• Homepage
  • Policy Briefs
    • Policy Areas
      • 2030 Agenda and Development Cooperation
      • Infrastructure Investment and Financing
      • Social Cohesion and the Future of Welfare Systems
      • Migration
      • Sustainable Energy, Water and Food Systems
      • Trade, Investment and Growth
      • International Finance
      • Digital Transformation
  • IN THE SPOTLIGHT
  • Think Tanks
  • About
  • Contact

About
G20 Insights
  • Policy Briefs
    • Policy Areas
    • Latest Policy Briefs
  • Overarching Visions
  • Think Tanks
  • In The Spotlight
  • G20 Performance
G20 Insights
G20 Insights > Policy Briefs > Assessing and Improving Poverty and Inequality Mitigation Policies
G20

Policy Area
2030 Agenda and Development Cooperation

Download as PDF Print
Share:

Assessing and Improving Poverty and Inequality Mitigation Policies

  • Carlos Ivan Simonsen Leal (Getulio Vargas Foundation (FGV))
September 1, 2017 | Last updated: December 10, 2020
Tags: SDGs and Developement Cooperation

Carlos Ivan Simonsen Leal suggests emphasizing trade and investment integration in global development agendas in order to spread the benefits of globalization and generate economic growth.


Challenge

Developing evidence-oriented policies that target both short-term realities and the middle to long-term structural determinants of poverty.


Proposal

In recent years, many countries have put in place “social policies” targeting poverty and inequality in the form of direct cash transfers. There are many theoretical and practical advantages to this design: unlike policies involving the provision of goods (or scrip/food stamps specifically earmarked for approved purposes), direct cash transfers acknowledge the power of individual decision-making and market forces in maximizing the end-user welfare. Moreover, although cash transfers may seem like a short-term solution to structural problems, they can also be used to implement incentive schemes towards long-term improvements, particularly in the case of education. In Brazil, for example, the conditional cash transfer (CCT) portion of Bolsa Escola/Bolsa Família tries to incentivize families to send their children to school rather than having them work to complement the family’s income.

While these programs are generally believed to have been successful, there is relatively scarce information on their effectiveness, optimal design and size. On the one hand, because cash transfers are financed by society as a whole with their present and future taxation, there should be significantly more accountability: not only how much is spent in cash transfers, but whether society’s getting the expected results for each marginal dollar invested. On the other, the design of such programs is often haphazard, reflecting the stratification and consolidation of politically-irrevocable policies over time, but it’s largely unknown how to improve them. Both of these issues require an extensive involvement of real data to make sense of what’s really going on beyond the mental models of policy-makers and analysts.

There are already some examples of cash transfer policies that have been developed in tandem with strategies for data acquisition and testing, such as Progresa/Oportunidades in Mexico. Beyond evaluating whether policies are sufficient and cost-effective, evidence-oriented policy-making can also help improve the design of policies by means of quasi-experimental and experimental tests, particularly Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). Policy developments that incorporate the ability of running tests on mechanism design ideas and implementation details hold the possibility for significantly better anti-poverty policy in the future.

Given these early experiences and the potential upsides and downsides of direct cash transfer policies (particularly when conditioned to longer-term personal investments such as education), we recommend:

  1. International development agencies should track cash transfer policies around the world on a continuous basis in order to produce comparative intelligence;
  2. As much as possible, international agencies should track actual implementation details and results as closely as possible, rather than rely merely on the macro results which may have to do with other factors as well;
  3. Development agencies should develop “best practices” guidebooks in light of their analysis of international experience and their theoretical understanding of economic policy and policy-making;
  4. Testing and iterative design should be emphasized in such “best practices”, as well as concrete policy advisories and possible agreements for foreign aid.

 

Barrientos, Armando, and Juan M. Villa (2013). “Evaluating Antipoverty Transfer Programs in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa: Better Policies? Better politics?” WIDER Working Paper, No. 009.

Galiani, Sebastian, and Patrick J. McEwan (2013). “The Heterogeneous Impact of Conditional Cash Transfers.” Journal of Public Economics, No. 103: 85-96.

