Poverty and Migration in the Digital Age: Experimental...
Transcript of Poverty and Migration in the Digital Age: Experimental...
Poverty and Migration in the Digital Age:
Experimental Evidence on Mobile Banking in Bangladesh
Jean Lee, Jonathan Morduch, Saravana Ravindran,
Abu Shonchoy, Hassan Zaman
April 26, 20171
Context
MigrationUrbanizationMobile MoneyPoverty and risk
2
Two sites
Dhaka: Capital city, home to garment factories
Gaibandha district, RangpurOne of poorest regions of Bangladesh, with exposure to monga (seasonal famine, September through November).
Rangpur has significantly lower rates of food consumption per capita than other regions.
Dhaka
Gaibandha
3
Focus: impact of remittances via mobile money
Factory workers
Remittances
4
5
6
Urbanization
7
From rural to Dhaka
(lifetime net migration rate
2001-11)
Absolute rural decline
Working age, 20-44
8
9
Mobile Money in Bangladesh
“[E]xperts at Bangladesh Bank, the country’s central bank, describe mobile money as a key strategy to expand financial access in this nation of 160 million people, where fewer than 30% have a bank account.”
- Wall Street Journal, 2015• Wide range of bank-based, interoperable
mobile money providers: Dutch Bangla Bank, bKash, etc.
• Potential to mitigate economic shocks (Jack and Suri, AER 2014; Batista and Vicente 2016)
10
bKash
• Leading mobile money service provided by BRAC Bank
• Mobile wallet and person-to-person transfers
• Individuals deposit and withdraw money through agent network
• Launched in 2011. Handles about 70 million transactions per day (Wall Street Journal, 2015)
11
Rapid Expansion
Microfinance: After 4 decades, 21 million users. 90% women.
Mobile money: In 5 years, 21 million accounts. 18% women.
Leesa Shrader, CGAP 2015
12
13
bKash
14
Partner: Gana Unnayan Kendra (GUK), a local NGO in Gaibandha.
Works to train garment workers and place them in jobs in Dhaka.
15
Research Questions
• Context: Seasonal variability in incomes, as well as the relatively higher incomes in factory jobs in Dhaka, motivates migration.
• Project: Introduce mobile banking accounts to a sample of migrants and rural families.
• Questions: Does the technology improve well-being of rural households (transfer recipients), particularly through the annual pre-harvest (monga season) famine. – Reduce food consumption variability? Improve education? Improve
financial conditions?– Improve recipient household members’ health through the difficult famine
season?
16
Experimental Design
1717
Linked samples
• Rural families: Rural families of migrants • Urban migrants: Migrants to Dhaka from these same rural
households (70% male, 30% female).• Rural households trained through GUK
– Targeted for this intervention after identified as ultra-poor• 99% have mobile phones• 11 % have bank accounts• Avg land: about 0.1 acre• Many have incomes < $1 per day per person
• Encouragement design: Half of the sample is experimentally introduced to the technology
18
Overview of Design• Rural household-urban migrant pairs are the unit of
randomization• 817 household-migrant pairs in final sample• Recruited through use of a garments training program
(SHIREE) roster and snowball sampling• Three cross-randomized experiments:
1. bKash training vs. no bKash training2. Messaging about individual benefits vs. messaging about
family/social benefits3. In a willingness-to-pay survey, priming to think about bKash or
cash• We focus here on Experiment 1
1919
Training Intervention
• 30- to 45-minute intervention. How to sign up and use bKash.
• Information about bKash mobile money (hard copy)• Technical assistance with enrollment:
– locating necessary identification, – completing application– locating vendor who could accept application
• 200 Taka (<3 USD) compensation for participation in the training
20
Timeline
• Study recruitment (Sept 2014 to Feb 2015)• Baseline survey (Dec 2014 to March 2015)• Introduce bKash (April 2015 to May 2015)
– Treatment: 415 households (bKash training and incentive)– Control: 400 households– Marketing: Within treatment arm, cross-randomized order in
which households and migrants were approached – whether or not migrant is “first mover” – and pro-social marketing strategy
• Midline survey (August 2015 to September 2015)• Endline survey (January 2016 to March 2016)
21
Administrative Data
• In addition to survey data, we collected administrative data from bKash on accounts held by households and migrants in our sample
• Data range from shortly following the end of the treatment phase to one year later (July 2015 to July 2016)
2222
Estimation
23
First Stage• Compare “active” accounts by treatment status,
where active is defined as having at least one transaction in the period July 2015 to July 2016
• Transactions include transfers (sent or received), withdrawals, deposits and airtime top-ups
• Data are from bKash admin files
24
Frequency of Transactions
• 73%% of bKash account holders make more than one transaction in their account per month
2525
First Stage: Rural
26
Controls: gender, age, primary school completion of head of the household, and household size
First Stage: Urban
27
Controls: gender, age, primary school completion of head of the household, and household size
• Average month-end balances are low (< $3)
• $1 = 78 taka• PPP$1 = 31 taka
• Rising over time
28
Average Month-End Balances
28
Low Balances
Number of Remittances
• Treatment households send about double the number of remittances over the period as control households
2929
Value of Mobile Remittances
• Similar pattern for value of remittances sent
• Peaks and valleys somewhat correspond to festivals and harvest seasons
30
Aus
Local boro HYV
boro
Migrant Income and Remittances
Average monthly income: 7830 Taka per migrant.– $100, PPP$300, (PPP$10/day)
Remittances in past 7 months: 17,279 Taka– $222, PPP$557 – 2468 Taka per month ($32, PPP$80)– Large fraction of monthly income (2468/7830 =
31.5%).
