Year Published
- 2008 (0)
- 2009 (0)
- 2010 (1) Apply 2010 filter
- (-) Remove 2011 filter 2011
- 2012 (2) Apply 2012 filter
- 2013 (1) Apply 2013 filter
- 2014 (0)
- 2015 (1) Apply 2015 filter
- 2016 (3) Apply 2016 filter
- (-) Remove 2017 filter 2017
- 2018 (1) Apply 2018 filter
- 2019 (4) Apply 2019 filter
- 2020 (0)
- 2021 (1) Apply 2021 filter
Research Topics
Populations
Types of Research
- Data Analysis (3) Apply Data Analysis filter
- Literature Review (2) Apply Literature Review filter
- Portfolio Review (0)
- Research Brief (0)
Geography
- East Africa Region and Selected Countries (3) Apply East Africa Region and Selected Countries filter
- Global (1) Apply Global filter
- South Asia Region and Selected Countries (1) Apply South Asia Region and Selected Countries filter
- Southern Africa Region and Selected Countries (0)
- Sub-Saharan Africa (0)
- West Africa Region and Selected Countries (1) Apply West Africa Region and Selected Countries filter
Dataset
- ASTI (0)
- FAOSTAT (0)
- Farmer First (0)
- LSMS & LSMS-ISA (3) Apply LSMS & LSMS-ISA filter
- Other Datasets (1) Apply Other Datasets filter
Current search
- (-) Remove Poverty filter Poverty
- (-) Remove 2011 filter 2011
- (-) Remove 2017 filter 2017
- (-) Remove Education & Training filter Education & Training
Cash transfer programs are interventions that directly provide cash to target specific populations with the aim of reducing poverty and supporting a variety of development outcomes. Low- and middle-income countries have increasingly adopted cash transfer programs as central elements of their poverty reduction and social protection strategies. Bastagli et al. (2016) report that around 130 low- and middle-income countries have at least one UCT program, and 63 countries have at least one CCT program (up from 27 countries in 2008). Through a comprehensive review of literature, this report primarily considers the evidence of the long-term impacts of cash transfer programs in low- and lower middle-income countries. A review of 54 reviews that aggregate and summarize findings from multiple studies of cash transfer programs reveals largely positive evidence on long-term outcomes related to general health, reproductive health, nutrition, labor markets, poverty, and gender and intra-household dynamics, though findings vary by context and in many cases overall conclusions on the long-term impacts of cash transfers are mixed. In addition, evidence on long-term impacts for many outcome measures is limited, and few studies explicitly aim to measure long-term impacts distinctly from immediate or short-term impacts of cash transfers.
This is "Section B" of a report that presents estimates and summary statistics from the 2008/2009 wave of the Tanzania National Panel Survey (TZNPS), part of the Living Standards Measurement Study – Integrated Surveys on Agriculture (LSMS-ISA). We present our analyses of household characteristics by gender and by administrative zone, considering landholding size, number of crops grown, yields, livestock, input use, and food consumption.
This is "Section C" of a report that presents estimates and summary statistics from the 2008/2009 wave of the Tanzania National Panel Survey (TZNPS), part of the Living Standards Measurement Study – Integrated Surveys on Agriculture (LSMS-ISA). We present our analyses of the basic characteristics of household heads and other household members, as well as our analyses of education for adults, children, and household heads by gender and zone.
The purpose of this literature review is to identify the linkages between increases in agricultural productivity and poverty reduction. The relevant literature includes economic theory and evidence from applied growth and multiplier models as well as micro-level studies evaluating the impact of specific productivity increases on local poverty outcomes. We find that cross-country and micro-level empirical studies provide general support for the theories of a positive relationship between growth in agricultural productivity and poverty alleviation, regardless of the measures of productivity and poverty that are used. The evidence also suggests multiple pathways through which increases in agricultural productivity can reduce poverty, including real income changes, employment generation, rural non-farm multiplier effects, and food prices effects. However, we find that barriers to technology adoption, initial asset endowments, and constraints to market access may all inhibit the ability of the poorest to participate in the gains from agricultural productivity growth.