Comparative Analysis of Food and Nutrients Demand in the Context of the Conditional Cash Transfer

Program Oportunidades in Mexico

Ana Elena Meza González

Supervisor: Dr. Christine WieckUCL – UBonn08.07.2013

1. Introductiona) Oportunidadesb) Research questions

2. Conditional Cash Transfers3. Analytical Framework4. Methodology5. Results6. Conclusions7. Recommendations

2

Content

᠐ 18.2% of Mexican population suffers from food poverty (2008) ~ 3.4 million households ~ 19.5 million people

1. Introduction

3

Source: taken from (CONEVAL, 2010)

Figure 1.1 Percentage of people suffering from food poverty. 1992 - 2008

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

Components of the Program (Irala Burgos, 2012)

᠐ Direct cash transfer to women to improve quantity, quality and diversity of food, and thus provide better nutrition.

᠐ Nutritional supplements: children 4 mo. – 2 years. Lactating and pregnant women.

᠐ In 2008 – Aid for a Better Living

Conditions:᠐ Grants to children under 18 who regularly attend school

between 3rd grade and 3rd year of High school. ᠐ Girls grant > Boys grant in secondary school.᠐ Regular visits to health centers.᠐ Health and nutritional workshops targeted to women.

᠐ The cash transferred represents on average 25% of the total income received by rural families, and between 15 to 20% of urban families’ income

1.a Oportunidades

4

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

Nutritional Impact :᠐ Oportunidades has lead to a significant increase in

children anthropometry. ᠐ One year after the implementation of the program:

beneficiary children in rural areas (44%) were found to be anemic, compared to 55% of the children in the control group. In urban areas, there was no significant difference among anemia rates.

᠐ There were not found statistically differences in the serum concentration of ferritin or soluble ferritin receptor, nor in serum zinc and retinol concentration.

᠐ (Behrman & Hoddinott, 2005) (Leroy, Ruel, & Verhofstadt, 2009)

᠐ There has not been an improvement on the micronutrient status even after the delivery of food supplements.

1.a Oportunidades

5

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

᠐ The aim of this study is to assess the impact of the Cash Transfer Program Oportunidades on nutrition of beneficiary households.

᠐ The objective is to analyze the food and nutrient demand of

the recipients of the cash transfer program Oportunidades by estimating their food and nutrient elasticities with respect to income and price.

᠐ This study will try to answer the following research questions: 1. Has the Conditional Cash Transfer Program

Oportunidades achieved to improve food availability of the households recipients of the transfer compared to no beneficiaries?

2. Has the Conditional Cash Transfer Program Oportunidades lead to diverse and nutrient-rich food consumption?

1.b Research questions

6

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

2. Conditional Cash Transfer

7

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

Cash to Women

Fortified Products

Education in Health &

Nutrition to Women

Health Visits (Condition)

Education (Condition)

Program

HH Income & Women’s Income Control

Women’s Time

Use of Health and Nutrition

Services

School Enrolment & Attendance

HH Food Security-Diet

Quality /Quantity

Feeding & Care Practices Educated

Girls

Food / Nutrient Intake Health

Household Members’ Nutrition

Underlying C

ausesInterm

ediate C

auses

Women’s Knowledge &

Awareness

Education supply

Health Supply

Long Term

᠐ Figure 2.1 Mechanisms by which conditional cash transfer programs may affect nutritional status

Source: adapted from (Leroy, Ruel, & Verhofstadt, 2009)

2. Conditional Cash Transfer

8

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

Cash to Women

Fortified Products

Education in Health &

Nutrition to Women

Health Visits (Condition)

Education (Condition)

Program

HH Income & Women’s Income Control

Women’s Time

Use of Health and Nutrition

Services

School Enrolment & Attendance

HH Food Security-Diet

Quality /Quantity

Feeding & Care Practices Educated

Girls

Food / Nutrient Intake

Health

Household Members’ Nutrition

Underlying C

ausesInterm

ediate C

auses

Women’s Knowledge &

Awareness

Education supply

Health Supply

Long Term

᠐ Figure 2.1 Mechanisms by which conditional cash transfer programs may affect nutritional status

Source: adapted from (Leroy, Ruel, & Verhofstadt, 2009)

3. Analytical Framework

9

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Y (Food)

X (Education, Health)

B

A

E

F

DXmin

Non-beneficiary Household

C

Beneficiary Household

᠐ Figure 2.3 Beneficiary and No Beneficiary Households of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs.

3. Analytical Framework

10

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

᠐ Data: 2010 National Survey of Households’ Income and Expenditure (ENIGH).

᠐ “Mexican System of Equivalent Food” (Pérez Lizaur et al., 2008).

