当前位置: X-MOL 学术Climate Policy › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Can conditional cash transfers reduce vulnerability to climate change?
Climate Policy ( IF 5.3 ) Pub Date : 2023-03-06 , DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2023.2183174
Marco Arena 1 , Alessandro Guasti 2 , Hussam Hussein 3, 4
Affiliation  

ABSTRACT

In the last decades several Conditional Cash Transfers (CCTs) have been implemented to interrupt the intergenerational transmission of poverty. More recently, they have also been used as a policy response to provide support to households hit by the COVID crisis. CCTs are being deployed as a development tool to reduce local communities’ vulnerability, increasing their resilience and capacity to adapt. In this context, this paper investigates if CCTs can reduce vulnerability to climate change by increasing the adaptative capacity of local communities. Indeed, while some literature has found that CCTs can reduce specific dimensions of vulnerability to socio-economic shocks, we argue that more research is necessary to understand their impact on vulnerability to climate change. Empirically, we use a panel of household survey data collected in Colombia in 2002 and 2006. We employ a difference-in-differences approach to analyse the impact of the CCT programme Familia en Acción (FA) CCTs on rural households. We consider seven components of vulnerability linked to climate change aggregated in an index: wealth, health, access to information, access to basic facilities, financial vulnerability, resilience to natural disasters, and nutrition. Our results differ from previous research and indicate that CCTs provided by the FA program do not decrease vulnerability to climate change. This finding suggests that CCTs are not a universal solution to reducing vulnerability to climate change and may be ineffective in specific contexts.

Key policy insights

  • The literature often assumes that CCTs can have a mitigating effect on vulnerability to climate change. Our research shows that in the context of Colombia, this assumption is incorrect.

  • The idea that providing monthly payments to households can reduce vulnerability to climate change should be considered with caution, given limited empirical evidence.

  • Policy makers and scholars should consider the multidimensional nature of vulnerability and design targeted interventions and avoid considering CCTs as a panacea to all aspects of vulnerability to climate change.

  • Our models show that the FA programme failed to have a significant impact in reducing vulnerability to climate change using several different specifications. We show that CCTs do not have an impact on numerous essential components such as wealth, health, access to infrastructure, information and knowledge, financial coping mechanisms, food consumption, and exposure to natural disasters.



中文翻译:

有条件的现金转移可以减少气候变化的脆弱性吗?

摘要

在过去的几十年中,已经实施了几项有条件的现金转移支付 (CCT) 来阻断贫困的代际传递。最近,它们还被用作政策响应,为受 COVID 危机打击的家庭提供支持。CCT 正在作为一种发展工具来部署,以减少当地社区的脆弱性,提高他们的复原力和适应能力。在此背景下,本文研究了 CCT 是否可以通过提高当地社区的适应能力来降低对气候变化的脆弱性。事实上,虽然一些文献发现 CCT 可以减少特定维度的社会经济冲击脆弱性,但我们认为需要更多的研究来了解它们对气候变化脆弱性的影响。根据经验,我们使用了 2002 年和 2006 年在哥伦比亚收集的一组家庭调查数据。我们采用逐一比较的方法来分析有条件现金转移计划家庭行动 (FA) 有条件现金转移对农村家庭的影响。我们将与气候变化相关的脆弱性的七个组成部分汇总在一个指数中:财富、健康、信息获取、基本设施获取、财务脆弱性、自然灾害恢复能力和营养。我们的结果与之前的研究不同,表明 FA 计划提供的 CCT 不会降低对气候变化的脆弱性。这一发现表明,有条件现金转移不是降低气候变化脆弱性的通用解决方案,在特定情况下可能无效。我们采用差异对差异的方法来分析 CCT 计划 Familia en Acción (FA) CCT 对农村家庭的影响。我们将与气候变化相关的脆弱性的七个组成部分汇总在一个指数中:财富、健康、信息获取、基本设施获取、财务脆弱性、自然灾害恢复能力和营养。我们的结果与之前的研究不同,表明 FA 计划提供的 CCT 不会降低对气候变化的脆弱性。这一发现表明,有条件现金转移不是降低气候变化脆弱性的通用解决方案,在特定情况下可能无效。我们采用差异对差异的方法来分析 CCT 计划 Familia en Acción (FA) CCT 对农村家庭的影响。我们将与气候变化相关的脆弱性的七个组成部分汇总在一个指数中:财富、健康、信息获取、基本设施获取、财务脆弱性、自然灾害恢复能力和营养。我们的结果与之前的研究不同,表明 FA 计划提供的 CCT 不会降低对气候变化的脆弱性。这一发现表明,有条件现金转移不是降低气候变化脆弱性的通用解决方案,在特定情况下可能无效。获得基本设施、财务脆弱性、抵御自然灾害的能力和营养。我们的结果与之前的研究不同,表明 FA 计划提供的 CCT 不会降低对气候变化的脆弱性。这一发现表明,有条件现金转移不是降低气候变化脆弱性的通用解决方案,在特定情况下可能无效。获得基本设施、财务脆弱性、抵御自然灾害的能力和营养。我们的结果与之前的研究不同,表明 FA 计划提供的 CCT 不会降低对气候变化的脆弱性。这一发现表明,有条件现金转移不是降低气候变化脆弱性的通用解决方案,在特定情况下可能无效。

关键政策见解

  • 文献通常假设 CCT 可以减轻气候变化的脆弱性。我们的研究表明,在哥伦比亚的背景下,这种假设是不正确的。

  • 鉴于有限的经验证据,应谨慎考虑向家庭每月付款可以降低气候变化脆弱性的想法。

  • 政策制定者和学者应考虑脆弱性的多维性质并设计有针对性的干预措施,避免将 CCT 视为应对气候变化脆弱性所有方面的灵丹妙药。

  • 我们的模型表明,FA 计划使用几种不同的规范未能对降低气候变化的脆弱性产生重大影响。我们表明,有条件现金转移对许多重要组成部分没有影响,例如财富、健康、获得基础设施、信息和知识、财务应对机制、食品消费和自然灾害风险。

更新日期:2023-03-08
down
wechat
bug