GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Debunking the stereotype of the lazy welfare recipient: Evidence from cash transfer programs worldwide

Debunking the stereotype of the lazy welfare recipient: Evidence from cash transfer programs worldwide

Library
Abhijit Banerjee, Rema Hanna, Gabriel Kreindler, & Benjamin A. Olken
2015

Summary

This paper re-analyses the results of seven randomized controlled trials of government run cash transfer programs from six countries – Honduras, Indonesia, Morocco, Mexico (2 different programs), Nicaragua, and the Philippines – to examine the program impacts on labour supply. The re-analysis uses harmonized data definitions and empirical strategies to make the data as comparable as possible. Re-analysing the micro data directly also allows the authors to pool effects across studies to yield tighter bounds than would be possible from any single study.

The paper uses data on this issue from randomized control trials (RCT) that meet three criteria:

  • the trial was an evaluation of a (conditional or unconditional) cash transfer program in a low-income country that compared the program to a pure control group;
  • the micro data for both adult males and females from the evaluation was available;
  • and the randomization needed to have at least 40 clusters.

Across the seven programs, the authors find no observable impacts of the cash transfer programs on either the propensity to work or the overall number of hours worked, for either men or women. Pooling across the five comparably designed studies, in order to maximize statistical power to detect effects if they exist, again finds no observable impacts on either work outcome. Looking at the pooled sample, the authors find a small, significant negative effect on work inside the household (about 1 percentage point, significant at 10 percent level). However, they find no observable effect of the transfers on work outside the household.

Source

Abhijit Banerjee, A., Hanna, R., Kreindler, H. G., & Olken, B. A. (2015). Debunking the stereotype of the lazy welfare recipient: Evidence from cash transfer programs worldwide.

Related Content

Social protection
Topic Guide
2019
Social Safety Nets in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States
Helpdesk Report
2019
Cash-Based Initiatives for Refugees in Jordan: Annotated Bibliography
Helpdesk Report
2019
Assistive technologies in developing countries
Helpdesk Report
2017

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2025; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2025; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2025

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".