Absence of Conflict of Interest.
Citation
Miller, C., & Tsoka, M. (2012). Cash transfers and children's education and labour among Malawi's poor. Development Policy Review, 30(4), 499-522. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7679.2012.00586.
Highlights
- The purpose of the study was to assess the effects of an unconditional cash transfer program, the Malawi Social Cash Transfer Scheme (SCTS), on child school participation and child labor.
- To assess the program’s effects, the authors used a randomized controlled trial in which villages were randomly assigned to the treatment group, which would receive the intervention, and the control group, which would not. Child labor was assessed using household surveys, and schooling outcomes were assessed using household surveys and school records. To understand the program’s impact on child school and work participation, the authors compared change in these outcomes over the first year of the program.
- The study found that children participating in the intervention had significantly greater decreases in school absences over one year, relative to the comparison group. In addition, over one year there was a significantly lower increase in the percent of both boys and girls who worked for income if they were in the intervention group rather than the comparison group.
- The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is moderate because, although it was based on a randomized controlled trial with high attrition, the treatment and control groups were similar before the intervention. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Malawi Social Cash Transfer Scheme, but other factors might also have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Malawi Social Cash Transfer Scheme
Features of the Intervention
The Malawi Social Cash Transfer Scheme (SCTS) is an unconditional cash transfer program that aims to increase school attendance and lower child labor among poor households in the district of Mchinji in Malawi. The program was implemented by the government of Malawi, but the study was conducted by Boston University and the University of Malawi. Participating households receive a monthly cash transfer that depends on the number of children and number of people in the household overall, although the transfer averaged $14 (USD) per month. While there were no conditions required to receive cash transfers, participants are encouraged to have their children attend school. The program includes households that are considered "labor constrained", which means that either there are no adults 19-64 who can work, or there are more than three dependents per each able adult. To be eligible to participate, households also should be considered "ultra-poor", which means that the households are in the lowest fifth of income or below the poverty line. However, in selecting households for the program, the district targeted the 10 percent poorest households that were also labor constrained.
Features of the Study
The Mchinji district selected eight villages for the study, and then the authors randomly assigned those villages to the treatment (n=4) and control group (n=4). Intervention households received the monthly cash transfers, and control households did not receive any benefits. The final outcomes analysis included 520 children in the control group, and 722 children in the intervention (treatment) group. The children were aged 6-18 when the baseline survey was completed. For children in the final sample, there were no significant differences at baseline in child age, child gender, or household head education level, although there were significant differences in one indicator of poverty, monthly food expenditures. The school attendance and child labor outcomes, and household demographics were assessed using a survey that authors administered to households as an in-person interview. The authors also verified attendance using school records. The analysis used a difference-in-differences method to compare child labor and attendance outcomes between the treatment and control groups. The analysis compared changes in these outcomes from when the intervention began to a year later. To account for baseline group differences, the analysis controlled for household size and monthly household food expenditures.
Findings
Employment/Child labor
- Over the year of the intervention, there was a significantly lower percent of boys that participated in paid work in the treatment group (+10 percentage points) versus the control group (+21 percentage points). There was also a significantly lower percent of girls that participated in paid work in the treatment group (+5 percentage points) versus the control group (+14 percentage points) over this time period.
Education (School participation/enrollment)
- Over the year of the intervention, the average decrease in number of days absent per month was significantly larger for the treatment group (-1.8 days) than for the control group (-.9 days), indicating that the intervention had a significant, positive effect on school attendance.
- While the average increase in the percent enrolled in school (+5 percentage points) was greater for the treatment group than for the control group (0 percentage points) over the intervention year, this effect was not statistically significant.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors identified a problem of "ghost" household members - those reported who did not exist to get more money in the monthly transfer. Although the authors stated they removed ghost members from the sample, analyses used data head of household survey responses and the ghost household members may be included.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is moderate because, although it was based on a randomized controlled trial with high attrition, the authors demonstrated that the treatment and control groups were similar before the intervention. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Malawi Social Cash Transfer Scheme, but other factors might also have contributed.