᠐ Table 1. Household Characteristics

3. Analytical Framework

11

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

᠐ Figure 3.1 Multistage Demand System

4. Methodology

12

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

Unit value Quality Elasticity

First Stage Food-at-home Leser’s approach

Second & Third Stage

1. QUAIDS

Ecker, O., & Qaim, M. (2011)Tafere, K., Taffesse, A. S., & Tamiru, S. (2010).

4. Methodology

13

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

Second & Third Stage

2. Two step Censoring

3. Endogeneity

Elasticity

€

E i = μ i +1− β iIncome Elasticity

Marshallian Price Elasticity

Hicksian Price Elasticity

4. Methodology

14

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

Elasticity

Unconditional Elasticity

Nutrient Elasticity wrt Expenditure

Nutrient Elasticity wrt

Price

4. Methodology

15

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Results

Conclusion

Method

᠐ Limitations of the study

᠐ The disturbance terms of the final model are heteroscedastic (Tafere, Taffesse, & Tamiru, 2010),

᠐ The adding-up restriction cannot be imposed via parametric restrictions (Tafere, Taffesse, & Tamiru, 2010),

᠐ under- or overestimation of expenditure,᠐ food purchased but not actually consumed,᠐ intra-household food allocation,᠐ food preparation,᠐ number of food items considered in this research.

5. Results

16

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Expenditure Elasticity Expenditure Share

Beneficiaries Non-Beneficiaries

Test H0: Eopor = Eno-opor

Benef. Non- Benef.

1. Stage

Food-at-home 0.411*** 0.321*** 0.000 0.500 0.421

2. Stage

Staple Food 0.997*** 0.840*** 0.000 0.328 0.330Animal Products 0.835*** 0.958*** 0.000 0.245 0.274

Vegetables 0.843*** 0.888*** 0.021 0.180 0.167Fruits 0.795*** 0.935*** 0.041 0.089 0.085Complements 1.187*** 1.120*** 0.000 0.157 0.144

3. Stage

Maize 0.981*** 0.960*** 0.133 0.321 0.373Rice 0.949*** 0.908*** 0.000 0.107 0.058Beef 1.018*** 0.966*** 0.489 0.119 0.174Chicken 0.937*** 0.898*** 0.001 0.168 0.214Zucchini 0.555** 0.466** 0.723 0.155 0.160Tomato 0.722*** 0.833*** 0.000 0.394 0.387Apple 0.968*** 0.733*** 0.081 0.274 0.252Banana 1.024*** 0.510*** 0.000 0.417 0.402Soda 0.963*** 1.024*** 0.321 0.366 0.435Alcohol 2.498*** 0.783*** 0.000 0.077 0.102

5. Results

17

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Expenditure Elasticity Expenditure Share

Beneficiaries Non-Beneficiaries

Test H0: Eopor = Eno-opor

Benef. Non- Benef.

1. Stage Food-at-home 0.411*** 0.321*** 0.000 0.500 0.421

2. Stage

Staple Food 0.997*** 0.840*** 0.000 0.328 0.330Animal Products 0.835*** 0.958*** 0.000 0.245 0.274

Vegetables 0.843*** 0.888*** 0.021 0.180 0.167Fruits 0.795*** 0.935*** 0.041 0.089 0.085Complements 1.187*** 1.120*** 0.000 0.157 0.144

3. Stage

Maize 0.981*** 0.960*** 0.133 0.321 0.373Rice 0.949*** 0.908*** 0.000 0.107 0.058Beef 1.018*** 0.966*** 0.489 0.119 0.174Chicken 0.937*** 0.898*** 0.001 0.168 0.214Zucchini 0.555** 0.466** 0.723 0.155 0.160Tomato 0.722*** 0.833*** 0.000 0.394 0.387Apple 0.968*** 0.733*** 0.081 0.274 0.252Banana 1.024*** 0.510*** 0.000 0.417 0.402Soda 0.963*** 1.024*** 0.321 0.366 0.435Alcohol 2.498*** 0.783*** 0.000 0.077 0.102

5. Results

18

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Expenditure Elasticity Expenditure Share

Beneficiaries Non-Beneficiaries

Test H0: Eopor = Eno-opor

Benef. Non- Benef.

