Skip to main content

Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfer programs on fertility: the case of the Red de Protección Social in Nicaragua

Abstract

Evaluating the impact of poverty-reduction programs on fertility is complicated given that changes in incentives to have children take time to be incorporated into decision making and evaluation periods are usually quite brief. We explore the use of birth spacing as a short-run indicator of the impact of poverty-reduction programs on fertility. The data come from a Nicaraguan conditional cash transfer program that offers incentives for poor households to invest in children’s health, nutrition, and education. We estimate a stratified Cox proportional hazard model and find that the program decreased the hazard of a birth, indicating an increase in birth spacing.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. Simulations were run to examine whether real changes in long-term fertility can be captured in the short run using spacing versus measures of birth. The results indicated that significant results are found for spacing and not number of births, particularly when the sample is small and when the time period is short. The results also indicated that increases in fertility are easier to identify as measured by births than are decreases in fertility. Thus, birth spacing measures are more valuable for these types of changes.

  2. The mortality rate for children born less than 2 years after another child is 60 per 1,000 live births, while that for children born 2 to 3 years after another child is 28 per 1,000 live births.

  3. In addition to the cash transfers for households, the program also included increased resources for schools and the contracting of a basic health care service package for program areas through NGOs.

  4. It is not exactly clear whether beneficiaries were explicitly told that the benefits would only last 3 years, however, they were informed that the program was not permanent.

  5. Although it is not possible to measure the start of the first risk period precisely, Pawloski et al. (2004) report the average age at menarche among a sample of girls in Managua to be 12. These data show that some women have their first birth as young age 12. The small number of women that reported a child was born before age 12 are not included in the sample.

  6. Since spacing measures the time between births, not conceptions, starting the next risk period 7 months after a birth allows for the possibility that a women conceives immediately after a birth and delivers prematurely. This is consistent with spacing reported from the Nicaragua DHS of 2001, where birth intervals are tabulated beginning at 7 months (INEC et al. 2002). Estimates were insensitive to whether we use an alternative minimum of 8 or 9 months between a birth and the start of the subsequent risk period.

  7. We assume a minimum of 7 months for a birth to occur after conception. Since transfers began in the control group in May of 2003, the earliest time at which a woman in the control group could have a birth that was influenced by the program is January 31, 2004.

  8. Only those children that died after the baseline survey or that were captured through the child mortality questions are observed. To be captured through the mortality questions, a child must have been the women’s most recent birth and have been born after 1996.

  9. When a woman’s reported number of live births equals the number of children observed (including those having died), it is assumed that all births are observed. When the reported number of live births is greater than the number of children observed, it is assumed that for women age 35 or younger, a missing birth is most likely to be an intermediate birth and not the first birth. For women over age 35, it is assumed that the first birth is not observed in the data when the earliest observed birth occurred when the women was 24 years old or older and that the children that are observed are the most recent births.

  10. Table 2 shows that nearly all of the median birth intervals are greater than 30 months. Since we find that the program decreases the probability of a birth, median birth intervals are likely to be longer. Given the small number of risk periods that begin after the program began and the short observation period, we are not able to estimate post-program median birth intervals.

  11. Adding age squared and its interaction with time at risk also does not change this result.

  12. A further test for pre-program differences in the hazard was conducted by limiting the observation period to only pre-program time and including a treatment group dummy. The coefficient on the treatment indicator was not significant, indicating that there were no differences in the hazard of birth between the two groups prior to the start of the program.

