Suchergebnisse

The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted governments across the world to introduce unprecedented lockdowns and other restrictions on mobility to slow the spread of coronavirus and to avoid overwhelming healthcare systems. While often necessary, these measures have led to well-documented disruptions in economic activity (World Bank 2020e). Consequently, many experts and international organizations have raised serious concerns about increased poverty and threats to food and nutrition security (Headey and Ruel 2020; Laborde et al. 2020; Laborde, Martin, and Vos 2020; Torero 2020). In April 2020, the World Food Programme warned that the number of acutely food insecure people in the world could double by the end of 2020 without concerted action (WFP 2020). ; PR ; IFPRI4; 1 Fostering Climate-Resilient and Sustainable Food Supply; 2 Promoting Healthy Diets and Nutrition for all; Feed the Future Initiative; ReSAKSS; CRP2 ; AFR; DSGD; PIM ; CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM)

Low intake of fruits and vegetables is a major cause of micronutrient deficiencies in the developing world. Since the 1980s, various non-governmental organizations have promoted homestead gardening (HG) programs, first in Asia, but now increasingly in Africa. Longstanding concerns with HG programs are: (1) they lack scalability, particularly for governments; (2) they only work in areas with/without good access to markets; and (3) they are only suitable for more water-abundant ecologies. We assess these concerns by analyzing a large and novel survey on the adoption of a nationwide HG program implemented by the Ethiopian government. We find that better market access encourages HG adoption; so too does greater public promotion of HGs, but only in more water-abundant ecologies. ; CRP2; CRP4; IFPRI3; ISI; Advancing Research on Nutrition and Agriculture (ARENA); 2 Promoting Healthy Diets and Nutrition for all ; DSGD; PHND; PIM; A4NH ; PR ; 8 pages ; CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (A4NH); CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM)

Low intake of fruits and vegetables is a major cause of micronutrient deficiencies in the developing world. Since the 1980s, various non-governmental organizations have promoted homestead gardening (HG) programs, first in Asia, but now increasingly in Africa. Longstanding concerns with HG programs are: (1) they lack scalability, particularly for governments; (2) they only work in areas with/without good access to markets; and (3) they are only suitable for more water-abundant ecologies. We assess these concerns by analyzing a large and novel survey on the adoption of a nationwide HG program implemented by the Ethiopian government. We find that better market access encourages HG adoption; so too does greater public promotion of HGs, but only in more water-abundant ecologies.

Economists often default to the assumption that cash is always preferable to an in-kind transfer. Do beneficiaries feel the same way? This paper addresses this issue using longitudinal household data from Ethiopia, where a large-scale social safety net intervention (PSNP) operates. Even though most payments are made in cash, and even though the (temporal) transaction costs associated with food payments are higher than payments received as cash, most beneficiaries stated that they prefer their payments only or partly in food. Higher food prices induce shifts in stated preferences toward in-kind transfers. More food-secure households, those closer to food markets and to financial services are more likely to prefer cash. Though shifts occur, the stated preference for food is dominant: In no year do more than 17 percent of households prefer only cash. There is suggestive evidence that stated preferences for food are also driven by self-control concerns. ; PR ; IFPRI3; CRP2; ISI; IFPRIOA; ESSP ; DSGD; PIM ; CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM)

Economists often default to the assumption that cash is always preferable to an in-kind transfer. Do beneficiaries feel the same way? This paper addresses this issue using longitudinal household data from Ethiopia where a large-scale social safety net intervention (PSNP) operates. Even though most payments are made in cash, and even though the (temporal) transaction costs associated with food payments are higher than payments received as cash, most beneficiaries stated that they prefer their payments only or partly in food. Higher food prices induce shifts in stated preferences towards in-kind transfers. More food secure households, those closer to food markets and to financial services are more likely to prefer cash. Though shifts occur, the stated preference for food is dominant: In no year do more than 17 percent of households prefer only cash. There is suggestive evidence that stated preferences for food are also driven by self-control concerns. ; IFPRI5; CRP2 ; DSGD; PHND; PIM ; Non-PR ; CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM)

Economists typically default to the assumption that cash is always preferable to an in-kind transfer. We extend the classic Southworth (1945) framework to predict under what conditions this assumption holds. We take the model to longitudinal household data from Ethiopia where a large-scale social safety net intervention – the Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP) – operates. Even though most PSNP payments are paid in cash, and even though the (temporal) transaction costs associated with food payments are higher than payments received as cash, the overwhelming majority of the beneficiary households prefer their payments only or partly in food. However, these preferences are neither homogeneous nor stable. Higher food prices induce shifts in preferences towards in-kind transfers, but more food secure households and those closer to food markets and to financial services prefer cash. There is suggestive evidence that preferences for food are also driven by self-control concerns. ; Non-PR ; IFPRI2; CRP2; ESSP ; DSGD; PIM ; CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM)