The world’s largest humanitarian cash transfer programme reduces child labour and increases schooling among refugee children

Forced Displacement and the Impact on Refugee Children’s Education

Forced displacement has become a major concern worldwide, with the number of refugees and internally displaced persons steadily increasing over the past decade. Turkey is one of the countries hosting the largest refugee population, with 3.1 million Syrians as of February 2024. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) estimated that in 2022, 43.3 million children were forcibly displaced, accounting for 40% of the total displaced population (UNHCR 2024). Forced displacement disrupts families’ lives and often forces children to leave school and enter the workforce at a young age (Ibáñez and Vélez 2008).

The Importance of Keeping Refugee Children in School

Ensuring that refugee children have access to education is a crucial policy goal, as schools provide them with skills that help them integrate into society and the labor market. However, there are numerous financial and non-financial barriers that prevent refugee children from accessing education. Refugee families face significant economic hardships (Tekin-Koru 2020). For example, in 2016, 28.6% of Syrian refugees in Turkey experienced food insecurity, and 93% lived below the national poverty line (WFP 2016). Many refugee household heads work in informal jobs without job security and earn less than the minimum wage (Demirci and Kirdar 2023, Pinedo-Caro 2020). Children, especially boys, often have to work to help their families meet basic needs. Additionally, forced displacement exposes these children to disruption, loss, and psychological hardship, making it more challenging for them to continue their education in a new country where they must adapt to the school system and overcome language barriers. As a result, refugees are less likely to start school, less likely to progress through grade levels, tend to have lower grades compared to native children (Kirdar et al. 2023), and are more likely to engage in child labor (Dayıoğlu et al. 2021).

The Cash Transfer Program in Turkey

In a recent study (Aygun et al. 2024), my co-authors and I examined whether the Emergency Social Safety Net (ESSN) program, which provides unconditional cash transfers to refugee households in Turkey, can enhance children’s school enrollment and reduce child labor. ESSN is the largest humanitarian cash transfer program globally, benefiting over 1.5 million recipients (IFRC 2024). It was established in November 2016 and is funded by the European Union. ESSN provides regular monthly cash transfers to vulnerable refugee families who meet specific eligibility criteria based on their household composition.

The cash transfer amounts are significant compared to the monthly earnings from work for refugees. In 2017, the average six-member Syrian family in Turkey received a monthly payment equivalent to 55% of the average monthly earnings of Syrian men and 43% of Turkey’s minimum monthly wage. The transfers are distributed in installments on debit cards provided to the recipients, which can be used to withdraw cash or make purchases.

Addressing Child Labor and Non-Enrollment through Cash Transfers

Using data collected by the World Food Programme (WFP) in 2018 from a representative sample of refugees in Turkey, we found that ESSN cash transfers effectively increase school enrollment among refugee children. Receiving ESSN transfers reduces the percentage of boys not in school from 28.4% to 10.4% (a decrease of 64%) and the percentage of girls not in school from 24.9% to 10.3% (a decrease of 59%). There is also a significant decrease in child labor as a result of receiving transfers. The percentage of boys working decreases from 17.0% to 2.4% (an 86% decrease), and the percentage of girls working decreases from 3.3% to 0.2% (a 95% decrease).

To understand how cash transfers have such a remarkable impact, we examined different mechanisms that could be at play. We found that ESSN cash transfers are the primary source of income for half of the beneficiaries and a secondary or tertiary source of income for more than 30%. Receiving the cash transfer reduces the extreme poverty gap by 72%. This means that the transfers help bridge the gap between the consumption levels of the poorest refugee households and the extreme poverty threshold (corresponding to the first quintile of consumption in our dataset).

Additionally, we discovered that modest ESSN cash transfers effectively reduce the frequency of harmful coping behaviors when families lack food, as measured by the reduced coping strategy index (rCSI). These behaviors include reducing meal portion sizes, decreasing the number of meals eaten per day, and restricting adult consumption to ensure children can eat. Furthermore, refugees are less likely to resort to harmful measures to cope with insufficient income, as measured by the Livelihood Coping Strategy index, which aggregates behaviors such as reducing essential non-food expenditures like education or health, marrying children under the age of 16, begging, and accepting high-risk or illegal temporary jobs.

Cash transfers also help address indirect costs related to schooling. These transfers significantly reduce the number of children who are not enrolled in school due to having to work by 14.4 percentage points, decreasing it from 19.0% to 4.6% (a decrease of 76%). They also reduce the number of children not attending school due to household responsibilities by 5.8 percentage points, eliminating non-enrollment for this reason. Furthermore, there is some indication that the cash transfers alleviate the direct cost of schooling, as non-enrollment due to schooling costs decreases by 5.6 percentage points, reducing it from 7.0% to 1.4% (an 80% reduction).

Heterogeneous Effects of Cash Transfers

The positive effects of cash transfers vary depending on household characteristics and are generally stronger for more vulnerable households. Children in the poorest households, as measured by per capita consumption levels, benefit the most from the cash transfer. The impact is greater in households where the head has no education compared to those with a head who has primary to high school education. Cash transfers encourage children’s school attendance in larger households that receive higher cash payments. Additionally, families who have been in Turkey for a longer period experience stronger effects than more recent arrivals. The effect of cash transfers also varies by children’s age, with children aged 12-14 benefiting the most in terms of school attendance.

Policy Implications

There is an urgent policy debate on finding immediate and innovative solutions to address forced displacement and its impact on children. While it is crucial to develop sustainable, long-term strategies to support displaced populations and facilitate their integration into host countries, cash transfers can effectively address humanitarian needs (Tappis and Doocy 2018, ODI 2017). However, it is essential to expand the evidence base for humanitarian actions

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 1: No Poverty
• SDG 2: Zero Hunger
• SDG 4: Quality Education
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 1.1: By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people everywhere.
• SDG 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.
• SDG 4.1: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.
• SDG 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value.
• SDG 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator for SDG 1.1: Proportion of population living below the national poverty line.
• Indicator for SDG 2.1: Prevalence of undernourishment.
• Indicator for SDG 4.1: Percentage of children completing primary and secondary education.
• Indicator for SDG 8.5: Employment-to-population ratio by sex, age group, and persons with disabilities.
• Indicator for SDG 10.2: Proportion of people living below 50% of median income.

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Note: The indicators mentioned in the table are based on the information provided in the article.

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: cepr.org

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.