References

  • Adato M, Roopnaraine T (2004) Sistema de Evaluación de la Red de Protección Social de Nicaragua: a Social Análisis of the Red de Protección Social (RPS) in Nicaragua. Food Consumption and Nutrition Division, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

  • Anderton DL, Bean LL (1985) Birth spacing and fertility limitation: a behavioral analysis of a nineteenth century frontier population. Demography 22(2):169–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arroyo CR, Zhang J (1997) Dynamic microeconomic models of fertility choice: a survey. J Popul Econ 10(1):23–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baughman R, Dickert-Conlin S (2009) The earned income tax credit and fertility. J Popul Econ 22(3):537–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker GS (1960) An economic analysis of fertility. Demographic and economic change in developed countries. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 209–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker GS, Lewis HG (1973) On the interaction between the quantity and quality of children. J Polit Econ 81(2):S279–S288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blossfeld H, Rohwer G (1995) Techniques of even history modeling: new approaches to causal analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Bongaarts J (1978) A framework for analyzing the proximate determinants of fertility. Popul Dev Rev 4(1):105–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Box-Steffensmeier JM, Jones BS (2004) Event history modeling: a guide for social scientists. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer M, Ratcliffe A, Smith S (2008) Does welfare reform affect fertility? Evidence from the UK. IFS Working Papers (W08/09). Institute for Fiscal Studies, London

  • Easterlin RA (1975) An economic framework for fertility analysis. Stud Fam Plann 6(3):54–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewbank DC (1989) Estimating birth stopping and spacing behavior. Demography 26(3):473–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grogger J, Bronas SG (2001) The effect of welfare payments on the marriage and fertility behavior of unwed mothers: results from a twins experiment. J Polit Econ 109(3):529–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handa S, Davis B (2006) The experience of conditional cash transfers in Latin America and the Caribbean. Dev Policy Rev 24(5):513–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hausman JA (1978) Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46(6):1251–1271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman JJ, Walker JR (1991) Economic models of fertility dynamics: a study of Swedish fertility. Res Popul Econ 7:3–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman JJ, Willis RJ (1975) Estimation of a stochastic model of reproduction: an econometric approach. In: Terleckyj N (ed) Household production and consumption. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 99–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Hionidou V (1998) The adoption of fertility control on Mykonos, 1879–1959: stopping, spacing or both? Popul Stud 52(1):67–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hotz VJ, Miller RA (1988) An empirical analysis of life cycle fertility and female labor supply. Econometrica 56(1):91–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huttly SRA, Victora CG, Barros FC, Vaughan JP (1992) Birth spacing and child health in urban Brazilian children. Pediatrics 89(6):1049–1054

    Google Scholar 

  • Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas y Censos (INEC), Ministerio de Salud (MINSA), Agencia de los Estados Unidos para el Desarrollo Internacional (USAID), Agencia Sueca para el Desarrollo Internacional (Asdi), Banco Mundial–Fondo de Inversión Social de Emergencia (BM/FISE), Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo/Programa de Modernización del Sector Salud (BID/PMSS), Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD), Fondo de Población de las Naciones Unidas (FNUAP), Programa DHS+/ORC Macro (2002) Encuesta Nicaraguense de Demografía y Salud 2001, Final Report. Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas y Censos, Managua

  • Jagannathan R, Camasso MJ (2004) Family cap and nonmarital fertility: the racial conditioning of policy effects. J Marriage Fam 65(1):52–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knodel J (1977) Family limitation and the fertility transition: evidence from the age patterns of fertility in Europe and Asia. Popul Stud 31(2):219–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knodel J (1987) Starting, stopping, and spacing during the early stages of fertility transition: the experience of German village populations in the 18th and 19th Centuries. Demography 24(2):143–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer E (1984) The impact of child mortality on spacing by parity: a Cox-regression analysis. Demography 21(3):323–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maluccio JA, Flores R (2005) Impact evaluation of a conditional cash transfer program: the Nicaraguan Red de Protección Social. Research Report No. 141, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

  • Maluccio JA, Murphy A, Regalía F (2010) Does supply matter? Initial supply conditions and the effectiveness of conditional cash transfers for grade progression in Nicaragua. J Dev Effect 2(1):87–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malthus T (1890) An essay on the principle of population. Ward, Lock and Co, London

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald P (1984) Nuptuality and completed fertility: a study of stopping, starting and spacing behavior. World Fertility Survey: Comparative Studies, No. 35. International Statistical Institute, The Hague

  • Merchant K, Martorell R (1988) Frequent reproductive cycling: does it lead to nutritional depletion of mothers? Prog Food Nutr Sci 12(4):339–370

