Welfare programs and labor supply in developing countries: Experimental evidence from Latin America

Journal of Population Economics

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 1255-1284

  Alzúa, María Laura ^a,b   Cruces, Guillermo ^a,b,c   Ripani, Laura ^d  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE LA PLATA   (Argentina)

^b CONICET ^*  (Argentina)

^c IZA   (Germany)

^d INTER AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK   (United States)

Author keywords

Conditional cash transfers; Developing countries; Income support; Labor supply; Randomized control trials; Welfare programs; Work incentives

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878551268     PISSN: 09331433     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00148-012-0458-0     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. AlzuaM, Cruces G, Ripani L (2010)Welfare programs and labor supply in developing countries: evidence from Latin America. CEDLAS Working Paper 95.
2. Angelucci M, De Giorgi G (2009) Indirect effects of an aid program: how do cash transfers affect ineligibles' consumption? Am Econ Rev 99(1): 486-508.
3. Angrist J, Krueger A (1999) Empirical strategies in labor economics. In: Ashenfelter O, Card D (eds) Handbook of labor economics, vol 3A. North-Holland, New York, p 2097.
4. Angrist J, Pischke J (2008) Mostly harmless econometrics: an empiricist's companion. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
5. Angrist J, Imbens G, Rubin D (1996) Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J Am Stat Assoc 91(434): 444-455.
6. Ardington C, Case A, Hosegood V (2009) Labor supply responses to large social transfers: longitudinal evidence from South Africa. Am Econ J: Appl Econ 1(1): 22-48.
7. Ashenfelter O, Plant M (1990) Nonparametric estimates of the labor-supply effects of negative income tax programs. J Labor Econ 8(1): 396-415.
8. Baker M, Gruber J, Milligan K (2008) Universal child care, maternal labor supply, and family well-being. J Polit Econ 116(4): 709-745.
9. Basu K, van Hoang P (1998) The economics of child labor. Am Econ Rev 88(3): 412-427.
10. Behrman J, Todd P (1999) Randomness in the experimental samples of PROGRESA (Education, Health and Nutrition Program). Report submitted to PROGRESA. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC.
11. Behrman J, Hoddinott J (2005) Programme evaluation with unobserved heterogeneity and selective implementation: the Mexican "PROGRESA" impact on child nutrition. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 67(4): 547-569.
12. Bertrand M, Duflo E, Mullainathan S (2004) How much should we trust differences in differences estimates? Q J Econ 119(1): 249-275.
13. Besley T, Coate S (1992) Workfare versus welfare: incentive arguments for work requirements in poverty alleviation programs. Am Econ Rev 82(1): 249-261.
14. Bhattarai K, Whalley J (2003) Discreteness and the welfare cost of labor supply tax distortions. Int Econ Rev 44(3): 1117-1133.
15. Blau D, Tekin E (2007) The determinants and consequences of child care subsidies for single mothers in the USA. J Popul Econ 20(4): 719-741.
16. Blundell R, MaCurdy T (1999) Labor supply: a review of alternative approaches. In: Ashenfelter O, Card D (eds) Handbook of labor economics, vol 3A. North-Holland, New York, p 2097.
17. Blundell R, Hoynes H (2004) Has 'in-work' benefit reform helped the labor market? In: NBER seeking a premier economy: the economic effects of British economic reforms, 1980-2000. National Bureau of Economic Research, pp 411-460.
18. Bobonis G, Finan F (2009) Neighborhood peer effects in secondary school enrollment decisions. Rev Econ Stat 91(4): 695-716.
19. Bouillon C, Tejerina L (2006) Do we know what works? A systematic review of impact evaluations of social programs in Latin America and the Caribbean. Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), Sustainable Development Department, Poverty and Inequality Unit.
20. Browning E (1971) Incentive and disincentive experimentation for income maintenance policy purposes: note. Am Econ Rev 61(4): 709-712.
21. Cameron A, Gelbach J, Miller D (2008) Bootstrap-based improvements for inference with clustered errors. Rev Econ Stat 90(3): 414-427.
22. CEDLAS (2012) A guide to the SEDLAC: socioeconomic database for Latin America and the Caribbean. Technical report. Centro de Estudios Distributivos, Laborales y Socials, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, and the World Bank. http://sedlac. econo. unlp. edu. ar/eng/methodology. php.
23. Cogan J (1981) Fixed costs and labor supply. Econometrica 49(4): 945-963.
24. Deaton A (2009) Instruments of development: randomization in the tropics, and the search for the elusive keys to economic development. NBER Working Paper 14690.
25. Dickens R, Gregg P, Wadsworth J (eds) (2004) The labour market under new labour: the state of working Britain. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
26. Djebbari H, Smith J (2008) Heterogeneous impacts in PROGRESA. J Econ 145(1-2): 64-80.
27. Donald S, Lang K (2007) Inference with differences in differences and other panel data. Rev Econ Stat 89(2): 221-233.
28. Duflo E, Glennerster R, Kremer M (2008) Using randomization in development economics research: a toolkit. In: Handbook of development economics. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
29. Eissa N, Liebman J (1996) Labor supply response to the earned income tax credit. Q J Econ 111(2): 605-637.
30. Eissa N, Kleven H, Kreiner C (2008) Evaluation of four tax reforms in the United States: labor supply and welfare effects for single mothers. J Public Econ 92: 3-4.
31. Fiszbein A, Schady N (2009) Conditional cash transfers: reducing present and future poverty. World Bank, Washington, DC.
