IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0301578.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multivariate mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression models with difference-in-differences estimator of the impact of WORTH Yetu on household hunger and socioeconomic status among OVC caregivers in Tanzania

Author

Listed:
  • Amon Exavery
  • Peter J Kirigiti
  • Ramkumar T Balan
  • John Charles

Abstract

Background: Although most of the livelihood programmes target women, those that involve women and men have been evaluated as though men and women were a single homogenous population, with a mere inclusion of gender as an explanatory variable. This study evaluated the impact of WORTH Yetu (an economic empowerment intervention to improve livelihood outcomes) on household hunger, and household socioeconomic status (SES) among caregivers (both women and men) of orphaned and vulnerable children (OVC) in Tanzania. The study hypothesized that women and men respond to livelihood interventions differently, hence a need for gender-disaggregated impact evaluation of such interventions. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of longitudinal data, involving caregivers’ baseline (2016–2019) and follow-up (2019–2020) data from the USAID Kizazi Kipya project in 25 regions of Tanzania. Two dependent variables (ie, outcomes) were assessed; household hunger which was measured using the Household Hunger Scale (HHS), and Socioeconomic Status (SES) using the Principal Component Analysis (PCA). WORTH Yetu, a livelihood intervention implemented by the USAID Kizazi Kipya project was the main independent variable whose impact on the two outcomes was evaluated using multivariate analysis with a multilevel mixed-effects, ordinal logistic regression model with difference-in-differences (DiD) estimator for impact estimation. Results: The analysis was based on 497,293 observations from 249,655 caregivers of OVC at baseline, and 247,638 of them at the follow-up survey. In both surveys, 70% were women and 30% were men. Their mean age was 49.3 (±14.5) years at baseline and 52.7 (±14.8) years at the follow-up survey. Caregivers’ membership in WORTH Yetu was 10.1% at the follow-up. After adjusting for important confounders there was a significant decline in the severity of household hunger by 46.4% among WORTH Yetu members at the follow-up compared to the situation at the baseline (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) = 0.536, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) [0.521, 0.553]). The decline was 45.7% among women (aOR = 0.543 [0.524, 0.563]) and 47.5% among men (aOR = 0.525 [0.497, 0.556]). Regarding SES, WORTH Yetu members were 15.9% more likely to be in higher wealth quintiles at the follow-up compared to the situation at the baseline (aOR = 1.159 [1.128, 1.190]). This impact was 20.8% among women (aOR = 1.208 [1.170, 1.247]) and 4.6% among men (aOR = 1.046 [0.995, 1.101]). Conclusion: WORTH Yetu was associated with a significant reduction in household hunger, and a significant increase in household SES among OVC caregivers in Tanzania within an average follow-up period of 1.6 years. The estimated impacts differed significantly by gender, suggesting that women and men responded to the WORTH Yetu intervention differently. This implied that the design, delivery, and evaluation of such programmes should happen in a gender responsive manner, recognising that women and men are not the same with respect to the programmes.

