There has been a lot of talk about unconditional cash transfers (UCTs) lately. An awful lot in the wake of the release of Haushofer and Shapiro’s findings on GiveDirectly in a policy brief (pdf) earlier this month.
In short, Haushofer and Shapiro find that GiveDirectly’s cash transfers (i) allow poor households to build assets, (ii) increase consumption, (iii) reduce hunger, (iv) do not increase spending on alcohol and tobacco, (v) increase investment in and revenue from livestock and small businesses, and (vi) increase the psychological well-being of recipients and their families.
These are all good things, and I look forward to the replication studies that will tell us when and under what conditions UCTs work.
(Matt Collin has a very nice post on UCTs here, in which he adds the caveat that just giving cash will not solve the coordination failures leading to the underprovision of public goods in many developing countries. Likewise, David McKenzie goes into detail about the strengths and weaknesses of Haushofer and Shapiro’s study in a post on the World Bank’s Development Impact blog.)