Date post: | 17-Jan-2017 |
Category: |
Government & Nonprofit |
Upload: | transferprojct |
View: | 243 times |
Download: | 2 times |
Consumption Smoothing and Productive Investments in Rural Zambia
Juan Bonilla – AIRA. Handa (UNICEF), N. Rai (AIR), D. Seidenfeld (AIR)
November 2015
Copyright © 2015 American Institutes for Research. All rights reserved.
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
The case for Consumption Smoothing
• Rural households in developing countries face substantial risk• Need to free consumption from income so not to be driven to extremities
when income is low – LC/PIH: Modigiliani, 1959; Friedman, 1957.
• CS mechanisms: precautionary savings, risk pooling, assets as buffer stocks, crop diversification.
• but, evidence suggests HHs only partially able to protect consumption from income shocks – (Kaziaga & Udri, 2006; Alderman & Paxon, 1994; Jalan and Ravallion, 1999; Townsend, 1994)
• A minimum level of income required?
2
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Consumption Smoothing & UCTs
• Cash transfers: potential vehicle for sustaining household consumption– Settings with limited formal insurance and weak credit markets– Limited empirical evidence
Research Question: • Do UCTs for very low income households reduce consumption
variability over time?– If so, what are the mechanisms used to smooth consumption
3
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Zambia’s Child Grant Program
- Started in 2010- Households with a child under 3 enrolled- Unconditional- 55 Kwacha per month (increased over time)- No differentiation by household size
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
CGP Districts: Greatest Poverty Levels(Travel Time from Lusaka by Vehicle)
Kaputa(20 Hrs)
Kalabo(12 Hrs)
Shangombo(16 Hrs)
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
2010: Less than Half the Consumption Compared to Similar Rural Households
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
TotalFood
Kw
per
cap
ita
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
2010: 96% below extreme poverty line, much higher than similar rural households
CGP LCMS Rural LCMS Rural Child <5 LCMS 3 districts, Child<5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
National Extreme Poverty Line
Perc
ent
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
DATA: 4 Years with 5 Rounds of Data Collection• Baseline: Sep/Oct 2010 (early Lean Season)• 24M: Sep/Oct 2012• 30M: June/July 2013 (Harvest Season)• 36M: Sep/Oct 2013• 48M: Sep/Oct 2014
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Empirical Strategies (ES)Use two complementary identification strategies:
1. Changes in consumption for those exposed to aggregate negative shocks vary by treatment condition
2. Experimental Design: Consumption by treatment condition
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
ES 1: DD over shocks and CGP
log of consumption for hh in district at time = 1 if i affected by shock at time t = 1 if i is a CGP beneficiary
time and district fixed effects
Test for Consumption Smoothing:
Consistency: Shocks and CGP
10
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
No difference in reporting shocks by T and C
Affected by Affected by Price Changes in Any Drought Flood Crop Inputs Food
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
CGP x Post 0.062 -0.009 0.062 0.010 0.002 -0.009 (0.055) (0.041) (0.045) (0.012) (0.013) (0.043) Shock Mean 0.55 0.28 0.20 0.05 0.03 0.27 Adj. R2 0.17 0.32 0.13 0.01 0.01 0.06 N 12056 12056 12056 12056 12056 12056
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
… and no correlation between observables and reporting a negative shocks
Coefficient SE CGP recipient -0.003 0.014 Household size 0.001 0.021 Recipient is married 0.010 0.009 Age of recipient -0.000 0.001 Recipient highest grade -0.000 0.001 Number of people ages 0-5 0.001 0.021 Number of people ages 6-12 0.002 0.021 Number of people ages 13-18 -0.002 0.022 Number of people ages 19-35 -0.005 0.023 Number of people ages 36-55 0.004 0.022 Number of people ages 56-69 -0.013 0.027
N 9523
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Coefficient SE Maize grain price -0.000 0.001 Bean price 0.010*** 0.004 Dry fish price -0.003 0.003 Cooking oil price 0.007 0.006 Sugar price -0.006 0.007 Table salt price -0.000 0.002 Toilet soap price -0.001 0.009 Laundry soap price -0.009 0.008 Secondary school fee -0.000 0.000 Total expenditures 0.000 0.001 HH owned any chickens 0.008 0.008 HH owned any cows 0.018 0.019 HH owned any milk cows -0.019 0.014 HH owned any goats 0.014 0.028 HH owned any goats 0.014 0.021 N 9523
