Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Direct & Indirect Impacts of an Unconditional Cash Transfer Programme: Zimbabwe's Harmonized Social Cash Transfer

929 views

Published on

Noemi Pace's (FAO) presentation at the Transfer Project Workshop in Arusha, Tanzania on 2nd April 2019.

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Direct & Indirect Impacts of an Unconditional Cash Transfer Programme: Zimbabwe's Harmonized Social Cash Transfer

  1. 1. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Direct and indirect impacts of an unconditional cash transfer programme: Zimbabwe's Harmonized Social Cash Transfer Noemi Pace Transfer Project Workshop Arusha, April 2-4, 2019
  2. 2. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Objective of the study • Analysis of the impact of the Zimbabwe Harmonized Social Cash Transfer (HSCT) programme on food security and nutrition (FSN) after 12 months of implementation • We disentangle the total impact of the programme on FSN on: - Direct impact due to an increase of purchasing power of households - Indirect impact mediated through an increase in agricultural production
  3. 3. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Policy question • Four dimensions of food security: availability of food, access to food, utilization of food, stability - Availability of food: supply-driven component - Access to food: demand-driven component • Does part of the observed impact on household consumption in more and better quality food come from increased own agricultural production? • Social protection interventions, such as the HSCT, can affect FSN playing a key role in both availability of food and access to food
  4. 4. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Description of the program • The HSCT is an unconditional cash transfer programme targeted to food-poor and labor-constrained households • Eligibility: labor-constrained families living below the food poverty line are selected using ZIMSTATS household census data • Transfer size ranges from USD 10 to 25, representing 20% of median household consumption expenditure
  5. 5. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Data • Data based on a twelve- month, longitudinal, non- experimental design study • Baseline: May-June 2013 • Follow-up: May-June 2014
  6. 6. Social Protection - From Protection to Production From cash to Food Security and Nutrition HSCT programme Food Security and Nutrition TOTAL IMPACT HSCT programme Agricultural production Food Security and Nutrition INDIRECT IMPACT DIRECT IMPACT WEATHER ANOMALIES
  7. 7. Social Protection - From Protection to Production • Number of distinct food items consumed • Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS): number of groups of food items consumed (12 food groups: cereals, roots and tubers, pulses, legumes and nuts, meat/poultry, vegetables, fruits, eggs, fish and seafood, milk and milk products, oil and fat, sugar and honey, miscellaneous) • Household Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES): based on answers to eight questions capturing a range of food insecurity severity - from “no food insecure” to “severely food insecure” Measuring Food Security and Nutrition
  8. 8. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Measuring agricultural production • Indicator of agricultural production: - number of crops that a household grows (maize, sorghum, groundnut, finger millet, pearl millet, roundnuts, cowpeas) • Indicators of weather anomalies from the NASA POWER project dataset: - Rainfall anomalies: deviation of the current planting total rainfall from the long-term mean at ward level, divided by the long-run rainfall standard deviation - Temperature anomalies: deviation of current planting mean temperature degree from the long-term mean at ward level, divided by the long-run temperature standard deviation
  9. 9. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Results Analysis of total impact: • significant increase of the number of food items consumed, ranging between 1.3 to 1.7 with respect to the baseline mean (increase of 13 to 16 percent) • significant increase of the Household Dietary Diversity Score, ranging between 0.62 to 0.72 (increase of 10 to 12 percent) • significant impact on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES) but only for households with labour capacity
  10. 10. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Results Impacts on number of food items: • Direct impact: 95 percent of the total impact is due to increased access to food thanks to the cash transfers • Indirect impact: 5 percent of the total impact is due to increased availability of food thanks to the agricultural production Impacts on the Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS): • Direct impact: 60 percent of the total impact is due to increased access to food thanks to the cash transfers • Indirect impact: 40 percent of the total impact is due to increased availability of food thanks to the agricultural production
  11. 11. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Conclusions • The analysis contributes to shed light on the channels through which a social protection programme affects FSN • The HSCT programme positively contributes to household welfare not only playing a protective function but also allowing households to invest in their main livelihood activity • Since some of the impacts on FSN is through own production, further improvements can be achieved by providing training, information and services aimed at raising productivity and diversifying agricultural production
  12. 12. Social Protection - From Protection to Production Thank you!

×