1. Stage Food-at-home 0.411 *** 0.321*** 0.000 0.500 0.421

2. Stage

Staple Food 0.997 *** 0.840*** 0.000 0.328 0.330Animal Products 0.835 *** 0.958*** 0.000 0.245 0.274Vegetables 0.843 *** 0.888*** 0.021 0.180 0.167Fruits 0.795 *** 0.935*** 0.041 0.089 0.085

Complements 1.187 *** 1.120*** 0.000 0.157 0.144

3. Stage

Maize 0.981*** 0.960*** 0.133 0.321 0.373Rice 0.949*** 0.908*** 0.000 0.107 0.058Beef 1.018*** 0.966*** 0.489 0.119 0.174Chicken 0.937*** 0.898*** 0.001 0.168 0.214Zucchini 0.555** 0.466** 0.723 0.155 0.160Tomato 0.722*** 0.833*** 0.000 0.394 0.387Apple 0.968*** 0.733*** 0.081 0.274 0.252Banana 1.024*** 0.510*** 0.000 0.417 0.402Soda 0.963*** 1.024*** 0.321 0.366 0.435Alcohol 2.498*** 0.783*** 0.000 0.077 0.102

5. Results

19

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Calorie Elasticity with respect to Income

Food-at-home Expenditure

elasticityBeneficiaries 0.457 0.411

Non-beneficiares 0.334 0.321

5. Results

20

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Beneficiary Households - Nutrient elasticity with respect to price

 Energ

yProtei

n Lipids Carb. Fiber Vit. A Vit. C Folate Fe K Ca

Maize-

0.044

-0.103 0.162 -0.220 -0.272 0.029 0.069 0.203 -0.258 0.123 -0.590

Wheat -0.023 -0.096 0.077 -0.088 0.071 0.027 0.076 -0.097 -0.055 0.106 0.107

Beans -0.007 -0.107 0.130 -0.109 -0.210 0.021 0.012 -0.123 -0.129 0.112 -0.153

Rice 0.000 -0.012 0.044 -0.032 0.062 0.011 0.037 -0.231 -0.018 0.041 0.081Beef 0.016 -0.019 0.034 0.009 0.005 0.114 0.000 0.005 -0.007 -0.002 0.019

Chicken 0.036 0.045 0.060 0.013 0.008 0.152 0.000 0.003 0.030 -0.002 0.032Milk 0.018 0.010 0.035 0.005 0.006 -0.008 0.000 0.004 0.012 -0.002 -0.022Eggs 0.059 -0.091 0.118 0.037 0.027 -0.507 0.000 0.024 -0.026 -0.008 -0.015

Zucchini 0.013 0.008 0.014 0.013 0.010 -0.002 -0.014 0.005 0.012 -0.019 0.013Onion 0.019 0.011 0.022 0.017 0.008 0.002 -0.051 -0.004 0.018 -0.071 0.021

Tomato 0.034 0.019 0.035 0.036 0.019 -0.140 -0.305 -0.006 0.027 -0.396 0.035Potato 0.033 0.021 0.036 0.031 0.019 -0.010 0.006 0.010 0.032 -0.001 0.037Apple -0.004 0.016 -0.032 0.016 0.015 0.003 0.032 0.024 0.019 0.001 0.021

Banana -0.006 0.023 -0.048 0.024 0.017 0.001 -0.225 0.017 0.027 -0.030 0.033Oranges -0.005 0.007 -0.014 0.003 0.010 -0.006 -0.023 -0.009 0.013 -0.123 0.010Lemon -0.003 0.010 -0.022 0.010 0.009 0.005 0.128 0.021 0.010 -0.028 0.014Soda 0.085 0.104 0.111 0.054 0.095 0.078 -0.014 0.094 0.110 -0.064 0.119