Suggested Citation

  • Amon Exavery & Peter J Kirigiti & Ramkumar T Balan & John Charles, 2024. "Multivariate mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression models with difference-in-differences estimator of the impact of WORTH Yetu on household hunger and socioeconomic status among OVC caregivers in ," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(4), pages 1-24, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0301578
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0301578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0301578
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0301578&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0301578?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reed, M.S. & Ferré, M. & Martin-Ortega, J. & Blanche, R. & Lawford-Rolfe, R. & Dallimer, M. & Holden, J., 2021. "Evaluating impact from research: A methodological framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    2. Christopher B. Barrett & Michael R. Carter, 2010. "The Power and Pitfalls of Experiments in Development Economics: Some Non-random Reflections," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(4), pages 515-548.
    3. Malapit, Hazel Jean L. & Quisumbing, Agnes R., 2015. "What dimensions of women’s empowerment in agriculture matter for nutrition in Ghana?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 54-63.
    4. Sophie Webber & Carolyn Prouse, 2018. "The New Gold Standard: The Rise of Randomized Control Trials and Experimental Development," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 94(2), pages 166-187, March.
    5. Shraddha Bajaria & Ramadhani Abdul & Amon Exavery & Epifania Minja & John Charles & Sally Mtenga & Elizabeth Jere & Eveline Geubbels, 2020. "Programmatic determinants of successful referral to health and social services for orphans and vulnerable children: A longitudinal study in Tanzania," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-15, September.
    6. Shanta Paudel Khatiwada & Wei Deng & Bikash Paudel & Janak Raj Khatiwada & Jifei Zhang & Jiangjun Wan, 2018. "A Gender Analysis of Changing Livelihood Activities in the Rural Areas of Central Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, November.
    7. Wei Wei & Tanwne Sarker & Wioletta Żukiewicz-Sobczak & Rana Roy & G. M. Monirul Alam & Md. Ghulam Rabbany & Mohammad Shakhawat Hossain & Noshaba Aziz, 2021. "The Influence of Women’s Empowerment on Poverty Reduction in the Rural Areas of Bangladesh: Focus on Health, Education and Living Standard," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-18, June.
    8. Amon Exavery & John Charles & Asheri Barankena & Shraddha Bajaria & Epifania Minja & Jacob Mulikuza & Tumainiel Mbwambo & Amal Ally & Remmy Mseya & Godfrey M Mubyazi & Levina Kikoyo & Marianna Balampa, 2022. "Impact of household economic strengthening intervention on food security among caregivers of orphans and vulnerable children in Tanzania," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-19, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ongudi, Silas & Thiam, Djiby, 2021. "The Direct and Indirect Effects of Income on the Consumption of Nutrients: Experimental Evidence from Kenya," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 314956, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Vikram Tyagi & Sophie Webber, 2021. "A rusting gold standard: Failures in an Indonesian RCT, and the implications for poverty reduction," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 53(5), pages 992-1011, August.
    3. Mosses Lufuke & Yunli Bai & Shenggen Fan & Xu Tian, 2022. "Women’s Empowerment, Food Security, and Nutrition Transition in Africa," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-11, December.
    4. Sylvain Chassang & Erik Snowberg & Ben Seymour & Cayley Bowles, 2015. "Accounting for Behavior in Treatment Effects: New Applications for Blind Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    5. Quentin Stoeffler & Michael Carter & Catherine Guirkinger & Wouter Gelade, 2022. "The Spillover Impact of Index Insurance on Agricultural Investment by Cotton Farmers in Burkina Faso," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 36(1), pages 114-140.
    6. Sophie Webber, 2015. "Randomising Development: Geography, Economics and the Search for Scientific Rigour," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 106(1), pages 36-52, February.
    7. Florent Bédécarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2015. "The gold standard for randomized evaluations: from discussion of method to political economy," Working Papers DT/2015/01, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    8. Ricker-Gilbert, Jacob & Jones, Michael, 2015. "Does storage technology affect adoption of improved maize varieties in Africa? Insights from Malawi’s input subsidy program," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 92-105.
    9. Tilman Brück & Neil T. N. Ferguson, 2020. "Money can’t buy love but can it buy peace? Evidence from the EU Programme for Peace and Reconciliation (PEACE II)," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(5), pages 536-558, September.
    10. Ruel, Marie T. & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Balagamwala, Mysbah, 2017. "Nutrition-sensitive agriculture: What have we learned and where do we go from here?," IFPRI discussion papers 1681, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. James R. Stevenson & Karen Macours & Douglas Gollin, 2023. "The Rigor Revolution: New Standards of Evidence for Impact Assessment of International Agricultural Research," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 15(1), pages 495-515, October.
    12. Simone Passarelli & Dawit Mekonnen & Elizabeth Bryan & Claudia Ringler, 2018. "Evaluating the pathways from small-scale irrigation to dietary diversity: evidence from Ethiopia and Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 10(4), pages 981-997, August.
    13. repec:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2024:i:2:p:273-285. is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Stevano, Sara, 2020. "Small development questions are important, but they require big answers," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    15. Alberto Posso & Stephen C. Smith & Lucia Ferrone & UNICEF Office of Research - Innocenti, 2019. "Do constraints on women worsen child deprivations? Framework, measurement, and evidence from India," Papers inwopa1045, Innocenti Working Papers.
    16. Kaleb S. Jada & Mequanint B. Melesse & Marrit Berg, 2023. "The effects of safety certification and nutrition messaging on the demand for nutritionally enhanced food in urban Ethiopia," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 15(2), pages 395-409, April.
    17. Lata Gangadharan & Tarun Jain & Pushkar Maitra & Joe Vecci, 2022. "Lab-in-the-field experiments: perspectives from research on gender," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 31-59, January.
    18. Bageant, Elizabeth & Lentz, Erin & Narayanan, Sudha & Jensen, Nathan & Lepariyo, Watson, 2024. "How do women’s empowerment metrics measure up? A comparative analysis," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    19. André, Kévin & Cho, Charles H. & Laine, Matias, 2018. "Reference points for measuring social performance: Case study of a social business venture," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 660-678.
    20. Hoffmann, Nimi, 2020. "Involuntary experiments in former colonies: The case for a moratorium," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    21. Keishiro Hara & Iori Miura & Masanori Suzuki & Toshihiro Tanaka, 2023. "Designing research strategy and technology innovation for sustainability by adopting “imaginary future generations”—A case study using metallurgy," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3-4), September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0301578. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.