The Impact Of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs On Indigenous Households In Latin America Evidence From Progresa In Mexico

Conditional cash transfers(CCTs) are widely used antipoverty measuresin Latin America, and manysuch programs include indigenous beneficiaries.However, concerns have been raised that the indigenous poor,who have historically been marginalized,may not benefit from CCTsas much as the nonindigenouspopulation, owing to cultural as well as geographic factors. Even so, rigorous evidenceshowing this effect is limited. We assessedthis issue in the context of PROGRESA (Programa de Educación, Salud, y Alimenación), an integrated approach to poverty alleviation in Mexico, in which over one-thirdofbeneficiaries were indigenous at the program’s inceptionin 1998. A feature of the program’s initial targetingwasthat indigenous and nonindigenous beneficiaries were drawn from geographically similar areas, minimizing the potential for geographic factors to lead to differential impacts.Despite an extensive literatureshowing positive average impacts of PROGRESAon health and education outcomes, few studieshave disaggregatedthese effects by indigenous status. Using the randomized assignment of initial programrollout, we estimatedPROGRESA’simpactson a range of health and education indicators, distinctly for indigenous and nonindigenousbeneficiaries.We foundthat, as of November 2000, PROGRESA had significant impacts on many health and education indicators among both indigenous and nonindigenous households in our sample; in addition, in aggregateacross most indicators, these impacts werevery similar. Our results indicate thatif geographic disadvantage for indigenous households can be minimized(a nontrivial endeavor),cultural factors may not pose an intrinsic barrier to indigenous householdsbenefiting from CCTprograms, and as such, CCTs canpromote humancapital accumulation amongboth indigenous and nonindigenous households

It has been almost two decades since conditional cash transfer programs first appeared on the agendas of multilateral agencies and politicians. Latin America has often been used as a testing ground for these programs, which consist of transfers of money to subsections of the population upon meeting certain conditions, such as sending their children to school or having them vaccinated. Money from the Government in Latin America takes a comparative view of the effects of this regular transfer of money, which comes with obligations, on rural communities. Drawing on a variety of data, taken from different disciplinary perspectives, these chapters help to build an understanding of the place of conditional cash transfer programsin rural families and households, in individuals’ aspirations and visions, in communities’ relationships to urban areas, and in the overall character of these rural societies. With case studies from Chile, Mexico, Peru, Brazil and Colombia, this book will interest scholars and researchers of Latin American anthropology, sociology, development, economics and politics.

Abstract: "The authors use panel data for Mexico for 1997 to 1999 to test several assumptions regarding the impact of a conditional cash transfer program on child labor, emphasizing the differential impact on indigenous households. Using data from the conditional cash transfer program in Mexico--PROGRESA (OPORTUNIDADES)--they investigate the interaction between child labor and indigenous households. While indigenous children had a greater probability of working in 1997, this probability is reversed after treatment in the program. Indigenous children also had lower school attainment compared with Spanish-speaking or bilingual children. After the program, school attainment among indigenous children increased, reducing the gap. This paper--a product of the Education Sector Unit, Latin America and the Caribbean Region--is part of a larger effort in the region to evaluate human development programs"--World Bank web site.

Conditional cash transfer programs (CCTs)—cash grants to poor families that are conditional on their participation in education, health, and nutrition services—have become a vital part of poverty reduction strategies in many countries, particularly in Latin America. In Conditional Cash Transfers in Latin America, the contributors analyze and synthesize evidence from case studies of CCTs in Brazil, Honduras, Mexico, and Nicaragua. The studies examine many aspects of CCTs, including the trends in development and political economy that fostered interest in them; their costs; their impacts on education, health, nutrition, and food consumption; and how CCT programs affect social relations shaped by gender, culture, and community. Throughout, the authors identify the strengths and weaknesses of CCTs and offer guidelines to those who design them.

Bt cotton remains one of the most widely grown biotech crops among smallholder farmers. Numerous studies, including those previously conducted in Pakistan, attest to its yield and cost advantages. However, the effectiveness of Bt toxin, which depends on many technical constraints, is heterogeneous. Furthermore, in Pakistan, the diffusion of Bt cotton varieties occurred despite a weak regulatory system and without seed quality control; evidence demonstrates that varieties sold as Bt may not contain the genes or express them effectively. We use data collected from a sample that is statistically representative of the nation’s cotton growers to test the effects of Bt cotton use on productivity in a damage control framework. Unlike previous studies, we employ five measures of Bt identity: name, official approval status, farmer belief, laboratory tests of Bt presence in plant tissue, and biophysical assays measuring Bt effectiveness. Only farmers’ belief that a variety is Bt affects cotton productivity. Although all measures reduce damage from pests, the biophysical indicators have the largest effect, and official approval has the weakest. For applied economists, findings highlight the importance of getting the data right concerning Bt. For policy makers, they suggest the need, on ethical if not productivity grounds, to monitor variety integrity closer to point of sale.

Development projects are generally subject to a potential tradeoff between sustainability and poverty reduction. Grants are also commonly assigned without a standardized criterion. This paper proposes an innovative scoring tool that combines both a risk and poverty scorecard to prioritize lending and grant allocation. We implement and test the instrument through a competitive fund for demand-driven projects in Central America intended to better link smallholder farmers to markets and improve their welfare. The evaluation results show that the highest-ranked projects generally have a larger economic impact on their beneficiaries than lower-ranked projects. We observe a larger effect on income, access to credit,and access to local markets, and the relative differences are stronger over time. The proposed scorecard tool is intended to better ensure the accountability and sustainability of development funds and can be easily adapted to different contexts