Alcohol 0.019 0.024 0.031 0.022 0.022 0.016 0.003 0.020 0.025 -0.013 0.025Chips -0.043 0.029 -0.139 0.025 0.027 0.022 -0.005 0.027 0.031 -0.018 0.034

Fat & Oil-

0.276

0.123 -0.813 0.108 0.111 0.097 -0.036 0.117 0.132 -0.079 0.146

5. Results

21

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Beneficiary Households - Nutrient elasticity with respect to price

 Energ

yProte

in Lipids Carb. Fiber Vit. A Vit. C Folate Fe K Ca

Maize -0.044-

0.103

0.162 -0.220 -0.272 0.029 0.069 0.203 -0.258 0.123 -0.590

Wheat -0.023 -0.096 0.077 -0.088 0.071 0.027 0.076 -0.097 -0.055 0.106 0.107

Beans -0.007-

0.107

0.130 -0.109 -0.210 0.021 0.012 -0.123 -0.129 0.112 -0.153

Rice 0.000 -0.012 0.044 -0.032 0.062 0.011 0.037 -0.231 -0.018 0.041 0.081

Beef 0.016 -0.019 0.034 0.009 0.005 0.114 0.000 0.005 -0.007 -0.002 0.019

Chicken 0.036 0.045 0.060 0.013 0.008 0.152 0.000 0.003 0.030 -0.002 0.032Milk 0.018 0.010 0.035 0.005 0.006 -0.008 0.000 0.004 0.012 -0.002 -0.022

Eggs 0.059 -0.091 0.118 0.037 0.027 -0.507 0.000 0.024 -0.026 -0.008 -0.015

Zucchini 0.013 0.008 0.014 0.013 0.010 -0.002 -0.014 0.005 0.012 -0.019 0.013Onion 0.019 0.011 0.022 0.017 0.008 0.002 -0.051 -0.004 0.018 -0.071 0.021

Tomato 0.034 0.019 0.035 0.036 0.019 -0.140 -0.305 -0.006 0.027 -0.396 0.035Potato 0.033 0.021 0.036 0.031 0.019 -0.010 0.006 0.010 0.032 -0.001 0.037Apple -0.004 0.016 -0.032 0.016 0.015 0.003 0.032 0.024 0.019 0.001 0.021

Banana -0.006 0.023 -0.048 0.024 0.017 0.001 -0.225 0.017 0.027 -0.030 0.033Oranges -0.005 0.007 -0.014 0.003 0.010 -0.006 -0.023 -0.009 0.013 -0.123 0.010Lemon -0.003 0.010 -0.022 0.010 0.009 0.005 0.128 0.021 0.010 -0.028 0.014Soda 0.085 0.104 0.111 0.054 0.095 0.078 -0.014 0.094 0.110 -0.064 0.119

Alcohol 0.019 0.024 0.031 0.022 0.022 0.016 0.003 0.020 0.025 -0.013 0.025Chips -0.043 0.029 -0.139 0.025 0.027 0.022 -0.005 0.027 0.031 -0.018 0.034

Fat & Oil -0.276 0.123 -0.813 0.108 0.111 0.097 -0.036 0.117 0.132 -0.079 0.146

5. Results

22

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Beneficiary Households - Nutrient elasticity with respect to price

 Energ

yProte

in Lipids Carb. Fiber Vit. A Vit. C Folate Fe K Ca

Maize -0.044

-0.103 0.162 -0.220 -

0.272 0.029 0.069 0.203 -0.258 0.123 -

0.590Wheat -0.023 -0.096 0.077 -0.088 0.071 0.027 0.076 -0.097 -0.055 0.106 0.107Beans -0.007 -

0.107 0.130 -0.109 -0.210 0.021 0.012 -

0.123-

0.129 0.112 -0.153

Rice 0.000 -0.012 0.044 -0.032 0.062 0.011 0.037 -0.231 -0.018 0.041 0.081

Beef 0.016 -0.019 0.034 0.009 0.005 0.114 0.000 0.005 -0.007 -0.002 0.019Chicken 0.036 0.045 0.060 0.013 0.008 0.152 0.000 0.003 0.030 -0.002 0.032

