The Effectiveness of Conditional Cash Transfer Program: A Case of Rural and Urban Beneficiaries in Philippines

Charlyn Maybituin Capulong, Agham C Cuevas

Abstract


This paper analyzes the effectiveness of the Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) program in the Philippines in terms of its effect on conditionality goods as reflected by food, health, and education expenditures of households from rural and urban areas that benefitted the program.  The CCT program in the Philippines is known as Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) that seeks to address the problem on poverty by improving the socioeconomic status of poor households through targeted investments in health and education. This study used the Propensity Score Matching methodology in estimating the average treatment effect on the treated to capture the effect of CCT on conditionality goods. The study finds that CCT has a significant effect on education for household beneficiaries in rural areas and has improved the quality of food consumed by household beneficiaries in urban areas. Also, a decreased in the per capita total expenditure and per capita food expenditure of the household beneficiaries is revealed in urban areas driven by their improved saving behavior. Thus, the CCT program, at some point, is effective in meeting its short-term goal, but it must be more targeted in order to improve its impact on other conditionality goods.


Keywords


CCT; Health Expenditure; Education Expenditure; Food Expenditure; PSM

Full Text:

PDF

References


Attanasio, O., & Mesnard, A. (2006). The Impact of a Conditional Cash Transfer Programme on Consumption in Colombia*. Fiscal Studies, 27(4), 421–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5890.2006.00041.x

Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some Practical Guidance for the Implementation of Propensity Score Matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(1), 31–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x

Chaudhury, N., Friedman, J., & Onishi, J. (2013). Philippines conditional cash transfer program impact evaluation 2012. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Dandekar, V., & Rath, N. (1971). Poverty in India, Indian School of Political Economy.

Das, J., Do, Q., & Ozler, B. (2005). Reassessing Conditional Cash Transfer Programs. The World Bank Research Observer, 20(1), 57–80. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lki005

Department of Social Welfare and Development. (2019). About the Program. Accessed on June 11, 2022, from https://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/about/

Duvendack, M., & Palmer-Jones, R. (2012). High Noon for Microfinance Impact Evaluations: Re-investigating the Evidence from Bangladesh. Journal of Development Studies, 48(12), 1864–1880. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2011.646989

Engel, E. (1857). Die productions-und consumtionsverhältnisse des königreichs sachsen. Zeitschrift des Statistischen Bureaus des Königlich Sächsischen Ministeriums des Innern, 8, 1-54.

Gao, Q., Zhai, F., & Garfinkel, I. (2010). How Does Public Assistance Affect Family Expenditures? The Case of Urban China. World Development, 38(7), 989–1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.12.005

Gao, Q., Zhai, F., Yang, S., & Li, S. (2014). Does Welfare Enable Family Expenditures on Human Capital? Evidence from China. World Development, 64, 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.06.003

Han, H., Gao, Q., & Xu, Y. (2016). Welfare Participation and Family Consumption Choices in Rural China. Global Social Welfare, 3(4), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40609-016-0066-0

Heckman, J. J., Ichimura, H., & Todd, P. (1998). Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator. Review of Economic Studies, 65(2), 261–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-937x.00044

Heckman, J. J., Lalonde, R. J., & Smith, J. A. (1999). The Economics and Econometrics of Active Labor Market Programs. Handbook of Labor Economics, 1865–2097. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1573-4463(99)03012-6

Imbens, G. W., & Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(1), 5–86. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.47.1.5

Lamberte, M. B., & Bautista, R. M. (1990). Comparative Saving Behavior of Rural and Urban Households in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Development JPD 1990 Vol. XVII No. 2-, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

Lopez-Arana, S., Avendano, M., van Lenthe, F. J., & Burdorf, A. (2016). The impact of a conditional cash transfer programme on determinants of child health: evidence from Colombia. Public Health Nutrition, 19(14), 2629–2642. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1368980016000240

Meng, C., & Pfau, W. D. (2012). Simulating the Impacts of Cash Transfers on Poverty and School Attendance: The Case of Cambodia. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 33(4), 436–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-012-9292-5

Philippine Statistics Authority. (2022). Proportion of Poor Filipinos was Recorded at 18.1 Percent in 2021. Psa.gov.ph. https://psa.gov.ph/statistics/poverty/node/167972

Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Sensitivity to Hidden Bias. Observational Studies, 105–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3692-2_4

Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/70.1.41

Saucedo Delgado, O., Kadelbach, V., & Mata Mata, L. (2018). Effects of Conditional Cash Transfers (CCT) in Anti-Poverty Programs. An Empirical Approach with Panel Data for the Mexican Case of PROSPERA-Oportunidades (2002–2012). Economies, 6(2), 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies6020029

Smith, J. A., & Todd, P. E. (2005). Does matching overcome LaLonde’s critique of nonexperimental estimators? Journal of Econometrics, 125(1–2), 305–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2004.04.011

Tutor, M. V. (2014). The impact of Philippines' conditional cash transfer program on consumption. Philippine Review of Economics, 51(1), 117-161. https://pre.econ.upd.edu.ph/index.php/pre/issue/view/108

Zenk, S. N., Schulz, A. J., Israel, B. A., James, S. A., Bao, S., & Wilson, M. L. (2006). Fruit and vegetable access differs by community racial composition and socioeconomic position in Detroit, Michigan. Ethnicity & disease, 16(1), 275–280.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.18196/jerss.v8i1.20726

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.



Office:
Redaksi Journal of Economics Research and Social Sciences, Gedung E2 Lantai 2, Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta
Jalan Brawijaya, Tamantirto, Kasihan, Bantul, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta 55183

Email: jerss@umy.ac.id

Telp: +62 812-3233-6697

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.