Category Archives: money

Conditional Cash Transfers – Learning as We Go

Global Development, Global Health, Latin America and the Caribbean, money, social welfare, ,

By: Richard Skolnik

The use of conditional cash transfers (CCTs) is spreading. Originating in Mexico and Brazil, CCTs are incentive payments that governments make to people to encourage them to engage in selected programs, often in health or education. The payments are “conditional” on people’s participating in those program in an agreed way. CCTs are now used in a number of countries to promote better nutrition, improved health in young children, and safer pregnancy outcomes for mothers and children, among other goals. The evidence suggests that CCTs might be a cost-effective approach to improving a number of health outcomes, especially in settings where there are important social and economic constraints to people’s accessing key health services.

As the use of CCTs expands, I look forward to seeing more research on: the ethics of paying people for making certain choices; how to sustain the behavioral impacts of CCTs; how to pay for them; and how to retain community-based approaches to behavior change when appropriate.

It will be valuable to see more explicit attention paid to ethical issues related to cash incentives for poor people to engage in certain behaviors.  To date, there does not appear to have been a systematic examination of them, either broadly or as they have played out in the CCT programs thus far. Ethicists are working with economists to address these questions and a seminar at Harvard in April on CCTs and ethics is a welcome step. Continue reading →

Leave a comment

The Solutions that Aren’t (Part 1)

Global Development, Global Health, money, policy, trends, ,

By: Alanna Shaikh

In the past couple of years we’ve faced major reconsideration of two of international development’s biggest miracles: micro-credit and the Green Revolution.[i] They have gone from being seen as world-changing silver bullets to just one more tool in a kind of effective arsenal.

Micro-credit – the extension of small loans to poor people – it seems, doesn’t lift most people out of poverty. Instead, what it does is help poor people to smooth their consumption – spread the cost of major expenditures over time. A loan that pays for a wedding, a home, or medical expenses allows a family to pay in installments slowly, as opposed to being suddenly drained of all their resources. It acts, in fact, in much the same way as micro-savings. Or a credit card, for that matter, and how many people have been lifted out of poverty by a Discover card? It’s a useful tool for money management, and a valuable tool for people who previously had no access to this kind of credit, but it’s not a game-changer. (For more information on micro-finance, I recommend reading anything David Roodman has written in particular this paper and his excellent blog.)

The Green Revolution has faced a similar rethinking. For those of you not familiar with the term, the Green Revolution was “a series of research, development, and technology transfer initiatives, occurring between the 1940s and the late 1970s, that increased agriculture production around the world, beginning most markedly in the late 1960s…The initiatives involved the development of high-yielding varieties of cereal grains, expansion of irrigation infrastructure, modernization of management techniques, distribution of hybridized seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and pesticides to farmers.”

The impact of the Green Revolution was felt primarily in South Asia, with Africa as a lesser beneficiary of the new technology. It has long been seen as one of international development aid’s greatest successes. We broke South Asia’s famine cycle. How do you not count that as a win?

Continue reading →

One comment so far