… and no correlation between observables and reporting a negative shocks
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Results: CGP insulates recipients against shocks
Log of Total Expenditures
(1) (2) (3) (4) Negative Shock (𝜷𝟏) -0.07*** -0.07*** -0.06** -0.05** (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) CGP (𝛽2) 0.27*** 0.26*** 0.24*** 0.20*** (0.05) (0.05) (0.04) (0.03) CGP x Shock (𝛽3) 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06* (0.04) (0.03) (0.03) (0.03) Shock, CGP -0.037 -0.024 -0.007 0.010 (𝜷𝟏 + 𝜷𝟑) (0.028) (0.029) (0.025) (0.022) Mean of Shock 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Time FE Yes Yes Yes Demographics Yes Yes Food prices Yes Adj. R2 0.06 0.07 0.19 0.21 N 9541 9541 9541 9539
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
… regardless of the type of shock
Affected by Affected by Price Changes in Any Drought Flood Crop Inputs Food
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Shock, CGP: Total Expenditures 0.010 -0.024 0.006 0.066 -0.026 0.021 (𝛽1 + 𝛽3) (0.022) (0.030) (0.033) (0.043) (0.061) (0.025) Food Expenditures 0.005 -0.003 0.002 0.017 -0.010 0.006 (𝛽1 + 𝛽3) (0.006) (0.009) (0.010) (0.013) (0.018) (0.007) Mean of Shock 0.60 0.32 0.16 0.06 0.03 0.30 N 9539 9539 9539 9539 9539 9539
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Empirical Strategy 2:Tracking expenditure levels over time
consumption for household in district at time = 1 if i is a CGP beneficiarytime fixed effects
Test for Consumption Smoothing:Control: CGP:
16
𝑆24 𝑆30 𝑆36 𝑆48
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
CGP recipients show more stable consumption levels over time
𝛾 2,24
𝛾3,24
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
CGP recipients show more stable consumption levels over time
Total Food Domestic Health Other (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Baseline Mean 40.48 30.03 2.25 5.18 2.97 Tests (p-values): 𝛾2,24 = 𝛾2,30 = 𝛾2,36 = 𝛾2,48 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.10 0.99 ST,24=ST,30=ST,36=ST,48 0.17 0.12 0.02 0.42 0.23 Adj. R2 0.17 0.16 0.07 0.06 0.07 N 12054 12056 12054 12054 12053
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
… the control group exhibits more food consumption volatility as a fraction of total spending
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Smoothing consumption shares Food Domestic Health Other (1) (2) (3) (4)
Baseline Mean 0.72 0.15 0.06 0.07 Tests (p-values): 𝛾2,24 = 𝛾2,30 = 𝛾2,36 = 𝛾2,48 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.02 ST,24=ST,30=ST,36=ST,48 0.93 0.58 0.00 0.09 Adj. R2 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.09 N 12054 12054 12054 12053
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Mechanisms for Consumption Smoothing
- Use of Livestock as buffer stock
- Build precautionary savings
- Invest in productive activities
- Reduce debt burden
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Livestock may be used as buffer stock
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
CGP HHs own more livestock Proportion
Chickens Cattle Goats Ducks (1) (2) (3) (4)
Treat x Post 0.152*** 0.094*** 0.033** 0.027** (0.035) (0.020) (0.012) (0.008) Baseline Mean 0.43 0.10 0.02 0.03 Adj. R2 0.13 0.08 0.06 0.02 N 12038 12056 12056 12052
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Results consistent with reported coping strategies to negative shocks
Use Savings
Sold Assets
Reduce Expenses
Work More
Use CGP
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Treat x Post 0.032* -0.002 -0.069* -0.115** 0.106*** (0.016) (0.006) (0.036) (0.044) (0.011) Outcome Mean 0.04 0.01 0.13 0.39 0.00
Adj. R2 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.17 N 6980 6980 6980 6980 5156
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Coping strategies to any negative shock
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH
Conclusions- CGP beneficiaries insulates against aggregate
negative shocks
- ... By investing in productive activities and engaging in CS mechanisms
- A minimum income value may be needed for subsistence HHs to overcome constraints preventing smooth consumption
27
Juan [email protected]
1000 Thomas Jefferson Street NWWashington, DC 20007-3835General Information: 202-403-5000www.air.org