Costs Of Education Flashcards
Overall, does reducing direct costs actually increase enrolment/demand for education
Yes, as shown in Duflo (building more schools) , Duflo Dupas and Kremer with scholarships etc
Free school meals and uniforms on attendance
Increase
Conditional cash transfers famous in Mexico - called Progresa (now oportunidades)
When do they receive cash? (2)
Mum gets cash for each child that attends
Another transfer for meeting health guidelines (bringing children to health checkups)
Findings of Progresa on:
Years of schooling
Dropouts
Increased schooling
Reduced dropouts
We also wanted to check if conditionality was necessary. Did we need the conditions (transfer per child attending, and health checkups) , or could we should give cash?
Baird, Ozler and McIntosh explored the free cash vs condition debate:
How did they research design (control vs treatment)
Treatment - if attendance below 80%, have to get money next month.
Control - just given cash unconditionally.
Findings on
School attendance
Test scores
Fertility (because originally girls more likely to drop out, also get married and pregnant and get HIV)
School attendance improved in treatment group (with conditions)
Test scores improved with treatment group
Less likely to get fertile in treatment group
So conditional transfers seem to be good as an incentive to promote the desired behaviour.
However main disadvantage of CCT
It can deny transfers for those who dont meet conditions - they may be vulnerable and need the income support but cannot get it.
This undermines social protection dimension of welfare programs (since they may not be able to meet conditions unfairly e.g having to care for family - UNFAIR)
Unconditional cash transfers can still improve important outcomes e.g HIV infection, even if not as effective in improving targeted outcomes e.g attendance
What else does Baird find for UCT
UCT effects wear off after 5 years.
Again so CCT better