Rawlings, Laura B., and Gloria M. Rubio (2005). “Evaluating the Impact of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs.” The World Bank Research Observer, 20.1: 29-55.



Download as PDF Print
Share:

Edit

Authors

Carlos Ivan Simonsen Leal

Existing Initiatives & Analysis

Implementation Overview
Existing Agreements
Existing Policies and Monitoring
Analysis and Data

    Suggest more existing initiatives and analyses!

    Your suggestions will be sent to the authors.





    *We will only use your contact informations to contact you concerning your request. For further informations on handling your private data you can check our Privacy Policy.

    *necessary fields

    • Working Paper Series

       

       

    • Global Solutions Papers

      To the Economics E-Journal

    The authors are solely responsible for the content and their views do not necessarily
    represent the views or recommendations of their related institutions.

    Report this Page

    Latest Policy Briefs

    • Digital Transformation
      Treating Root Causes, not Symptoms: Regulating Problems of Surveillance and Personal Targeting in the Information Technology Industries

      As part of the Digital Markets Act, the EU Commission has proposed a new competition tool to address market power in the digital economy that is dominated by large online platforms. While limiting the power of US-based tech companies, such as Google or Facebook, can be helpful, we argue that limiting competition is not enough. Business models based on invasion of privacy and behavior modification are at the root of the associated problems stemming from their use are at the root of challenges to democracy and sustainability — in order to protect democracy and support sustainable development, Europe needs to develop alternatives to the current behaviorally targeted advertising business model. This policy brief discusses current alternatives to business models based on invasion of privacy and behavior modification, arguing that current alternatives need further development before implementation. To further support the development of new business models we argue in favor of regulatory sandboxes, digital ad revenue tax, reducing accumulation of data to technical necessity only, and adapting procedures and ethics from human subjects research.

      • Lance Bennett
      • Alan Borning
      • Marvin Landwehr
      • Daniela Stockmann
      • Volker Wulf
    • 2030 Agenda and Development Cooperation
      Dealing with interlinkages – A focused approach for implementing the SDGS and overcoming the Covid-19 crisis

      In 2020 and beyond, the Group of Twenty (G20) must invigorate its implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and respond to the COVID-19 crisis. Both challenges are global in nature and require a universal, integrated, and transformative response. Thus, the G20 should: (1) reorient its political agenda following the 2019 Global Sustainable Development Report’s proposal of six entry points for transformation, and focus on the “economy and finance” and “science and technology” levers; (2) reshape its working structures accordingly; (3) act collectively toward a science-based direction for sustainable development; and (4) ensure that the response and recovery measures regarding the COVID-19 crisis follow the spirit of the 2030 Agenda, and are conducive to achieving its sustainable development goals.

      • Imme Scholz (German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE))
      • Adolf Kloke-Lesch (Sustainable Development Solutions Network Germany (SDSN Germany))
      • Robert Lepenies
      • Alex Godoy-Faúndez
      • Felix Moronta-Barrios
      • Anet Režek Jambrak
      • Armand Ketcha Malan Kablan
      • Tolu Oni
      • Moritz Riede
      • Yoko Shimpuku
      • Teresa Stoepler

    In The Spotlight

    T20 Italy recognizes Global Solutions Summit as associated event

    Global Solutions Summit has been recognized as an associated event by Think20 Italy under its G20 presidency. The Summit 2021 aims to support the T20 and G20 by bringing together top researchers, policymakers, business leaders and civil society representatives in a renowned […]


    A Project By
    Be part of G20 Insights!

    Contribute your expertise by sharing your Policy Brief.

    contact@g20-insights.org
    • Policy Briefs
      • Policy Areas
      • Latest Policy Briefs
      • Overarching Visions
    • Think Tanks
    • About
      • In the spotlight
      • About G20 Insights
      • Contact
      • Support
    Share:
    © Global Solutions Initiative Foundation gemeinnützige GmbH  |   Legal Notice | Privacy
    We use cookies to help giving you the best experience on our website. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this.Got it! |Privacy Policy