31
Key findings: impact of treatment
Rural households:– Reduced borrowing and increased savings– Improved education, health and agricultural outcomes– Improved resilience to negative economic shocks
Urban migrants:– Increased savings and reduced poverty– Increased employment in formal sector– Worsened self-reported health indicators
32
Results: Rural Households
33
Estimating Impacts• We then estimate Intent-to-Treat and
Instrumental Variables estimates of the treatment effect using the following specification:
• Our outcomes include individual outcomes and indices of outcomes within an outcome locus, such as education or health, as constructed following Kling, Liebman and Katz (2007)
34
• At baseline, the total size of loans taken by rural households over the last 12 months was 6798 Taka.
• Monthly remittances are large in comparison to the size of total loans (2486/6798 = 36.6%)
35
Borrowing
Borrowing
• Significant reduction in reported need to borrow over past 1 year
• Reduction in total value of loans (p-value = 0.107)
36
Borrowing Index
37
Savings
38
44 percentage points more likely to save on a control mean of 43%
Education• Significant
increases in daily hours spent studying and aspirations for children
• Insignificant increases in rates of passing last exam, enrollment, and attendance
• No effect on education expenditures
39
Education Index
40
Health• Significant
decrease in number of sick household members
• Insignificant decreases in weeks ill over past year and average medical expenses
41
Health Index
42
Agriculture• Fewer negative
agricultural productivity shocks
• Insignificant positive increase in agricultural productivity
43
Agriculture Index
44
Consumption
• No significant impacts on consumption levels
45
Consumption Index
46
Resilience to Shocks
• To compare the outcomes of rural households in the treatment group hit by shocks with outcomes of rural households in the control group hit by shocks, we estimate:
• is the coefficient of interest (on treatment group * shock)
47
Shocks – Remittance Flows• Large and
significant increases in remittances sent by migrants via bKash
• Pattern very similar to estimates for consumption
• Illustrates mechanism for consumption smoothing when hit by shocks
48
Shocks - Consumption• Significant
increase in consumption when hit by agricultural shocks(32%)
• Impact larger than that estimated by Jack and Suri, 2014 (7%)
• Insignificant increase in consumption when hit by health shocks
49
Shocks – Food Consumption• Similar pattern
when we look at food consumption
• Magnitudes are slightly larger, since food consumption is likely hardest hit when households are faced with shocks
50
Positive Shocks
51
Are Migrants Key for Resilience to Shocks?
• To compare outcomes of rural households in the treatment group hit by shocks whose paired migrants are also hit with shocks, with rural households in the control group hit by shocks whose paired migrants are hit with shocks:
• is the coefficient of interest (rural and urban pairs experience shocks at same time)
52
Household Shock + Migrant Shock • No impact on
consumption for rural households hit by shocks, when migrant is hit by a health shock
• Migrants are key for provision of insurance in bad times
53
Household Shock + Migrant Shock
• Migrants unable to send more remittances when they are hit by health shocks
54
Results: Urban Migrants
55
Remittances
56
Remittances
57
Savings
58
Formal Employment
59
Work in Garments Industry
60
Poverty
61
Migrant Health• Decreases in self-
reported health indicators in terms of physical health problems, ease of daily work, bodily pain, social activities, emotional problems and severe emotional problems
62
Health Index
63
Higher Income at Expense of Health
64
Results: Robustness Checks
65
Spillover Analysis - Rural
66
Impact on control group of adoption – based on having more villagers in the treatment group
Spillover Analysis - Urban
67
Impact on control group of adoption – based on having more people locally in the treatment group
Network Spillovers - Urban
68
Discussed bKash with social network, but that did not affect adoption.
Conclusion
2 big trends gaining speed:• Movement of people• Movement of money
• Extreme poverty will become more difficult to reduce
• Migration with remittances as a poverty reduction strategy
69
Strategy 1: Local development
MicrofinanceGraduation/ultrapoor programsTrainingSME
(Capital, Human capital, X)Labor
Strategy 2: Migrate and connect
(Capital, Human capital, X)Labor
72
Summary Statistics
7373