Among the negative stereotypes of cash transfers, a recurrent one is their purported negative effect on mutual help and informal support among people. New evidence from Ghana helps busting this myth: de Milliano et al show that the LEAP1000 program, which supports pregnant women and mothers of children under one year living in poverty, “… increased group membership and participation in local ceremonies and activities [generating] a potential crowding-in of new social support”. How did this happen? Cash improved access to financial markets, such as borrowing money or contributing to local savings schemes (instrumental support), thereby strengthening social participation in local groups and gatherings (emotional support). And in doing so, not only was beneficiaries’ need for assistance reduced, but the newfound economic security enabled them to help others.

Let’s get into “how to” issues! A fantastic compendium explores cross-country practices in bridging civil registries, issuance of identity credentials, and access to social protection programs. Penned by the Canadian Centre of Excellence for Civil Registration and Vital Statistics Systems, it provides a rich set of lessons with case studies from Argentina, Chile, Namibia, South Korea, and Tunisia (in Argentina, for example, there is an insightful discussion on how, program by program, approaches evolved over the past 20 years and showing that “… positive convergence between social protection and legal identity policies does indeed exist”). See also a webinar presenting key findings (h/t Valentina Barca).

Since I mentioned the past… it’s been a vibrant week with reflections about the past year and the future… and in all formats! For example, Peres et al are the editors of a fascinating collection of 14 short articles in the latest edition of Policy in Focus; the video recordings of the BMZ-ODI sponsored event on Covid-19 lesson is now available; and an inspiring NPR podcast with NYT poverty reporter Jason DeParle discusses the potential, ongoing tectonic changes in the US poverty narrative – i.e., the new “child tax credits” (which are not a ‘credit’ and are not based on ‘taxes’) provide families with an unprecedented $3,600/child in 2021 and are nearly-universal in coverage (eligibility includes households earning less than $180,000/year) (h/t Truman Packard).

Speaking of universal child benefits, a UNICEF report by Kidd et al lays out different scenarios for introducing those programs  in six South Asian countries. In particular, it provides estimates for three eligibility options – (1) benefits for children of 0-2 years, (2) 0-5 years, and (3) 0-9 years – and shows that the initial cost would be of 0.16-0.3%, 0.3-0.6%, and 0.6-1% of GDP respectively. Those investments would rise gradually over time (e.g., in Pakistan, by nearly 0.04% of GDP annually). Coverage would be substantial, e.g., for option (2) it would result in covering between 29.7% of households in Sri Lanka and 53.5% of them in Pakistan (by 2035, such rates would rise to 62.8% and 84.9%, respectively). Since lower welfare deciles have more children, their incidence would be progressive: for example, in Pakistan option (2) would reach 85.2% of the population in the poorest decile (and 1/3 of those in the richest one). Poverty would be reduced from 5.9% in the Maldives to 18.7% in India (by 2035 it would be in the 16.8-55% range). Bonus: a blog by Patel et al argue that child grants empower women in Brazil and South Africa (see full paper here).

How to fund social assistance? One often-cited mechanism is subsidy reforms, so a new review by Auktor and Loewe is very welcome. In particular, they capture lessons and ingredients from energy and food subsidy reforms in MENA with structured case studies from Egypt, Morocco and Iran. These include insights on outreach, political dialogue, compensation (including cash transfers), government commitment, and social turmoil – check out table 4 on p.26 for a great comparative summary. Importantly, the paper notes that “… [a]n end to the reforms has not yet been reached in any of the three countries”.

What’s new on the labor and skills front (h/t Michael Weber) Let’s begin with the two sides of the training coin: does business training for small scale entrepreneurs work? In Kenya, McKenzie and Puerto show that three years after training, treated businesses are selling more, earn higher profits, and their owners have higher well-being.  In Chile, however, providing classroom and on-the-job or technical training had no effect on wage and self-employment (income rose in the short-term, but faded over time) (h/t Dave Evans).

Four new resources on unemployment insurance! In Finland, Kyyrä evaluates the effects of a reform that increased the level of unemployment assistance by 22%: the reform led to a drop of 9% in the unemployment exit hazard – put differently, a 10% increase in unemployment assistance reduces the unemployment exit hazard by 4% and the job finding hazard by 6%. In France, Benghalem and Villedieu showed that informing the unemployed about the existence of part-time unemployment benefits had a significant positive impact on the propensity to work “while on claim”, but reduced the unemployment exit rate. In Sweden, Landais et al argue that in using a subsidy for supplemental unemployment insurance coverage is optimal and complementary to the use of a minimum mandate. Finally, Autor and Mas organized a fabulous Spring Labor Studies Program Meeting with 7 papers featured, including the Marinescu et al’s piece on the impact of the US pandemic unemployment compensation on job search and vacancy creation (didn’t have much impact due to labor market tightness).

Let me end on a romantic note… an all-star collection of Disasters articles (h/t Paul Bance) brought me back to my PhD days, like De Waal’s 1988 article on early warning systems, Dreze’s 1991 famine prevention paper, or Young and Jaspar’s 1995 famine piece. Thirty years on, all still very relevant…

Happy Easter!