Child labor-Low-Favorable 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 11 - 20 of 24

Cash transfer programme, productive activities and labour supply: Evidence from a randomised experiment in Kenya (Asfaw et al. 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to assess the impact of a monthly cash transfer program on household food consumption, resources, and work, including child labor. The study used survey data from a…
Child education and work choices in the presence of a conditional cash transfer programme in rural Colombia (Attanasio et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The objective of this study was to examine the impact of the conditional cash transfer program, Familias en Acción, on children’s work and school participation in Columbia. The study used a…
Exploring the differential impact of public interventions on indigenous people: Lessons from Mexico's conditional cash transfer program (Lopez-Calva & Patrinos 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The objective of the study was to examine the impact of Mexico’s conditional cash transfer program (PROGRESA/Oportunidades) on child labor and school attendance for children ages 8 to 17 across 3…
Reducing child labour in Panama: An impact evaluation (Andisha et al. 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of two components of the DESTINO program—CEC (a tutoring course) and EPA (an alternative primary school program)—on children’s participation in…
Effects of cash transfers on child labor and schooling in Kenya (Owoko 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The objective of the study was to assess the impact of Kenya’s Cash Transfer to the Orphaned and Vulnerable Children (CT-OVC) program on children’s participation in work and school. The study used a…
Are conditional cash transfers effective in urban areas? Evidence from Mexico (Behrman et al. 2012)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Mexico’s conditional cash transfer program (PROGRESA/Oportunidades) on school enrollment and employment in paid activities for children ages 6 to…
Same bureaucracy, different outcomes in human capital? How indigenous and rural non-indigenous areas in Panama responded to the CCT (Arriaz & Rozo 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Red de Oportunidades (RdO), a conditional cash transfer program in Panama, on child labor and school enrollment. The authors used cross-sectional…
Do conditional cash transfers for schooling generate lasting benefits? A five-year followup of PROGRESA/Oportunidades (Behrman et al. 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Mexico’s conditional cash transfer program (PROGRESA/Oportunidades) on long-term schooling and work for children ages 9 to 15 (during the time of…
The impact of conditional cash transfer programs on household work decisions in Brazil (Ferro et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The purpose of the study was to examine the impact of the Bolsa Escola program, which provided conditional cash transfers to families in Brazil, on child labor and school enrollment. The authors…
Impact of the Uruguayan conditional cash transfer program (Borraz & Gonzalez 2009)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to analyze the impact of a conditional cash transfer program (Ingreso Ciudadano) on school attendance (ages 8 to 14) and child labor (ages 6 to 14) among children in…

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.