IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/idb/ovewps/0311.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Same Bureaucracy, Different Outcomes in Human Capital? How Indigenous and Rural Non-Indigenous Areas in Panama Responded to the CCT

Author

Listed:
  • Irani Arráiz

    () (Inter-American Development Bank)

  • Sandra Rozo

    () (Inter-American Development Bank)

Abstract

This paper estimates the impact of the conditional cash transfer program, Red de Oportunidades, on human capital outcomes in areas with different incidences of poverty: indigenous and rural non-indigenous areas of Panama. The analysis relies on data from the Living Standards Measurement Survey of 2008. It uses a propensity score matching technique to identify the impact of the program by replicating the selection criteria followed by the government. Our results show that the program increased school enrollment and was able to reduce child labor in both areas. In rural areas, the impact of the program on education outcomes was restricted to enrollment in middle school where we estimated an increase of 10.2 percentage points (pp). The program also increased the proportion of children that completed elementary school by 13.8 pp, although it did not have an impact on enrollment in elementary or high school. In indigenous areas, the impact of the program on education outcomes was restricted to enrollment in elementary school where we estimate an increase of 7.9 pp. Additionally, the results show that the program reduced child labor in children ages 12 to 15 in both areas: by 10.1 pp in rural areas and 15.8 pp in indigenous areas. With regard to preventive health care services, we found no evidence of impact on the numbers of visits to health care providers or the number of vaccines that children received. However, we estimated that the proportion of women who had a Papanicolau test screening because of the program increased by 11.7 pp in rural areas and 14.7 pp in indigenous areas. Sadly, we found that the program might also have led to an increase in the number of pregnancies in rural areas: the proportion of pregnant women in 2008 was 3.2 pp higher in the beneficiary group than in the control group, and the number of pregnancies since the beginning of the program increased by 0.44 among beneficiaries---despite the fact that the number of children ages 3 to 6, who were born before the implementation of the program, was not statistically different between the groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Irani Arráiz & Sandra Rozo, 2011. "Same Bureaucracy, Different Outcomes in Human Capital? How Indigenous and Rural Non-Indigenous Areas in Panama Responded to the CCT," OVE Working Papers 0311, Inter-American Development Bank, Office of Evaluation and Oversight (OVE).
  • Handle: RePEc:idb:ovewps:0311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://idbdocs.iadb.org/WSDocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=36180403
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Conditional Cash Transfer; Impact Evaluation; Panama;

    JEL classification:

    • I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy
    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:idb:ovewps:0311. 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: (Felipe Herrera Library). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/iadbbus.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.