Milk 0.018 0.010 0.035 0.005 0.006 -0.008 0.000 0.004 0.012 -0.002 -0.022Eggs 0.059 -

0.091 0.118 0.037 0.027 -0.507 0.000 0.024 -0.026 -0.008 -0.015

Zucchini 0.013 0.008 0.014 0.013 0.010 -0.002 -0.014 0.005 0.012 -0.019 0.013Onion 0.019 0.011 0.022 0.017 0.008 0.002 -0.051 -0.004 0.018 -0.071 0.021

Tomato 0.034 0.019 0.035 0.036 0.019 -0.140 -0.305 -0.006 0.027 -

0.396 0.035Potato 0.033 0.021 0.036 0.031 0.019 -0.010 0.006 0.010 0.032 -0.001 0.037Apple -0.004 0.016 -0.032 0.016 0.015 0.003 0.032 0.024 0.019 0.001 0.021

Banana -0.006 0.023 -0.048 0.024 0.017 0.001 -0.225 0.017 0.027 -0.030 0.033Oranges -0.005 0.007 -0.014 0.003 0.010 -0.006 -0.023 -0.009 0.013 -

0.123 0.010Lemon -0.003 0.010 -0.022 0.010 0.009 0.005 0.128 0.021 0.010 -0.028 0.014Soda 0.085 0.104 0.111 0.054 0.095 0.078 -0.014 0.094 0.110 -0.064 0.119

Alcohol 0.019 0.024 0.031 0.022 0.022 0.016 0.003 0.020 0.025 -0.013 0.025Chips -0.043 0.029 -

0.139 0.025 0.027 0.022 -0.005 0.027 0.031 -0.018 0.034

Fat & Oil -0.276 0.123 -

0.813 0.108 0.111 0.097 -0.036 0.117 0.132 -0.079 0.146

5. Results

23

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Beneficiary Households - Nutrient elasticity with respect to price

 Energ

yProte

in Lipids Carb. Fiber Vit. A Vit. C Folate Fe K Ca

Maize-

0.044

-0.10

30.162 -0.220

-0.27

20.029 0.069 0.203

-0.25

80.123

-0.59

0Wheat -0.023 -0.096 0.077 -0.088 0.071 0.027 0.076 -0.097 -0.055 0.106 0.107

Beans -0.007

-0.10

70.130 -0.109

-0.21

00.021 0.012

-0.12

3

-0.12

90.112

-0.15

3Rice 0.000 -0.012 0.044 -0.032 0.062 0.011 0.037 -

0.231 -0.018 0.041 0.081Beef 0.016 -0.019 0.034 0.009 0.005 0.114 0.000 0.005 -0.007 -0.002 0.019

Chicken 0.036 0.045 0.060 0.013 0.008 0.152 0.000 0.003 0.030 -0.002 0.032Milk 0.018 0.010 0.035 0.005 0.006 -0.008 0.000 0.004 0.012 -0.002 -0.022

Eggs 0.059-

0.091

0.118 0.037 0.027-

0.507

0.000 0.024 -0.026

-0.008

-0.015

Zucchini 0.013 0.008 0.014 0.013 0.010 -0.002 -0.014 0.005 0.012 -0.019 0.013Onion 0.019 0.011 0.022 0.017 0.008 0.002 -0.051 -0.004 0.018 -0.071 0.021

Tomato 0.034 0.019 0.035 0.036 0.019-

0.140

-0.305

-0.006 0.027

-0.39

60.035

Potato 0.033 0.021 0.036 0.031 0.019 -0.010 0.006 0.010 0.032 -0.001 0.037Apple -0.004 0.016 -0.032 0.016 0.015 0.003 0.032 0.024 0.019 0.001 0.021

Banana -0.006 0.023 -0.048 0.024 0.017 0.001 -0.225 0.017 0.027 -0.030 0.033Oranges -0.005 0.007 -0.014 0.003 0.010 -0.006 -0.023 -0.009 0.013 -

