Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 Principal Investigator Ismat Ara Begum, PhD Department of Agricultural Economics BAU, Mymensingh-2202 Interim Report Prepared for Presentation at NFPCSP-FAO.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "1 Principal Investigator Ismat Ara Begum, PhD Department of Agricultural Economics BAU, Mymensingh-2202 Interim Report Prepared for Presentation at NFPCSP-FAO."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 Principal Investigator Ismat Ara Begum, PhD Department of Agricultural Economics BAU, Mymensingh-2202 Interim Report Prepared for Presentation at NFPCSP-FAO Workshop 28-29 November, 2012; Dhaka Social Safety Nets and Productive Outcomes: Evidence and Implications for Bangladesh

2 2 Research Team Prof. Dr. Shaheen Akter Co-Investigator Prof. Noor Md. Rahmatullah Co-Investigator Dr. Mohammad Jahangir Alam Co-Investigator Dr. M. Sayeedul Haque Research Assistant Md. Mojammel Haque Research Assistant Ferdoushi Begum Research Assistant

3  Social safety net programs (SSNPs) are non-contributory transfer programs designed & implemented for the poor & the vulnerable groups  These groups are always a concern to the Bangladesh govt.  One of the main agenda of govt. is reduction of poverty.  Like many other developing countries, SSNPs can play a vital role to reduce poverty in Bangladesh.  Safety net spending is around 15% of the Bangladesh govt. expenditure & 24.57 % HHs received benefit from SSNPs (in 2010) 3 Introduction

4 4  31.5 % of households in the country live in poverty  So, it remains unclear whether SSNPs only prevent entry into poverty or promoting exit from poverty or both  Studies investigated ONLY targeting, delivery mechanism, operational performance, alternative design etc.  However, evidence about the productive outcome impacts at household and community levels is scarce  This research will contribute to understand –  Whether selected SSNPs are generating productive outcomes & are contributing to households’ exit from poverty and food insecurity  What constraints or enabling factors are mediating these outcomes

5  To document potential productive impacts of selected public safety nets at the household and community levels and the possible incentive framework behind those results at the two levels  To identify successful examples of government and NGO safety net interventions which foster productive outcomes  To draw implications for the design and implementation of SSN in Bangladesh and for complementarities among government agencies interventions Objectives 5

6 Goal Food Security Poverty reduction Credit accessibility Risk coping Preventing school drop-out Community Level Goods and labour markets Multiplier effects in local economy Creation of community level assets/ infrastructure Gender inequalities Household Level Labor allocation (farm vs off farm, adults vs children) Asset accumulation/protection Change in use of inputs and techniques in crop production Consumption/food security Human capital accumulation Investments Risk coping strategies I m p a ct M ec ha ni s m P at h w a y s Income effect Productivity effect Purchasing power effect Alleviation of liquidity constraints Certainty & predictability of income Promoting child education Optimal intrahousehold resource allocation Poor and Vulnerable People Inter venti o n Social Safety net Programs Cash/Kind /Training Conceptual Framework 6

7 7 Hypothesis (Household level) Hypothesis: SSN interventions either cash or kind (conditional, unconditional, public works) may facilitate significant changes in income generating activities, labour allocation, accumulation of productive assets and productive investments of beneficiary household than non-beneficiary households. Research Questions  What are the productive outcomes of selected public safety nets at the household level? Methodology  For estimating impact we used propensity score matching (PSM)  We used HIES 2010 as a single cross section for identifying the treatment & control groups

8 8 Hypothesis (Local Economy Level) The community will benefit economically from social safety nets interventions through local goods & labour markets and multiplier effects Research Questions  What are the productive outcomes of selected public safety nets at the community level? Local goods (buying-selling activities, prices etc.) Labour markets (new employment, employment diversification, wages etc.) Multiplier effects (investment, employment, economic growth) Methodology  HIES community dataset, FGD (30) and KII(20)

9 The study is designed to conduct into three phases  Phase 1 → Reviewing Literature, assess the productive impacts of selected SSNs at household level in Bangladesh (literature review and HIES data)  Phase 2 → presents the impact at community level and recent evidence and documents on the productive outcomes of the safety nets in Bangladesh & other countries (Field survey, HIES data & literature review)  Phase 3 → Deals with the issues of enhancing the productive outcomes of the SSNPs (Impact results, SSN-IMPACT matrix, FGDs & KIIs) 9 Study Phasing

10 10 For estimating productive outcomes we considered -  Interventions with an explicit income-generation component  Old age allowance  Allowances for the widowed, destitute and deserted women  Agriculture rehabilitation  A combination of - Cash for work, VGD, food for work & 100 days scheme  Interventions with no explicit income-generation component  Stipend for primary students  Stipend for secondary and higher secondary/female students Phase 1: Literature review, estimating productive outcomes at household level

11 11 Table 1 : Number of beneficiary households of the selected SSNPs in HIES 2010 No. Selected SSNPs Programs beneficiary HHs % of beneficiary households 1Old Age Allowance (OAA) 48527.0 2 Allowance for the Widowed, Deserted and Destitute (AWDD) 20311.3 3 Combined program (CFW, VGD, FFW, EGP 100 days) 412.3 4Agriculture Rehabilitation 44624.9 5Stipend for Primary Students 44424.7 6 Stipend for Secondary & Higher Secondary/ Female Student 1769.8 Total1795100

