LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Orazio Attanasio; Emla Fitzsimons; Ana Gómez; Diana Lopez; Costas Meghir; Alice Mesnard (2006)
Publisher: Institute for Fiscal Studies
Types: Research
Subjects: L1, JEL classification: I28, I38, J22, O15, HV, child labour; conditional cash transfers; education
jel: jel:O15, jel:J22, jel:I28, jel:I38
Identifiers:doi:10.1086/648188
This research is part of a large evaluation effort, undertaken by a consortium formed by IFS, Econometria and SEI, which has considered the effects of Familias en Accion on a variety of outcomes one year after its implementation. In early reports, we focussed on the effects of the programme on school enrolment. In this paper, we both expand those results, by carefully analysing anticipation effects along with other issues, and complement them with an analysis of child labour - both paid and unpaid (including domestic) work. The child labour analysis is made possible due to a rich time use module of the surveys that has not previously been analysed. We find that the programme increased the school participation rates of 14 to 17 year old children quite substantially, by between 5 and 7 percentage points, and had lower, but non-negligible effects on the enrolment of younger children of between 1.4 and 2.4 percentage points. In terms of work, the effects are generally largest for younger children whose participation in domestic work decreased by around 10 to 12 percentage points after the programme but whose participation in income-generating work remained largely unaffected by the programme. We also find evidence of school and work time not being fully substitutable, suggesting that some, but not all, of the increased time at school may be drawn from children's leisure time.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Ahmed, Akhter, and Carlos del Ninno. 2002. “The Food for Education Program in Bangladesh: An Evaluation of Its Impact on Educational Attainment and Food Security.” Discussion Paper no. 138, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC.
    • Attanasio, Orazio, Erich Battistin, Emla Fitzsimons, Costas Meghir, Alice Mesnard, and Marcos Vera-Hernandez. 2006. “Evaluacio´ n del impacto del programa Familias en Accio´ n-subsidos condicionados de la red de apoyo social: Informe del primer seguimento” [Evaluation of the impacts of the program Familias en Accio´ nconditional cash transfer of the Social Support Network: Report on the first followup]. Published report (March), Econometria/SEI, Bogota.
    • Attanasio, Orazio, Emla Fitzsimons, and Ana Gomez. 2005. “The Impact of a Conditional Education Subsidy on School Enrolment in Rural Colombia.” Institute for Fiscal Studies Report Summary, London.
    • Das, Jishnu, Quy Toan Do, and Berk Ozler. 2005. “Reassessing Conditional Cash Transfer Programs.” World Bank Observer 20, no. 1:57-80.
    • Grootaert, Christian, and Ravi Kanbur. 1995. “Child Labour: An Economic Perspective.” International Labour Review 135, no. 2:187-203.
    • Handa, Sudhanshu, and Benjamin Davis. 2006. “The Experience of Conditional Cash Transfers in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Development Policy Review 24, no. 5:513-36.
    • Jensen, Peter, and Helena Nielsen. 1997. “Child Labour or School Attendance? Evidence from Zambia.” Journal of Population Economics 10, no. 4:407-24.
    • Patrinos, Harry, and George Psacharopoulos. 1997. “Family Size, Schooling and Labour in Peru: An Empirical Analysis.” Journal of Population Economics 10, no. 4: 387-405.
    • Ravallion, Martin, and Quentin Wodon. 2000. “Does Child Labor Displace Schooling? Evidence on Behavioral Responses to an Enrolment Subsidy.” Economic Journal 110, no. 462:158-75.
    • Rawlings, Laura, and Gloria Rubio. 2005. “Evaluating the Impact of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs.” World Bank Research Observer 20, no. 1:29-55.
    • Ray, Ranjan. 2000. “Child Labor, Child Schooling, and Their Interaction with Adult Labor: Empirical Evidence for Peru and Pakistan.” World Bank Economic Review 14, no. 2:347-67.
    • Rubio-Codina, Marta. 2002. “The Impact of PROGRESA on Household Time Allocation.” Masters' diss., University of Toulouse I, France.
    • Schultz, Paul. 2004. “School Subsidies for the Poor: Evaluating the Mexican Progresa Poverty Program.” Journal of Development Economics 74, no. 1:199-250.
    • Skoufias, Emmanuel, and Susan Parker. 2001. “Conditional Cash Transfers and Their Impact on Child Work and School Enrolment: Evidence from the PROGRESA Program in Mexico.” Economia 2, no. 1:45-96.
    • Ve´lez, Carlos Eduardo, Elkim Castan˜ o, and Ruthanne Deutsch. 1998. “An Economic Interpretation of Colombia's SISBEN: A Composite Welfare Index Derived from the Optimal Scaling Algorithm.” Unpublished manuscript, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article