0.123 0.010Lemon -0.003 0.010 -0.022 0.010 0.009 0.005 0.128 0.021 0.010 -0.028 0.014Soda 0.085 0.104 0.111 0.054 0.095 0.078 -0.014 0.094 0.110 -0.064 0.119

Alcohol 0.019 0.024 0.031 0.022 0.022 0.016 0.003 0.020 0.025 -0.013 0.025Chips -0.043 0.029 -

0.139 0.025 0.027 0.022 -0.005 0.027 0.031 -0.018 0.034

Fat & Oil -0.276 0.123 -

0.813 0.108 0.111 0.097 -0.036 0.117 0.132 -0.079 0.146

5. Results

24

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Beneficiary Households - Nutrient elasticity with respect to price

 Energ

yProte

in Lipids Carb. Fiber Vit. A Vit. C Folate Fe K Ca

Maize -0.044 -0.103 0.162 -0.220 -0.272 0.029 0.069 0.203 -0.258 0.123 -0.590Wheat -0.023 -0.096 0.077 -0.088 0.071 0.027 0.076 -0.097 -0.055 0.106 0.107Beans -0.007 -0.107 0.130 -0.109 -0.210 0.021 0.012 -0.123 -0.129 0.112 -0.153Rice 0.000 -0.012 0.044 -0.032 0.062 0.011 0.037 -0.231 -0.018 0.041 0.081Beef 0.016 -0.019 0.034 0.009 0.005 0.114 0.000 0.005 -0.007 -0.002 0.019

Chicken 0.036 0.045 0.060 0.013 0.008 0.152 0.000 0.003 0.030 -0.002 0.032Milk 0.018 0.010 0.035 0.005 0.006 -0.008 0.000 0.004 0.012 -0.002 -0.022Eggs 0.059 -0.091 0.118 0.037 0.027 -0.507 0.000 0.024 -0.026 -0.008 -0.015

Zucchini 0.013 0.008 0.014 0.013 0.010 -0.002 -0.014 0.005 0.012 -0.019 0.013Onion 0.019 0.011 0.022 0.017 0.008 0.002 -0.051 -0.004 0.018 -0.071 0.021

Tomato 0.034 0.019 0.035 0.036 0.019 -0.140 -0.305 -0.006 0.027 -0.396 0.035Potato 0.033 0.021 0.036 0.031 0.019 -0.010 0.006 0.010 0.032 -0.001 0.037Apple -0.004 0.016 -0.032 0.016 0.015 0.003 0.032 0.024 0.019 0.001 0.021

Banana -0.006 0.023 -0.048 0.024 0.017 0.001 -0.225 0.017 0.027 -0.030 0.033Oranges -0.005 0.007 -0.014 0.003 0.010 -0.006 -0.023 -0.009 0.013 -0.123 0.010Lemon -0.003 0.010 -0.022 0.010 0.009 0.005 0.128 0.021 0.010 -0.028 0.014Soda 0.085 0.104 0.111 0.054 0.095 0.078 -0.014 0.094 0.110 -0.064 0.119

Alcohol 0.019 0.024 0.031 0.022 0.022 0.016 0.003 0.020 0.025 -0.013 0.025Chips -0.043 0.029 -0.139 0.025 0.027 0.022 -0.005 0.027 0.031 -0.018 0.034

Fat & Oil -0.276 0.123 -0.813 0.108 0.111 0.097 -0.036 0.117 0.132 -0.079 0.146

5. Results

25

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

Beneficiary Households - Nutrient elasticity with respect to price

 Energ

yProte

in Lipids Carb. Fiber Vit. A Vit. C Folate Fe K Ca

Maize -0.044 -0.103 0.162 -0.220 -0.272 0.029 0.069 0.203 -0.258 0.123 -0.590Wheat -0.023 -0.096 0.077 -0.088 0.071 0.027 0.076 -0.097 -0.055 0.106 0.107Beans -0.007 -0.107 0.130 -0.109 -0.210 0.021 0.012 -0.123 -0.129 0.112 -0.153Rice 0.000 -0.012 0.044 -0.032 0.062 0.011 0.037 -0.231 -0.018 0.041 0.081Beef 0.016 -0.019 0.034 0.009 0.005 0.114 0.000 0.005 -0.007 -0.002 0.019