12 12 Table 2: Measurable productive outcome indicators at household level OutcomesIndicatorMeasurable indicator Imputed from 2010 HIES Labour allocation Relative ( farm, non-farm, male, female, self) employment Average working hours per day per worker Calculating daily male and female hours in farm, non-farm activities Income generating activities Total no. of activities involved, Total (farm, non-farm)income, Number of total activities per household per active member Calculate total number of activities, Calculating total income (farm, non-farm) InvestmentsOwn land per person, Real expenditure on tools, animals, family enterprises, durable goods & housing improvement per household per person/ household Calculate own land, hhs expenditure Shock and coping mechanism Asset sold, Insurance, migration, school drop-out Dummy variable: 1 and 0 Shock and coping mechanism ConsumptionPer capitaCalculating Sum of per capita value of food and non-food expenditure.

13 13 Table 3 : Observable characteristics included as independent variables in the PSM VariablesDescriptionMeanSD Dependent variableTreatment=1 0.320.47 AgeHAge of household head (years) 46.1414.26 AgeH 2 Age of household head (years) square 2332.251453.23 EduHEducation of household head (years of schooling 2.783.96 EduHDHousehold head is illiterate=1 0.620.49 LandOwned land (decimal) 35.8792.66 FamSTotal household size 4.481.83 Chl514Children 5-14 years 52.0319.28 Male65Male 65+ year old=1 1.121.08 Female62Female 62+ year old=1 0.150.36 DisableMember disable=1 0.120.33 DayLAt least a member work as day labor=1 0.030.18 mstatFWomen currently separated, divorced etc. =1 1.310.80 ElectElectricity connection=1 0.240.43 RoomRoom per person in household 0.480.50 Region 1Regional dummy 0.520.32 R2Regional dummy 0.220.42 R3Regional dummy 0.050.21 R4Regional dummy 0.080.27 Sample Size (n)=5635 including treatment group (T=1795)

14 14 Conditional Independence Assumption Overall testsProbit Pseudo R 2 LR χ 2 p> χ 2 Mean BiasMedian Bias OAA Raw sample0.244740.25045.130.3 Matched0.01216.240.5073.42.9 AWDD Raw0.243391.46040.631 Matched0.0094.820.98831.9 AR Raw0.137393.500.00019.417.5 Matched0.01923.960.1563.83.5 PEdu Raw0.163464.810.00022.814.5 Matched0.0056.340.9992.22.1 Second Edu Raw0.177256.420.00030.834.4 Matched0.0157.360.9873.82.8 All SSNP Raw0.087613.390.00018.420.4 Matched0.00317.390.5633.43.1 Table 4: Average bias and test statistics, PSM Analysis

15 Figure 1 : Common supports (Stipend for Primary Education Program) Figure 2 : Common supports (Agriculture Rehabilitation Program) Common Support or overlap region 15

16 16 Table 5 : Impact of Old Age Allowance on productive outcomes IndicatorsTreatmentControlATTt value Working hour per day 11.0011.05-0.04-0.06 Number of non-farm activities 1.541.500.040.29 Self-employed at non-farm (av. number) 0.340.310.030.57 Annual salary received from non-farm sector (TK) 12585.3917965.65-5380.26-1.11 Value of agricultural assets 5315.672132.213183.460.82 Total credit 5787.845621.65166.19 0.07 Land_purchased 0.01 0.00-0.46 Purchase of agril tools 3732.1949.323682.871.09 Non_food_expenditure 39998.8240378.83-380.01-0.07 Annual expenses on durable goods (TK) 6076.523082.352994.181.3 Annual income from crop production (TK) 9266.9412111.51-2844.56-0.81 Annual food expenditure (TK) 364806.02391234.07-26428.05-1.25

17 17 Table 6 : Impact of AWDD on productive outcomes Indicators TreatmentControlATTt value Working hour per day 10.5310.98-0.45-0.54 Number of non-farm activities 1.461.260.201.19 Self-employed at non-farm (av. number) Annual salary received from non-farm sector (TK) 9384.9315255.58-5870.66-1.17 Annual income from livestock (TK) 2208.194612.41-2404.23-2.32 Value of agricultural assets 705.024141.13-3436.11-2.72 Spending in fertilizer (Tk/farm) 773.061024.82-251.76-1.02 Total credit 4936.214534.48401.720.27 Land purchased (yes=1) 0.000.03-0.02-1.9 Non-food expenses (TK) 33468.1636404.03-2935.87-1.21 Annual expenses on durable goods (TK) 2416.013541.38-1125.37-1.05 Annual Food Expenditure (TK) 346637.13341914.004723.130.23 Annual Health Expenditure (TK) 600.4353.8246.71.58

