The impact of the Kenya Cash Transfer Program for Orphans and Vulnerable Children on household spending
The impact of the Kenya Cash Transfer Program for Orphans and Vulnerable Children on household spending
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/19439342.2011.653980
复制
发表时间：
2012-01-01
影响因子：
0.9
通讯作者：
Ward, Patrick
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Alviar, Carlos;Davis, Benjamin;Ward, Patrick
肯尼亚孤儿和弱势儿童现金转移方案是政府的旗舰社会保障方案，截至2011年底，惠及全国130，000多个家庭和260，000名孤儿和弱势儿童。本文的目的是调查CT-OVC是否改变了家庭的消费行为偏好。我们比较标准的差异中的差异方案的影响与事先预期的基线支出弹性的影响。由于该方案，参与家庭在食品、保健和服装方面的支出大大高于对照家庭，而在烟酒方面的支出则大大低于对照家庭。方案对七个粮食类别中的四个类别的支出也产生了影响。为了检验该计划是否只是使家庭沿着其总支出恩格尔曲线移动，或者实际上改变了该曲线，我们将家庭对该计划的事前预期行为与事后实际反应进行了比较。我们发现，事实上，在大约一半的消费类别事前预测和事后的实际效果是显着不同的，这意味着偏好可能已经改变了方案的接受者。然后，我们直接测试该计划是否引起了显着的变化，支出弹性（所暗示的相关边际消费倾向），并找到证据，这对酒精和烟草，并在较小程度上为食品，健康和交通和通信。
The Kenya Cash Transfer Program for Orphans and Vulnerable Children (CT-OVC) is the government's flagship social protection programme, reaching over 130,000 households and 260,000 orphans and vulnerable children across the country as of late 2011. The objective of this paper is to investigate whether the CT-OVC has changed the preferences of households in terms of their consumption behaviour. We compare standard difference-in-differences programme effects with ex-ante expected effects given baseline expenditure elasticities. As a result of the programme, participating households had significantly higher expenditures than control households on food, health, and clothing and significantly less spending on alcohol and tobacco. Programme impacts were also seen on spending in four of seven food groups. To test whether the programme simply moves households along their total expenditure Engel curve or in fact shifts that curve, we compare ex-ante expected behaviours with the ex-post actual response of households to the programme. We find in fact that in about one-half of the consumption categories ex-ante predicted and ex-post actual effects are significantly different, implying that preferences may have changed among programme recipients. We then directly test whether the programme has induced significant changes in expenditure elasticities (as implied by their associated marginal propensities to consume) and find evidence of this for alcohol and tobacco, and to a lesser extent for food, health and transportation and communication.