The document discusses a study on the impacts of cash versus food transfers on early childhood development in Karamoja, Uganda. The findings indicate that cash transfers positively affect adult engagement in agricultural work and household investments, while food transfers show limited benefits. However, there is no significant impact on child schooling or hazardous labor, raising questions about the overall effects on children's wellbeing and the design of future programs.

1. unite for
children
Child work in the Karamoja
Early Childhood Development
cash or food transfer program
Luisa Natali
UNICEF Office of Research—Innocenti
Transfer Project workshop
Arusha, 3rd of April 2019

2. 2
Karamoja WFP food or cash transfers
• Objectives: Food security & early
childhood development
• Targeting: households with young
children (3-5) enrolled in ECD centres
• Transfers: Unconditional, every 6
weeks:
• Food or Cash
• ~10% of pre-program average
consumption per month
• Recipient: woman in the household
Districts: Kaabong, Kotido, Napak

3. 3
Evaluation design
• Stratified cluster RCT, run by IFPRI
• 98 ECD centres randomly allocated to one of three arms:
• Food
• Cash
• Control
• Baseline (2010, harvest season), Endline (18-months, lean season)
• ~ 2,500 households
• Existing evidence:
• Significant impacts of the cash transfers on primary objectives
• Overall lack of – or limited – impacts of food intervention

4. 4
Results
Photo credit: Amber Peterman

5. 5
Positive impact of cash (not food) on adults’
engagement in agricultural work
93% 93%
79%
89%
Control Cash
Baseline Endline
+ 9 pp** impact
…accompanied by 25%
positive impact on time
spent on income-earning
activities

6. 6
Cash (not food) relaxes liquidity constraints
related to agricultural activity
Cash beneficiaries
invest significantly
more in land
+ 12 pp** impact

7. 7
Increase in (older) children’s agricultural work
in cash arm
57%
52%
36%
65%
Control Cash
Baseline Endline
+ 29 pp** impact
+ 31% impact

8. 8
No impact on schooling (neither cash nor food)
61% 59% 59%
Control Cash Food
Currently enrolled at endline
• Neither positive nor detrimental
effect (school enrollment, attendance,
education expenditures)
• Findings suggest decrease in
children’s leisure time
Are there impacts on child labour?
• No significant impact on long
working hours
• Lack of data on engagement
in hazardous activities
@ILO

9. 9
Q1: Is the overall impact
of cash transfers for older
children welfare improving
or not?
Cash Food
ECD outcomes
 ̶
HH food security
 ̶
HH agricultural work &
time on income-earning
activities
 ̶
HH investment in land
 ̶
Child (agricultural) work
 ̶
Schooling
̶ ̶
Long working hours
̶ ̶
Hazardous activities
? ?
Broader indicators of
child wellbeing
? ?
Long-term implications
? ?
Q2: How to better design
programmes – apart from
conditionalities or larger
transfers – to encourage
human capital investment
overall for the household,
without children engaging
in hazardous labour?
(Cash plus?)

10. 10
• Transfer Project website: www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/transfer
• Briefs: http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/transfer/publications/briefs
• Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TransferProject
• Twitter: @TransferProjct email: lnatali@unicef.org
For more information
Ghana, credit: Ivan Griffi
Thank you! 

11. 11
References
• Dammert, A.C., J. de Hoop, E. Mvukiyehe, and F.C. Rosati (2018). Effects of Public Policy
on Child Labor: Current Knowledge, Gaps, and Implications for Program Design. World
Development, 110: 104-123.
• Gilligan, D., A. Margolies, E. Quiñones, and S. Roy (2013). WFP/UNICEF/IFPRI Impact
Evaluation of Cash and Food Transfers at Early Childhood Development Centers in
Karamoja, Uganda: Final Impact Report. Submitted to: World Food Programme, Rome;
World Food Programme, Kampala; and UNICEF, Kampala, May 2013.
• Gilligan, D.O., M. Hidrobo, J. Hoddinott, S. Roy, and B. Schwab (2014). Much Ado about
Modalities: Multicountry Experiments on the Effects of Cash and Food Transfers on
Consumption Patterns. IFPRI Conference Paper, International Food Policy Research
Institute.
• Gilligan, D. O. and S. Roy (2015). Resources, Stimulation, and Cognition: How Transfer
Programs and Preschool Shape Cognitive Development in Uganda, IFPRI Conference
Paper, International Food Policy Research Institute.
• De Hoop, J., Groppo, V., and S. Handa on behalf of the Malawi SCTP and Zambia MCTG
study teams (2017) Household Micro-entrepreneurial Activity and Child Work: Evidence
from Two African Unconditional Cash Transfer Programs, Presented at NEUDC 2017.
• De Hoop, J., and F.C. Rosati (2014). Cash Transfers and Child Labor. The World Bank
Research Observer, 29: 202–34.

12. 12
Food for thought
• Importance of:
• Local context / initial conditions
• Level of transfer / regularity
• Targeting / (Primary) objectives
• Program duration
• Lack of data on broader child wellbeing indicators
• Need for long-term impact evaluations