18 Indicators TreatmentControlATTt value Number of farm activities 0.940.570.377.75 Number of non-farm activities 1.161.71-0.56-4.27 Day_labourer at non-farm activities 0.120.22-0.10-3.35 Self employment in farm activities 1.460.780.689.74 Self-employed at non-farm (av. number) 0.340.47-0.13-2.04 Income from livestock products 8213.775988.322225.451.86 Value of agricultural assets (TK) 15969.106195.559773.563.37 Spending in fertilizer (Tk/farm) 4135.111911.022224.085.02 Total credit 8911.4310648.65-1737.22-0.42 Asset sold Purchase of agril tools 1049.13553.39495.730.68 Annual income from crop production (TK) 54771.1126231.5428539.585.85 Annual food expenditure (TK) 510080.11494596.4915483.620.77 Table 7 : Impact of Agriculture Rehabilitation Program on productive outcomes  ARP is a promising means of safety net for the marginal & small farmers  This type of safety net for farming communities could contribute more to productive outcomes 18

19 IndicatorsTreatmentControlATTt value Number of non-farm activities 1.741.460.282.19 Day labourer in non-farm activities0.310.190.123.81 Self-employed at non-farm (av. number) 0.55 0.000.07 Annual salary received from non-farm sector (TK) 11100.549085.602014.940.83 Value of agricultural assets (TK) 6053.905101.76952.140.39 Spending in fertilizer (Tk/farm) 962.221493.66-531.44-0.87 Purchase of agril tools 1046.58809.03237.550.29 Annual non-food expenses (TK) 42798.6150449.31-7650.71-2.11 Annual expenses on durable goods (TK) 3397.315119.98-1722.67-1.54 Annual income from crop production (TK) 15712.6115688.1424.470.01 Annual food expenditure (TK) 451680.60479105.19-27424.59-1.53 Annual education expenditure (TK) 4509.414981.19-471.79-0.76 Annual health expenditure (TK) 824.58556.24268.351.7 Table 8 : Impact of Stipend for Primary Education Program on productive outcomes 19

20 IndicatorsTreatmentControlATTt value Number of non-farm activities 1.991.760.231.07 Self-employed at non-farm (av. number) 0.680.34 3.59 Ann. salary received from non-farm (TK) 42445.6032772.689672.920.99 Value of agricultural assets (TK) 4621.5911844.66-7223.07-2.28 Total credit 25295.4557354.55-32059.09-1.53 Purchase of agril tools 108.41105.632.780.04 Annual expenses on durable goods (TK) 11901.736063.865837.860.98 Income from vegetable production 4679.354084.61594.730.31 Annual food expenditure (TK) 580628.93565582.5215046.410.34 Annual education expenditure (TK) 13472.4010671.862800.541.41 Annual health expenditure (TK) 981.98458.84523.151.95 Table 9 : Impact of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education Program 20

21 21 Phase 2: Outcomes at community level, evidence and documents on the productive outcomes  FGD & KII  HIES community survey data collectedcommunity survey RQ 1)What are the productive outcomes of selected safety nets at the community level ? 2)Is there any difference between the productive outcomes of male and female at community level?

22 1)What are the successful examples of government & NGOs safety nets interventions which foster productive outcomes? 2)What are the recommendations for adjustment and actions? 3)What would be the alternative coordination/ integration mechanism at the local and central level? Research Questions 22 Phase 3: Enhancing the productive outcomes of the SSN For RQ (1)  International as well as regional programs similar to interventions has been reviewed  Particularly we aim to identify productive roles of widely cited safety net programs.  Program-impact matrix will be developed

23 23  Based on the results in phase-I & 2, recommendations will be provided for adjustments & actions to be taken to maximize the productive outcomes  Recommendations will consider whether existing institutional & operational arrangements as well as policy frameworks can foster the changes recommended  Alternative coordination/integration mechanisms will also be explored Phase 3: Research question 2 & 3

24 24 Major activities and progress made Work PlanUpdate/Progress made Desk research: working on research problem, organizing literature review, formulating conceptual framework etc. Completed (Literature review could be modified & improved) Draft inception reportCompleted Preparation and submission of final inception reportCompleted Inception workshop at BAUCompleted Developing qualitative check list for FGDs/KIIs, pre-testing and finalizing checklists Completed Collecting secondary documents including the HIES 2010 dataCompleted Preparation of methodological note which will incorporate qualitative check list, sample design, detailed fieldwork plan etc. Completed Sampling, selection of data enumerators and organizing training Completed, Training will be organized before going to complementary field survey Conducting complementary field survey at the community village level/FGD/KII To be done Data cleaning/preparation of HIES dataCompleted Data cleaning/preparation of complementary field survey dataTo be done Preparation and submission of draft interim reportSubmitted Data analysis and model estimationGoing-on Preparation & submission of (a) draft report (b) dataset, codebooks & documentations (in electronic format) To be done Final workshop with resultsTo be done Preparation and submission of final report (with dataset) /publications/writing articles To be done

25 25

Download ppt "1 Principal Investigator Ismat Ara Begum, PhD Department of Agricultural Economics BAU, Mymensingh-2202 Interim Report Prepared for Presentation at NFPCSP-FAO."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google