Reassessing Conditional Cash Transfer Programs

By Jishnu Das, Quy-Toan Do, Berk Özler. 2005

245 citations recorded by the source corpus.

During the past decade, the use of conditional cash transfer programs to increase investment in human capital has generated considerable excitement in both research and policy forums. This article surveys the existing literature, which suggests that most conditional cash transfer programs are used for essentially one of two purposes: restoring efficiency when externalities exist or improving equity by targeting resources to poor households. The programs often meet their stated objectives, but in some instances there is tension between the efficiency and equity objectives. The overall impact of a program depends on the gains and losses associated with each objective.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Nutrition and Dietetics, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1574c66fe14fb9a048cb2f0521e4b29df89ebc55

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Nutrition and Dietetics

In Safety Research

Citations in the corpus

Conditional Cash Transfers: Reducing Present and Future Poverty (2009, unknown): “Вставка 3.3 предлагает углубленный анализ того, в какой степени в бразилии и Эквадоре косвенные оценки нуждаемости и демографические характеристики домохозяйств приводят к ошибкам исключения. третий фактор связан с требованиями к предоставлению услуг (Nichols and Zeckhauser 1982; Das, Do, and Őzler…”
Introduction: Cash Transfers: Panacea for Poverty Reduction or Money Down the Drain? (2006, background): “10. Das et al. (2005) consider the issue of conditionalities in anti-poverty programmes, as do Davis et al. (2002) for conditionalities in two programmes in Mexico; and Rubalcava et al. (2002) examine consumption effects of making mothers the recipients of the Progresa transfer.”
School Feeding Programs and Development : Are We Framing the Question Correctly? (2012, unknown): “That is, FFE may address both equity and economic efficiency (Das, Do, and Özler 2005).”
Cash transfers, conditions, school enrollment, and child work: evidence from a randomized experiment in Ecuador (2006, background): “…programs is PROGRESA in Mexico (now re-named Oportunidades), although similar programs have also been implemented in a number of other Latin American countries, including Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Honduras, and Nicaragua (see Rawlings and Rubio 2005, and Das, Do, and Ozler 2005 for reviews).”
Reducing Child Poverty with Cash Transfers: A Sure Thing? (2006, background): “Das et al. (2005) consider the issue of conditionalities in anti-poverty programmes, as do Davis et al. (2002) for conditionalities in two programmes in Mexico; and Rubalcava et al. (2002) examine consumption effects of making mothers the recipients of the Progresa transfer.”
The Impact of Economic Resource Transfers to Women Versus Men (2012, background): “…impact of economic resource transfers to women versus men: a systematic review 28 Also included in this category are a number of excellent reviews (non-systematic) of the impact of transfer programmes (for example, Das et al., 2005; Westover, 2008; Banerjee et al., 2009; Fiszbein et al., 2009).”
Child Schooling and Child Work in the Presence of a Partial Education Subsidy (2017, background): “For instance, Das, Do, and Özler (2005) and Fiszbein and Schady (2009) provide comprehensive overviews of the theoretical underpinnings of CCT design.”