IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/wdevel/v59y2014icp487-504.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Bolsa Família on Women’s Decision-Making Power

Author

Listed:
  • de Brauw, Alan
  • Gilligan, Daniel O.
  • Hoddinott, John
  • Roy, Shalini

Abstract

Conditional cash transfer programs with female beneficiaries have scope to increase women’s intrahousehold decision-making power. Yet quantitative evidence is limited. We show that Brazil’s Bolsa Família program has significant impacts on women’s decision making, but with considerable heterogeneity in effects. In aggregate, Bolsa Família significantly increases women’s decision-making power regarding contraception. This effect is driven by urban households, in which Bolsa Família also significantly increases women’s decision-making power in spheres related to children’s school attendance and health expenses, household durable goods purchases, and contraception use. Meanwhile, in rural households, we find no increases and possible reductions in women’s decision-making power.

Suggested Citation

  • de Brauw, Alan & Gilligan, Daniel O. & Hoddinott, John & Roy, Shalini, 2014. "The Impact of Bolsa Família on Women’s Decision-Making Power," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 487-504.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:59:y:2014:i:c:p:487-504
    DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.02.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X13000491
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Fafchamps & A. R. Quisumbing, 2002. "Control and Ownership of Assets Within Rural Ethiopian Households," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(6), pages 47-82.
    2. Duncan Thomas, 1990. "Intra-Household Resource Allocation: An Inferential Approach," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(4), pages 635-664.
    3. John Fitzgerald & Peter Gottschalk & Robert Moffitt, 1998. "An Analysis of Sample Attrition in Panel Data: The Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 251-299.
    4. Clarissa Gondim Teixeira & Fabio Veras Soares & Elydia Silva & Guilherme Issamu Hirata, 2011. "How Effective are the Non-monetary Components of CCT Programs?," One Pager 129, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    5. Chiappori, Pierre-Andre, 1988. "Rational Household Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 63-90, January.
    6. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder, 2003. "Efficient Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Using the Estimated Propensity Score," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 1161-1189, July.
    7. Behrman, Jere R., 2010. "The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and the Mexican PROGRESA Anti-Poverty and Human Resource Investment Conditional Cash," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1473-1485, October.
    8. Hoddinott, John & Haddad, Lawrence, 1995. "Does Female Income Share Influence Household Expenditures? Evidence from Cote d'Ivoire," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 57(1), pages 77-96, February.
    9. Guido W. Imbens & Whitney Newey & Geert Ridder, 2005. "Mean-square-error Calculations for Average Treatment Effects," IEPR Working Papers 05.34, Institute of Economic Policy Research (IEPR).
    10. John Fitzgerald & Peter Gottschalk & Robert Moffitt, 1998. "An Analysis of the Impact of Sample Attrition on the Second Generation of Respondents in the Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 33(2), pages 300-344.
    11. Jeffrey R Kling & Jeffrey B Liebman & Lawrence F Katz, 2007. "Experimental Analysis of Neighborhood Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 83-119, January.
    12. David A. Freedman & Richard A. Berk, 2008. "Weighting Regressions by Propensity Scores," Evaluation Review, , vol. 32(4), pages 392-409, August.
    13. Handa, Sudhanshu & Peterman, Amber & Davis, Benjamin & Stampini, Marco, 2009. "Opening Up Pandora's Box: The Effect of Gender Targeting and Conditionality on Household Spending Behavior in Mexico's Progresa Program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1129-1142, June.
    14. Ariel Fiszbein & Norbert Schady & Francisco H.G. Ferreira & Margaret Grosh & Niall Keleher & Pedro Olinto & Emmanuel Skoufias, 2009. "Conditional Cash Transfers : Reducing Present and Future Poverty," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 2597.
    15. Orazio Attanasio & Valérie Lechene, 2010. "Conditional cash transfers, women and the demand for food," IFS Working Papers W10/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    16. Gustavo J. Bobonis, 2009. "Is the Allocation of Resources within the Household Efficient? New Evidence from a Randomized Experiment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(3), pages 453-503, June.
    17. Agnes R. Quisumbing & John A. Maluccio, 2003. "Resources at Marriage and Intrahousehold Allocation: Evidence from Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and South Africa," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 65(3), pages 283-327, July.
    18. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2006. "Large Sample Properties of Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 235-267, January.
    19. Angelucci Manuela, 2008. "Love on the Rocks: Domestic Violence and Alcohol Abuse in Rural Mexico," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-43, October.
    20. Shelly Lundberg & Robert A. Pollak, 1996. "Bargaining and Distribution in Marriage," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 139-158, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:socmed:v:197:y:2018:i:c:p:9-16 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Roy, Shalini & Ara, Jinnat & Das, Narayan & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2015. "“Flypaper effects” in transfers targeted to women: Evidence from BRAC's “Targeting the Ultra Poor” program in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 1-19.
    3. Antonia Grohmann & Annekathrin Schoofs, 2018. "Financial Literacy and Intra-Household Decision Making: Evidence from Rwanda," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1720, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    4. de Brauw, Alan & Gilligan, Daniel O. & Hoddinott, John & Roy, Shalini, 2015. "The Impact of Bolsa Família on Schooling," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 303-316.
    5. Fernandez, Antonia & Della Giusta, Marina & Kambhampati, Uma S., 2015. "The Intrinsic Value of Agency: The Case of Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 92-107.
    6. Bergolo, Marcelo & Galván, Estefanía, 2018. "Intra-household Behavioral Responses to Cash Transfer Programs. Evidence from a Regression Discontinuity Design," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 100-118.
    7. repec:spr:soinre:v:137:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s11205-017-1632-2 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Dasgupta, Utteeyo & Mani, Subha, 2015. "Only Mine or All Ours: Do Stronger Entitlements Affect Altruistic Choices in the Household," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 363-375.
    9. Independent Evaluation Group, 2014. "Social Safety Nets and Gender : Learning from Impact Evaluations and World Bank Projects," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 21365.
    10. Schüring, Esther, 2014. "Preferences for Community-based Targeting - Field Experimental Evidence from Zambia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 360-373.
    11. Peterman, Amber & Schwab, Benjamin & Roy, Shalini & Hidrobo, Melissa & Gilligan, Daniel, 2015. "Measuring women’s decisionmaking: Indicator choice and survey design experiments from cash and food transfer evaluations in Ecuador, Uganda, and Yemen:," IFPRI discussion papers 1453, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. repec:eee:socmed:v:181:y:2017:i:c:p:148-157 is not listed on IDEAS

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:59:y:2014:i:c:p:487-504. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.