Child labor-Mod/high-No 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 - 8 of 8

You get what you pay for: Schooling incentives and child labor (Edmonds & Shrestha 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of financial schooling incentives (a scholarship and stipend) on school attendance and carpet weaving (a worst form of child labor) among youth ages…
You get what you pay for: Schooling incentives and child labor (Edmonds & Shrestha 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of financial schooling incentives (a scholarship and stipend) on school attendance and carpet weaving (a worst form of child labor) among youth ages…
The impact of financial education for youth in Ghana (Berry et al. 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of two different financial literacy programs, Aflatoun and Honest Money Box, on child labor and school attendance of children in grades 5 and 7 in…
The impact of financial education for youth in Ghana (Berry et al. 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of two different financial literacy programs, Aflatoun and Honest Money Box, on child labor and school attendance of children in grades 5 and 7 in…
Do education and health conditions matter in a large cash transfer? Evidence from a Honduran experiment (Benedetti et al. 2016)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of a conditional cash transfer on school enrollment and child labor. The study was a randomized controlled trial conducted in in low-income villages…
Three essays on investments in children's human capital (Bustelo 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of a Nicaraguan conditional cash transfer program, Red de Proteccion Social (RPS), on child work participation and school enrollment. The study was a…
Conditional cash transfers in education: Design features, peer and sibling effects. Evidence from a randomized experiment in Columbia (Berrera-Osorio et al. 2008)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Subsidios Condicionados a la Asistencia Escolar, a conditional cash transfer program (CCT), on school participation and child labor. This summary…
Conditional cash transfers in education: Design features, peer and sibling effects. Evidence from a randomized experiment in Columbia (Barrera-Osorio et al. 2008)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Subsidios Condicionados a la Asistencia Escolar, a conditional cash transfer program (CCT), on school participation and child labor. This summary…

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.