Melissa Hidrobo's (IFPRI) presentation at the Transfer Project Workshop in Arusha, Tanzania on 3rd April 2019.

1. Cash transfers, polygamy, and intimate partner violence:
Experimental evidence from Mali
Rachel Heath
2
, Melissa Hidrobo
1
, Shalini Roy
1
1
International Food Policy Research Institute
2
University of Washington
Transfer Workshop 2019
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 1 / 15

2. Motivation
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is the most pervasive form of violence
globally: 1 in 3 women aected in her lifetime
In Mali, nearly 4 in 10 women have experienced physical violence in
their lifetime (DHS 2012/2013)
A growing body of literature shows that cash transfer programs in
developing countries can reduce IPV (Angelucci 2008; Bobonis et al 2013; Hidrobo et al
2016; Haushofer and Shapiro 2013; Perova and Vakis 2013; Roy et al 2017)
Find decreases in physical violence ranging from 5-11 percentage points
although some subgroups found at greater risk for increases in violence
Nearly all target women and are in Latin America
Policy relevant given that ~1 billion transfer beneciaries in developing
world (DFID 2011)
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 2 / 15

3. Motivation
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is the most pervasive form of violence
globally: 1 in 3 women aected in her lifetime
In Mali, nearly 4 in 10 women have experienced physical violence in
their lifetime (DHS 2012/2013)
A growing body of literature shows that cash transfer programs in
developing countries can reduce IPV (Angelucci 2008; Bobonis et al 2013; Hidrobo et al
2016; Haushofer and Shapiro 2013; Perova and Vakis 2013; Roy et al 2017)
Find decreases in physical violence ranging from 5-11 percentage points
although some subgroups found at greater risk for increases in violence
Nearly all target women and are in Latin America
Policy relevant given that ~1 billion transfer beneciaries in developing
world (DFID 2011)
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 2 / 15

4. Motivation
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is the most pervasive form of violence
globally: 1 in 3 women aected in her lifetime
In Mali, nearly 4 in 10 women have experienced physical violence in
their lifetime (DHS 2012/2013)
A growing body of literature shows that cash transfer programs in
developing countries can reduce IPV (Angelucci 2008; Bobonis et al 2013; Hidrobo et al
2016; Haushofer and Shapiro 2013; Perova and Vakis 2013; Roy et al 2017)
Find decreases in physical violence ranging from 5-11 percentage points
although some subgroups found at greater risk for increases in violence
Nearly all target women and are in Latin America
Policy relevant given that ~1 billion transfer beneciaries in developing
world (DFID 2011)
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 2 / 15

5. Motivation
But a lot is still unknown:
What happens to IPV when transfers are targeted to men?
In some regions, targeting women may be viewed as contextually
inappropriate
Do impacts depend on household structure?
Impacts of transfers in the context of complex family dynamics are
likely to be dierent
Polygamy is common in Mali, as in much of West Africa
Dierent wives may be treated dierently and have dierent bargaining
power
What are the mechanisms through which transfers aect IPV?
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 3 / 15

6. Motivation
But a lot is still unknown:
What happens to IPV when transfers are targeted to men?
In some regions, targeting women may be viewed as contextually
inappropriate
Do impacts depend on household structure?
Impacts of transfers in the context of complex family dynamics are
likely to be dierent
Polygamy is common in Mali, as in much of West Africa
Dierent wives may be treated dierently and have dierent bargaining
power
What are the mechanisms through which transfers aect IPV?
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 3 / 15

7. Motivation
But a lot is still unknown:
What happens to IPV when transfers are targeted to men?
In some regions, targeting women may be viewed as contextually
inappropriate
Do impacts depend on household structure?
Impacts of transfers in the context of complex family dynamics are
likely to be dierent
Polygamy is common in Mali, as in much of West Africa
Dierent wives may be treated dierently and have dierent bargaining
power
What are the mechanisms through which transfers aect IPV?
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 3 / 15