Chicken 0.036 0.045 0.060 0.013 0.008 0.152 0.000 0.003 0.030 -0.002 0.032Milk 0.018 0.010 0.035 0.005 0.006 -0.008 0.000 0.004 0.012 -0.002 -0.022Eggs 0.059 -0.091 0.118 0.037 0.027 -0.507 0.000 0.024 -0.026 -0.008 -0.015

Zucchini 0.013 0.008 0.014 0.013 0.010 -0.002 -0.014 0.005 0.012 -0.019 0.013Onion 0.019 0.011 0.022 0.017 0.008 0.002 -0.051 -0.004 0.018 -0.071 0.021

Tomato 0.034 0.019 0.035 0.036 0.019 -0.140 -0.305 -0.006 0.027 -0.396 0.035Potato 0.033 0.021 0.036 0.031 0.019 -0.010 0.006 0.010 0.032 -0.001 0.037Apple -0.004 0.016 -0.032 0.016 0.015 0.003 0.032 0.024 0.019 0.001 0.021

Banana -0.006 0.023 -0.048 0.024 0.017 0.001 -0.225 0.017 0.027 -0.030 0.033Oranges -0.005 0.007 -0.014 0.003 0.010 -0.006 -0.023 -0.009 0.013 -0.123 0.010Lemon -0.003 0.010 -0.022 0.010 0.009 0.005 0.128 0.021 0.010 -0.028 0.014Soda 0.08

50.10

40.11

1 0.054 0.095 0.078 -0.014 0.094 0.110

-0.064

0.119

Alcohol 0.019 0.024 0.031 0.022 0.022 0.016 0.003 0.020 0.025 -0.013 0.025Chips -0.043 0.029 -0.139 0.025 0.027 0.022 -0.005 0.027 0.031 -0.018 0.034

Fat & Oil -0.276 0.123 -0.813 0.108 0.111 0.097 -0.036 0.117 0.132 -0.079 0.146

᠐ Quantity᠐ May not be enough to cover the necessity for food.᠐ The cash transfer may be diverted into other type of expenditure.

᠐ Diversity᠐ Increased within food groups.᠐ Similar among groups.

᠐ Quality᠐ Beneficiaries depend on few products (maize, beans, eggs, tomatoes)

to get most of macro- and micronutrients.᠐ An increase in income would increase staple food and complement

consumption, more than animal products, vegetables and fruits.

᠐ Positive effect of nutritional and health education.

6. Conclusion

26

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

᠐ Future research:᠐ Increase the number of food items in the

study. ᠐ Survey on consumption not on expenditure.

᠐ Other policy impacts.

᠐ Policy recommendation:᠐ Near-to-cash transfer to meet the objective of

the program.

7. Recommendations

27

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

᠐ Illustration: Marcelo Romero

Thank you.

28

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

᠐ Illustration: Marcelo Romero 29

Intro

Oportu-

nidades

Hypothesis

CCT

Framework

Method

Results

Conclusion

References

᠐ Behrman, J. R., & Hoddinott, J. F. (2005). “Programme Evaluation with Unobserved Heterogeneity and Selective Implementation: The Mexican ‘PROGRESA’ Impact on Child Nutrition.”. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics , 67 (4), 547-569.

᠐ Ecker, O., & Qaim, M. (2011). Analyzing Nutritional Impacts of Policies. An Empirical Study for Malawi. World Development , 39 (3), 412-428.

᠐ Leroy, J. L., Ruel, M., & Verhofstadt, E. (2009). The Impact of Conditional Cash Transfer Programmes on Child Nutrition: a Review of Evidence using a Programme Theory Framework. Journal of Development Effectiveness , 1 (2), 103-129.

᠐ Pérez Lizaur, A. B., Marván Laborde, L., & Palicios, B. (2008). Sistema Mexicano de Alimentos Equivalentes (3rd Edition ed.). Mexico: Fomento de Nutrición y Salud, A. C.

᠐ Tafere, K., Taffesse, A. S., & Tamiru, S. (2010, April). Food Demand Elasticities in Ethiopia: Estimates Using Household Income Consumption Expenditure (HICE) Survey Data . Discussion Paper No. ESSP2 011.