RESUMO
This paper exploits the randomized research design of a large welfare program-PROGRESA-to study the existence in rural Mexico of spillover effects in the propensity to screen for gender- and non-gender-specific conditions. I find significant evidence of increased demand for Papanicolaou cervical-cancer screening among women ineligible for the Conditional Cash Transfer, yet no evidence of similar externalities in non-gender specific tests, such as blood-pressure and blood-sugar checks. Certain pieces of evidence are suggestive of the weakening of the social norm related to husbands' opposition to screening of their wives as one of the possible drivers of the indirect effect.
Assuntos
Interação Social , Cônjuges , Atenção à Saúde , Feminino , Humanos , México , População RuralRESUMO
In this paper, we study the effect of Progresa, a conditional cash transfer program in Mexico, on the micronutrient and macronutrient consumption levels of program participants. Overall, we find that Progresa has a complicated effect on nutrition outcomes. We find that treatment households increase their vitamin consumption by 15 percent and mineral consumption by 7 percent. Our results indicate that conditional cash transfers may have important positive effects on vitamin A, iron, and possibly calcium, which are under-consumed by a vast majority of the Mexican population. We also find that Progresa increases consumption of processed carbohydrates by 23 percent and saturated fat by about 5 percent. These findings suggest that Progresa has a dual effect on the nutrition outcomes of Progresa eligible households, likely improving macro- and micronutrient consumption levels, but also increasing the consumption of food categories that likely lead to increased prevalence of overweight and obesity.
Assuntos
Dieta/estatística & dados numéricos , Micronutrientes/administração & dosagem , Estado Nutricional , Pobreza/estatística & dados numéricos , Assistência Pública/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , México/epidemiologia , Motivação , Sobrepeso/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Public policy programs must often impose limits on who may be eligible for benefits. Despite research on the impact of exclusion in developed countries, there is little evidence on how people react to being excluded from benefits in developing societies. Utilizing repeated waves of data from an experimental evaluation of Mexico's foundational PROGRESA antipoverty program, we examine the impact of exclusion and distinguish two separate forms. "Statistical exclusion" occurs where determination of benefits is based on randomized assignment to a treatment and control group. "Needs-based exclusion" occurs when benefits programs are designed to be selective rather than universal, basing eligibility on characteristics, like relative poverty, that are difficult to measure simply and accurately. Focusing on temporal variation in survey non-response as our behavioral outcome, we show that needs-based exclusion has much greater negative effects on continued participation than statistical exclusion. We also show that these effects are concentrated among the wealthy, that is, those furthest from the eligibility cut-off line. These findings reinforce general concerns about the validity of evaluation studies when incentives are at work. We discuss both the behavioral explanations that might underlie these findings as well as some potential approaches to reduce threats to evaluation validity.