Conference onWorking Women: Better Outcomes for Growth

November 18, 2009

Gender Impact of Cash for Work Programs (in West and Central Africa)

Quentin WodonDevelopment Dialogue on Values and Ethics Human Development Network

Context – West Africa hard hit by food price increase in 2007-08 Increase in population share in poverty from

50% increase in selected food pricesFigure 1: Upper and Lower Bound Poverty Impacts

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Ghana Togo Guinee Nigeria SierraLeone

Gabon RDC Mali Liberia Niger

Per

cent

age

Poi

nt I

ncre

ase

in P

over

ty

Upper Bound

Lower Bound

Main responses – Tax cuts on food imports & cash for work programs Tax cuts poorly targeted in most countries Cash for work potentially better targeted Gender Action Plan funding for testing light

evaluation instruments and gender focus 2 main case studies for the light evaluation

instrument: Liberia and Sierra Leone Analysis of labor markets in both countries

(and a few other West African countries) Emphasis on gender aspects

Liberia CfWTEP

US$10m from GFRP to Support vulnerable women and children with WFP to feed

up to 62,000 children (3m) Support agricultural supply response to reduce post-

harvest losses and increase productivity (4m) Provide temporary employment through cash for work

program (CfWTEP 3m) by creating 680,000 person/days labor in 2 years (17,000 workers)

Implementation arrangements Management by Liberian Agency for Community

Empowerement (LACE) Local LACE Implementing Partners by county ECOBANK payments (branches or mobile teams)

Liberia CfWTEP

Post-conflict setting – basic infrastructure needs Perception of high unemployment; CWIQ 2007:

11% unemployed, 8% undermployed Half of workforce in unpaid/low productivity work

(may weaken targeting of CfW) Women with substantially lower earnings

Features of CfW program 2007 minimum wage US$ 2.5/day. Pressure to

increase wages in CfW to $3.0 40 working days per person. 75% of project cost to labor/materials costs.

Some working tools

Beneficiary Workers

Duport Waterside Community – Monserrado county

Light evaluation instrument

3 objectives of survey instrument Measurement of targeting performance Impact of programs on ind/hh income

(taking substitution effects into account) Use of wages received by individuals and

households through cash for work Status of implementation

Liberia: data collection completed; preliminary analysis by end December

SL: data collection on-going

Light evaluation instrument

Features of survey instrunment Length: 5 page questionnaire Sections on characteristics of households

and individual program participant; detailed employment history; solidarity mechanisms; program assessment/impact; household assets; other income sources

Sample size: 1,000 Cost: only $20,000/country for data

collection and entry

Gender aspects of evaluation

Uptake of programs & HH structure Comparison: male vs. female participants

Targeting performance Wage substitution effects Use of funds (light analysis of intra-

household allocation mechanisms) Perceptions/other aspects (ID, Bank, …)

Comparison with national survey data Ex post vs ex ante simulated performance Values – religion, culture, etc. as factors

Conclusion

Potentially innovative and low cost light evaluation instrument

Close collaboration between anchor and regional unit with government agencies

Ability to replicate in other countries and to adapt to other types of programs

Interest of HDN’s Development Dialogue on Values and Ethics to work with you

Thank you !