32. Galiani S, McEwan P (2012) The heterogeneous impact of conditional cash transfers in Honduras. http://ssrn. com/abstract=1931216.
33. Gertler P (2004) Do conditional cash transfers improve child health? Evidence from PROGRESA's control randomized experiment. Am Econ Rev 94(2): 336-341.
34. Glewwe P, Olinto P (2004) Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfers on schooling: an experimental analysis of Honduras's PRAF program. Final Report for USAID.
35. Heckman J (2008) Econometric causality. Int Stat Rev 76(1): 1-27, 04.
36. IFPRI (2000) PRAF, third report: monitoring and evaluation system. IFPRI, Washington, DC.
37. Imbens G (2010) Better LATE than nothing: some comments on Deaton (2009) and Heckman and Urzua (2009). J Econ Lit 48(2): 399-423.
38. Imbens G, Rubin D, Sacerdote B (2001) Estimating the effect of unearned income on labor earnings, savings and consumption: evidence from a survey of lottery players. Am Econ Rev 91(4): 779-794.
39. Kanbur R, Keen M, Tuomala M (1994) Labor supply and targeting in poverty alleviation programs. World Bank Econ Rev 8(2): 191-211.
40. Kluve J, Tamm M (2012) Parental leave regulations, mothers' labor force attachment and fathers' childcare involvement: evidence from a natural experiment. J Popul Econ. doi: 10. 1007/s00148-012-0404-1.
41. Maluccio J (2004) Effects of conditional cash transfer programs on current poverty, consumption, and nutrition. Paper presented at the second international workshop on conditional cash transfer programs, São Paulo. Brazil, April 2004.
42. Maluccio J (2007) The impact of conditional cash transfers in nicaragua on consumption, productive investments, and labor allocation. ESA Working Paper No 07-11. Agricultural and Development Economics Division, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
43. Maluccio J, Flores R (2005) Impact evaluation of a conditional cash transfer program: the Nicaraguan Red de Protección Social. Report 141. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC.
44. Meghir C, Phillips D (2008) Labour supply and taxes. Working Paper 008/04. Institute For Fiscal Studies, London.
45. Michalopoulos C, Robins P, Card D (2005) When financial work incentives pay for themselves: evidence from a randomized social experiment for welfare recipients. J Public Econ 89(1): 5-29.
46. Moffitt R (2002) Welfare programs and labor supply. In: Auerbach A, Feldstein M (eds) Handbook of public economics, 1st edn, vol 4, chapter 34. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
47. Moffitt R (2003a) The negative income tax and the evolution of U. S. welfare policy. J Econ Perspect 17(3): 119-140.
48. Moffitt R (2003b) The role of randomized field trials in social science research: a perspective from evaluations of reforms of social welfare programs. NBER TechnicalWorking Paper 0295, National Bureau of Economic Research.
49. Moffitt R, Scholz J (2009) Trends in the level and distribution of income support. NBER Working Paper 15488, National Bureau of Economic Research.
50. Mörk E, Sjögren A, Svaleryd H (2013) Childcare costs and the demand for children: evidence from a nationwide reform. J Popul Econ 26(1): 33-65.
51. Orcutt G, Orcutt A (1968) Incentive and disincentive experimentation for income maintenance policy purposes. Am Econ Rev 58(4): 754-772.
52. Parker S, Skoufias E (2000) The impact of PROGRESA on work, leisure, and time allocation. Final Report, International Food Policy Research Institute. www. ifpri. org/themes/Progresa/timeallocation. htm. Accessed June 2008.
53. Ralitza D, Wolff FC (2011) Do downward private transfers enhance maternal labor supply? Evidence from around Europe. J Popul Econ 24: 911-933.
54. Rawlings L, Rubio G (2003) Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfer programs: lessons from Latin America. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No 3119.
55. Rawlings L, Rubio G (2005) Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfer programs. World Bank Res Obs 20(1): 29-55.
56. Skoufias E, Parker S (2001) Conditional cash transfers and their impact on child work and schooling: evidence from the PROGRESA program in Mexico. Economía 2(1): 45-86.
57. Skoufias E, Parker S (2006) Job loss and family adjustments in work and schooling during the Mexican peso crisis. J Popul Econ 19(1): 163-181.
58. Skoufias E, Di Maro V (2008) Conditional cash transfers, adult work incentives, and poverty. J Dev Stud 44(7): 935-960.
59. Skoufias E, Davis B, Behrman J (1999) An evaluation of the selection of beneficiary households in the education, health, and nutrition program (PROGRESA) ofMexico. Report submitted to PROGRESA. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC.
60. Skoufias E, Unar M, González-Cossío T (2008) The impacts of cash and in-kind transfers on consumption and labor supply: experimental evidence from rural Mexico. Policy Research Working Paper 4778, World Bank.
61. Todd P (2004) Design of the evaluation and method used to select comparison group localities for the six-year follow-up evaluation of Oportunidades in rural areas. Technical Note, Social Development Secretariat, SEDESOL, Mexico.
62. Todd J, Winters P, Stecklov G (2011) Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfer programs on fertility: the case of the Red de Protección Social in Nicaragua. J Popul Econ 25(1): 267-290.
63. Wooldridge J (2001) Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT, Cambridge.
64. Wooldridge J (2007) Difference-in-differences estimation. Lecture Notes 10, Guido Imbens and James Wooldridge course. What's New in Econometrics, NBER, Summer.
65. Yang D (2008) International migration, remittances and household investment: evidence from Philippine migrants' exchange rate shocks. Econ J 118(528): 591-630.