Protocol - What is the evidence of the impact of benefits of work guarantee schemes on the poor as compared with cash transfers?

Abstract

This is the protocol for a review which will identify and synthesize the literature in order to assess the evidence for the impact of employment guarantee schemes (EGS) and cash transfers (CT) on the poor. EGS should not be confused with Public Work Programmes in general, which also provide cash or food for work. EGS are distinctive in that they guarantee employment to a specified population over time, in effect taking the form of an unemployment insurance. CT schemes are diverse in conception and execution and all those which offer regular ongoing transfers will be included in the study in order to be comparable with EGS. The outcome is the effect of EGS and CT on poverty of beneficiary household, i.e. it will be assessed whether poverty has been reduced. Poverty is likely to be mainly defined in financial terms (income, assets etc), in the literature, but other studies will also be considered (for example those analysing food security or livelihoods). The protocol provides background information and details of the methods to be used.

Citation

Overseas Development Institute, London, UK, 22 pp.

Protocol - What is the evidence of the impact of benefits of work guarantee schemes on the poor as compared with cash transfers?

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.