Child labor-Mod/high-Mixed impacts

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 1 - 5 of 5

Leveling the intra-household playing field: Compensation and specialization in child labor allocation (Del Carpio & Macours 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Atención a Crisis ("Attention to the Crisis”), a conditional cash transfer (CCT) program, on the allocation of child labor within poor households…
Tanzania Youth Study of the Productive Social Safety Net (PSSN) impact evaluation: Endline report (The Tanzania Cash Plus Evaluation Team 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Productive Social Safety Net (PSSN) program on child labor and school participation outcomes. This summary focuses on the comparison of the…
Tanzania Youth Study of the Productive Social Safety Net (PSSN) impact evaluation: Endline report (The Tanzania Cash Plus Evaluation Team 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Productive Social Safety Net (PSSN) program on child labor and school participation outcomes. This summary focuses on the comparison of the…
Household micro-entrepreneurial activity and child work: Evidence from two African unconditional cash transfer programs (de Hoop et al. 2017)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of unconditional cash transfers on child labor and school attendance in Malawi and Zambia. This summary focuses on the Malawi Social Cash Transfer…
Effect of the Mchinji Social Cash Transfer Pilot Scheme on children's schooling, work and health outcomes: A multilevel study using experimental data (Luseno 2012)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The objective of the study was to examine the impact of the Mchinji Social Cash Transfer Pilot Scheme (SCTPS) on child labor and school outcomes. The study was a randomized controlled trial…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.