash transfer programs often target women in order to increase their control over household resources. Empirical evidence on the effectiveness of this approach is mixed and suggests the importance of local context. We present evidence on the effect of cash transfers on women’s control over decision-making in the MENA region, where little evidence is available and where cultural norms around women’s roles differ from more-studied regions. Using a regression discontinuity approach, we identify the impact of Egypt’s “Takaful” national cash transfer program on women’s control over decision-making and labor supply. Receiving cash transfers mostly reduced women’s reported ability to influence household decisions, particularly regarding child healthcare. The loss of control over decision-making was greater for women with less than primary education. Other effects of the program include a decline in women’s employment and an increase in men’s involvement in spheres of decision-making usually controlled by women. These results are robust to changes in model specification. We present suggestive evidence from mediation analysis that the negative effects on women’s control over decision-making was directly related to these declines in employment and increase in men’s involvement in female spheres. The negative findings are not wholly supported by complementary qualitative work in which women reported more positive perceptions of the program’s impacts.

Cash transfers and women’s control over decision-making and labor supply in Egypt

Breisinger, Clemens

ElDidi, Hagar

Gillian, Daniel

El Enbaby, Hoda

Jilani, Amir

Thai, Giang

Goessinger, Karim-Yassin

Moataz, Yasmine

Petesch, Patti

Since March 2015, the Government of Egypt has been providing cash to poor households through the Takaful and Karama program. The program is run by the Ministry of Social Solidarity (MoSS). Takaful supports poor families with children under 18 years of age, while Karama supports the poor elderly and disabled. For Takaful, the amount of cash that households receive depends on the number of children and their school level, while the Karama transfer is a set rate per individual. In 2018, Takaful will also begin requiring households in the program to make sure their children attend school and participate in health screenings. The program was evaluated by IFPRI, an international research organization, using both quantitative statistical methods (simple questions asked to many households during a survey) and qualitative methods (more in-depth questions asked to fewer households in longer interviews). The main goal of this evaluation was to measure and explain how the transfers affected the welfare of households in the program. In addition, the evaluation describes how well the program selection criteria work for identifying poor households.

Impact evaluation study for Egypt's Takaful and Karama cash transfer program: Synthesis report- Summary of key findings form the quantitative and qualitative impact evaluation studies

Jilani, Amir Hamza

Egypt has been providing cash to poor households through its first conditional cash transfer program, Takaful and Karama, a social protection program run by the Ministry of Social Solidarity (MoSS), since March 2015. Takaful (“Solidarity”) supports poor families with children under 18, while Karama (“Dignity”) supports the elderly poor and people living with disabilities. The cash transfer program has enrolled 2.25 million families across all of Egypt’s governorates. The amount of the Takaful cash transfer provided to households depends on the number of children and their school level. The Karama program provides a set amount per individual. In order to reach the poorest households, participants are selected using a proxy means test. In the Takaful program, 89 percent of recipients are women, while only 11 percent are men. Beginning in 2018, Takaful will also begin implementing conditionalities, requiring households in the program to ensure their children attend school and participate in health screenings, added to antenatal care for pregnant women and post-natal care. The Takaful and Karama program was evaluated by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) using both quantitative statistical methods (simple questions asked to many households during a survey) and qualitative methods (more in-depth questions asked to fewer households in longer interviews). The evaluation was designed to measure and explain the impacts of the cash transfers on household welfare, and to examine whether the program’s criteria for household selection were effective in identifying poor households. This brief, which focuses on the Takaful component of the program, summarizes the main findings from the evaluation and key recommendations.

Egypt’s Takaful and Karama cash transfer program: Evaluation of program impacts and recommendations

This report of the evaluation study provides a greater focus on measuring the impact of the larger Takaful program and also attempts to measure the impact of the much smaller Karama program. In addition, IFPRI will conduct a qualitative assessment of the Takaful and Karama program focused on learning about the experience with the program among the poorest beneficiary households. This qualitative assessment will also draw lessons from the quantitative survey to provide another report on the experience of very poor households. The remainder of this report is organized as follows Chapter 2 provides an overview of the Takaful and Karama Program. Chapter 3 summarizes the impact evaluation design. Chapter 4 describes the evaluation survey and sample. Chapter 5 provides context for the program by using the survey data to summarize the characteristics of beneficiary and non-beneficiary households and describe beneficiaries’ experience with program implementation. Chapter 6 presents the impact estimates for Takaful and Chapter 7 the estimates for Karama. Chapter 8 uses data from a separate representative sample of households collected during the survey to assess the targeting performance of the program. Chapter 9 concludes and discusses implications for social policy in Egypt.

Impact evaluation study for Egypt's Takaful and Karama cash transfer program: Part 1: Quantitative report

Roy, Shalini

Hidrobo, Melissa

Huybregts, Lieven

Despite falling rates of poverty and child undernutrition in Africa over the last two decades, the absolute number of people living in poverty and the absolute number of undernourished children continue to rise due to population growth (Beegle et al., 2018; Black et al., 2013). Global evidence suggests that cash transfer programs can reduce poverty and food insecurity and can build resilience for the poor. When cash transfer programs are com-bined with nutrition interventions, they also have the potential to accelerate improvements in child nutrition, especially when targeted to the critical window of opportunity for nutrition, the first one thousand days of a child’s life (Ruel et al., 2013). In West Africa, many cash transfer programs are combined with accompanying measures such as promotion sessions that aim to improve knowledge and increase adoption of recommended behaviors—including those related to child nutrition (Beegle et al., 2018, see Box 1). However, the extent to which such multi-component programs lead to changes in behavior and improve-ments in outcomes related to children’s nutrition and health is still not well-understood.

Multi-component cash transfer programs: Evidence from Mali’s social safety net program (Jigisémèjiri)

Karachiwalla, Naureen

Books

Your next favorite book is out there