    Google Scholar 

  • Moffitt RA (1997) The effect of welfare on marriage and fertility: what do we know and what do we need to know? Discussion Paper no. 1153–97, Institute for Research on Poverty, Johns Hopkins University

  • Moreno L, Goldman N (1991) Contraceptive failure rates in developing countries: evidence from the demographic and health surveys. Int Fam Plann Perspect 17(2):44–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Namboodiri NK (1972) Some observations on the economic framework for fertility analysis. Popul Stud 26(2):185–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman JL (1983) Economic analyses of the spacing of births. Am Econ Rev 73(2):33–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman JL, McCulloch CE (1984) A hazard rate approach to the timing of births. Econometrica 52(4):939–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawloski LR, Moore JB, Lumbiz L, Rodriguez CP (2004) A cross-sectional examination of growth indicators from Nicaraguan adolescent girls: a comparison of anthropometric data from their Guatemalan counterparts. Ann Hum Biol 31(6):647–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pebley AR, Millman S (1986) Birthspacing and child survival. Int Fam Plann Perspect 12(3):71–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafalimanana H, Westoff CF (2000) Potential effects on fertility and child health and survival of birth-spacing preferences in Sub-Saharan Africa. Stud Fam Plann 31(2):99–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahman M, DaVanzo J (1993) Gender preference and birth spacing in Matlab, Bangladesh. Demography 30(3):315–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawlings LB, Rubio G (2005) Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfer programs. The World Bank Res Obs 20(1):29–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regalía F, Castro L (2007) Performance-based incentives for health: demand- and supply-side incentives in the Nicaraguan Red de Protección Social. Center for Global Development Working Paper No. 119, The Center for Global Development, Washington, DC

  • Rodríguez G (1996) The spacing and limiting components of the fertility transition in Latin America. In: Guzmán JM, Singh S, Rodríguez G, Pantelides EA (eds) The fertility transition in Latin America. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 27–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig MR, Schultz TP (1985) The demand for and supply of births: fertility and its life cycle consequences. Am Econ Rev 75(5):992–1015

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutstein S, Johnson K, Conde-Agudelo A (2004) Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the relationship between interpregnancy or interbirth intervals and infant and child mortality. Report submitted to the CATALYST Consortium, October

  • Schultz TP (1997) Demand for children in low income countries. In: Rosenzweig MR, Stark O (eds) Handbook of population and family economics. Elsevier Science, New York, pp 349–429

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • StataCorp (2007) Stata statistical software: release 10. StataCorp LP, College Station

    Google Scholar 

  • Stecklov G, Winters P, Todd J, Regalía F (2007) Unintended effects of poverty programmes on childbearing in less developed countries: experimental evidence from Latin America. Popul Stud 61(2):125–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward MP, Butz WP (1980) Completed fertility and its timing. J Polit Econ 88(5):917–940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westoff CF, Bankole A (2000) Trends in the demand for family limitation in developing countries. Int Fam Plann Perspect 26(2):56–62, 97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winikoff B (1983) The effects of birth spacing on child and maternal health. Stud Fam Plann 14(10):231–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamaguchi K, Ferguson LR (1995) The stopping and spacing of childbirths and their birth-history predictors: rational-choice theory and event-history analysis. Am Sociol Rev 60(2):272–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank John Maluccio for access to the data as well as for providing valuable insights into the operation of the program. Eric Jensen, other participants at the 2008 Population Association of America Annual Meeting, Dean Jolliffe and two anonymous reviewers provided valuable feedback and suggestions.

Disclaimers

The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Economic Research Service or the US Department of Agriculture.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jessica E. Todd.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Junsen Zhang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Todd, J.E., Winters, P. & Stecklov, G. Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfer programs on fertility: the case of the Red de Protección Social in Nicaragua. J Popul Econ 25, 267–290 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-010-0337-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-010-0337-5

Keywords

  • Fertility
  • Conditional cash transfer programs
  • Hazard model

JEL Classification

  • J13
  • C41
  • H53