Suchergebnisse

Governments often provide some form of social assistance to vulnerable groups. The right to social security is enshrined in the South African Constitution and the Social Assistance Act 13 of 2004. The country provides for a child support grant to single parents or caregivers who are low-income earners. The impact of the child support grant on teenage pregnancy in South Africa has aroused interest in the last couple of years, sparking debate that it may be encouraging teenage pregnancy. However, empirical evidence has been produced to confirm this relationship. This study examines the relationship between receiving the child support grant and being pregnant with another child in two national data sets using logistic regression analysis and empirical data. The results indicate that teenagers who receive the child support grant are significantly less likely to be pregnant with another child compared with teenagers who do not receive the child support grant.

While the evidence is internationally inconclusive, social protection systems have been blamed for various perverse incentives or unintended consequences. This article explores one particular case in point. The South African Constitution and the Social Assistance Act of 2004 provide a child support grant (CSG) to low‐income single parents/caregivers. There is nevertheless concern regarding possible perverse incentives of the grant, sparking debate that it may encourage teenage pregnancy. Several studies have examined the validity of the claim, yet methodological weaknesses cast doubt on their conclusions. This article examines the probability of being pregnant with another child among black teenagers receiving the CSG in South Africa compared with black teenagers who are not recipients. Results indicate that black teenagers aged 15‐18 years receiving the grant have significantly lower odds of being pregnant with another child compared with their peers who do not receive the grant, controlling for demographic and socioeconomic factors.Related Articles
Flavin, Patrick, Alexander Pacek, and Benjamin Radcliff. 2011. "." Politics & Policy 39 (): 251‐269. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2011.00290.x/abstract


Coan, James. 2008. "." Politics & Policy 36 (): 806‐833. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2008.00136.x/abstract


Luccisano, Lucy, and Amy Romagnoli. 2007. "" Politics & Policy 35 (): 716‐751. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2007.00082.x/abstract
Related Media
. 2010. "." August 20. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDo‐EuyFYSg


. 2011. "." October 10. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vjdd41VbNvk


. 2009. "." June 24. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb4u46f9fS8

The final estimate of South Africa's population as of October 1996 from the first post-apartheid census by Statistics South Africa was lower (40·6 million) than expected (42 million). The expectation of a total population of 42 million was largely based on results of apartheid projections of South Africa's population. The results of the last apartheid census in South Africa in 1991 had been adjusted such that it was consistent with results modelling the population size of South Africa. The discrepancy between the final estimate of the 1996 census and that expected from the modelling described above, and the departure by Statistics South Africa from previous practice of adjusting the census results to be consistent with demographic models, has generated controversies regarding the accuracy of the final results from the 1996 census. This study re-examines levels and differential in fertility in South Africa from recent evidence in order to assess whether or not the fertility inputs in projections of South Africa's population during the apartheid era overestimated fertility.