8. Our study
Investigate the impacts on IPV of a national cash transfer program in
Mali where the targeted beneciary is household head usually male
Investigate whether impacts vary by polygamy status
Collect and analyze detailed data on mechanisms with a special
focus on men the main beneciaries of the program and the
perpetrator of violence in our study
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 4 / 15

9. Conceptual framework
Citation: Buller et al (2018). A mixed-method review of cash transfers and intimate partner violence in low and
middle-income countries.The World Bank Research Observer, Volume 33, Issue 2, August 2018
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 5 / 15

10. Program
Programme de Filets Sociaux Au Mali
(Jigisemejiri): 2014 ongoing
Targeting: Poor rural households
Recipients: Heads of household, primarily men
Components:
Cash transfers: unconditional transfers of
10,000 FCFA/month (or USD 17/month)
paid every trimester
Accompanying Measures: trainings 1-2x
month
Preventive Nutrition Packages: fortied
food distributed every trimester
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 6 / 15

11. Study design
Location: Five southern regions
Sikasso, Koulikoro, Kayes, Mopti,
Segou.
36% households are
polygamous.
Design: Randomly assigned 96
communes to either receive
treatment (transfers + training) or
control
76 Treatment and 20 Control
communes
Control communes would get
phased into program after 2
years.
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 7 / 15

12. Data
Data sources:
Baseline (Sept 2014-Feb 2015): before the start of the program
Beneciary households with a child 6-23 months, N=3,080
Midline (Aug 2016-Nov 2016): before the control group was rolled into
the program and before the rst PNP distribution
Panel sample: random subset of baseline households, N=2533
Qualitative gender study (April-May 2017): Gender study focused on
intrahousehold relationships
Beneciary households in Sikasso
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 8 / 15

13. Main outcomes
WHO Violence Against Women Instrument: questions on dierent
acts of violence/behaviors in the last 12 months
Emotional violence (4 questions)
Physical violence (6 questions)
Controlling behaviors (7 questions)
Mechanisms:
Emotional wellbeing of spouse: stress, anxiety, self ecacy
Relationship quality: disputes, trust
Female empowerment: labor and mobility
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 9 / 15

14. Main outcomes
WHO Violence Against Women Instrument: questions on dierent
acts of violence/behaviors in the last 12 months
Emotional violence (4 questions)
Physical violence (6 questions)
Controlling behaviors (7 questions)
Mechanisms:
Emotional wellbeing of spouse: stress, anxiety, self ecacy
Relationship quality: disputes, trust
Female empowerment: labor and mobility
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 9 / 15

15. Main results
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 10 / 15

16. Pathways
Quantitative results Qualitative results
Pathway 1:
Economic security
and emotional
well-being
- ^ assets and food security in
polygamous and monogamous
HH
- _ stress and anxiety in
polygamous HH
It [Jigisémèjiri] gave me
courage in support of my family
problems. I don't concern or
worry about it. Anyone who
was coughing I immediately
take him to the health centre
Pathway 2:
Intrahousehold
conict
- larger decreases in
self-reported disputes in
polygamous HH
With Jigisémèjiri the respect
between members of my
household has increased, the
harmony has strengthened, it
has also strengthened the
respect and the harmony
between my wives and myself.
Pathway 3:
Women's
empowerment
- No impacts This is the head of household
who makes the decision on how
to spend money from the
program, he buys food, meat
with that money...He explains
how to spend the money
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 11 / 15

17. Discussion
Why impact in polygamous households only?
1 Are we capturing something else correlated with polygamy?
E.g., household size, age gap between spouses, wealth?
2 Is it due to dierences in the institution of polygamy that leads to
dierences in communication or distribution of transfers?
Less spousal communication, weaker emotional ties in polygamous
marriages (Bove and Valeggia, 2009)
Less cooperation and more conict in polygamous HHs (Barr et al
2017)
3 Is there simply greater potential for impact in polygamous HHs, due
to higher initial conict?
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 12 / 15

18. Discussion
Why impact in polygamous households only?
1 Are we capturing something else correlated with polygamy?
E.g., household size, age gap between spouses, wealth?
2 Is it due to dierences in the institution of polygamy that leads to
dierences in communication or distribution of transfers?
Less spousal communication, weaker emotional ties in polygamous
marriages (Bove and Valeggia, 2009)
Less cooperation and more conict in polygamous HHs (Barr et al
2017)
3 Is there simply greater potential for impact in polygamous HHs, due
to higher initial conict?
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 12 / 15

19. Discussion
Why impact in polygamous households only?
1 Are we capturing something else correlated with polygamy?
E.g., household size, age gap between spouses, wealth?
2 Is it due to dierences in the institution of polygamy that leads to
dierences in communication or distribution of transfers?
Less spousal communication, weaker emotional ties in polygamous
marriages (Bove and Valeggia, 2009)
Less cooperation and more conict in polygamous HHs (Barr et al
2017)
3 Is there simply greater potential for impact in polygamous HHs, due
to higher initial conict?
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 12 / 15

20. Discussion
Why impact in polygamous households only?
1 Are we capturing something else correlated with polygamy?
E.g., household size, age gap between spouses, wealth?
2 Is it due to dierences in the institution of polygamy that leads to
dierences in communication or distribution of transfers?
Less spousal communication, weaker emotional ties in polygamous
marriages (Bove and Valeggia, 2009)
Less cooperation and more conict in polygamous HHs (Barr et al
2017)
3 Is there simply greater potential for impact in polygamous HHs, due
to higher initial conict?
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 12 / 15

21. Discussion
Preliminary analysis shows:
HH size explains some of the results
Some dierences in distribution of transfers within polygamous and
non-polygamous households
non-poly HHs are signicantly more likely than poly HHs to distribute
the cash to a female for HH or individual purchases (17% versus 12%)
Women in non-poly HHs report being more involved with transfer (e.g.,
input on how to use) than those in poly HHs
IPV, stress, anxiety, disputes higher in polygamous HHs than
non-polygamous HHs in control
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 13 / 15

22. Summary
Large and signicant reductions in IPV due to the program in
polygamous households (7-16 percentage points) - but minimal impact
in non-polygamous households
Analysis of mechanisms reveals signicant improvements in the
emotional well-being of the spouse, and larger reductions in disputes in
polygamous households compared to non-polygamous households
Dierential impacts on polygamous HHs potentially explained by
observable correlates, dierences in distribution of transfers, greater
potential for impact
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 14 / 15

23. Summary
Large and signicant reductions in IPV due to the program in
polygamous households (7-16 percentage points) - but minimal impact
in non-polygamous households
Analysis of mechanisms reveals signicant improvements in the
emotional well-being of the spouse, and larger reductions in disputes in
polygamous households compared to non-polygamous households
Dierential impacts on polygamous HHs potentially explained by
observable correlates, dierences in distribution of transfers, greater
potential for impact
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 14 / 15

24. Summary
Large and signicant reductions in IPV due to the program in
polygamous households (7-16 percentage points) - but minimal impact
in non-polygamous households
Analysis of mechanisms reveals signicant improvements in the
emotional well-being of the spouse, and larger reductions in disputes in
polygamous households compared to non-polygamous households
Dierential impacts on polygamous HHs potentially explained by
observable correlates, dierences in distribution of transfers, greater
potential for impact
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 14 / 15

25. Conclusions
Transfers targeted to men can reduce IPV, but it likely depends on
context and household structure
Does not alter gender norms, and may reinforce them
Important when designing CT programs to think about how design
features and context aect pathways through which transfers aect
IPV
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 15 / 15

26. Conclusions
Transfers targeted to men can reduce IPV, but it likely depends on
context and household structure
Does not alter gender norms, and may reinforce them
Important when designing CT programs to think about how design
features and context aect pathways through which transfers aect
IPV
Hidrobo et al. (International Food Policy Research Institute, University of Washington)Cash transfers and IPV Transfer Workshop 2019 15 / 15