Costing alternative transfer modalities

Discussions regarding the merits of cash and food transfers by academics and implementers alike focus on their relative impacts. Much less is known about their relative costs. We apply activity-based costing methods to interventions situated in Ecuador, Niger, Uganda, and Yemen, finding that the per...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Margolies, Amy, Hoddinott, John F.
Formato: Artículo preliminar
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: International Food Policy Research Institute 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/151286
_version_ 1855516359409008640
author Margolies, Amy
Hoddinott, John F.
author_browse Hoddinott, John F.
Margolies, Amy
author_facet Margolies, Amy
Hoddinott, John F.
author_sort Margolies, Amy
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description Discussions regarding the merits of cash and food transfers by academics and implementers alike focus on their relative impacts. Much less is known about their relative costs. We apply activity-based costing methods to interventions situated in Ecuador, Niger, Uganda, and Yemen, finding that the per transfer cost of providing cash is always less than that of providing food. Given the budget for these interventions, an additional 44,769 people could have received assistance at no additional cost had cash been provided instead of food. This suggests a significant opportunity cost in terms of reduced coverage when higher-cost transfer modalities are used. Decisions to use cash or food transfers should consider both impacts and costs.
format Artículo preliminar
id CGSpace151286
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2014
publishDateRange 2014
publishDateSort 2014
publisher International Food Policy Research Institute
publisherStr International Food Policy Research Institute
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace1512862025-11-06T05:20:39Z Costing alternative transfer modalities Margolies, Amy Hoddinott, John F. social protection cash transfers food aid Discussions regarding the merits of cash and food transfers by academics and implementers alike focus on their relative impacts. Much less is known about their relative costs. We apply activity-based costing methods to interventions situated in Ecuador, Niger, Uganda, and Yemen, finding that the per transfer cost of providing cash is always less than that of providing food. Given the budget for these interventions, an additional 44,769 people could have received assistance at no additional cost had cash been provided instead of food. This suggests a significant opportunity cost in terms of reduced coverage when higher-cost transfer modalities are used. Decisions to use cash or food transfers should consider both impacts and costs. 2014 2024-08-01T02:56:24Z 2024-08-01T02:56:24Z Working Paper https://hdl.handle.net/10568/151286 en https://hdl.handle.net/10568/154119 https://doi.org/10.2499/9780896291737RR163 https://hdl.handle.net/10568/152032 https://doi.org/10.1080/19439342.2014.984745 Open Access application/pdf International Food Policy Research Institute Margolies, Amy and Hoddinott, John F. 2014. Costing alternative transfer modalities. IFPRI Discussion Paper 1375. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). https://hdl.handle.net/10568/151286
spellingShingle social protection
cash transfers
food aid
Margolies, Amy
Hoddinott, John F.
Costing alternative transfer modalities
title Costing alternative transfer modalities
title_full Costing alternative transfer modalities
title_fullStr Costing alternative transfer modalities
title_full_unstemmed Costing alternative transfer modalities
title_short Costing alternative transfer modalities
title_sort costing alternative transfer modalities
topic social protection
cash transfers
food aid
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/151286
work_keys_str_mv AT margoliesamy costingalternativetransfermodalities
AT hoddinottjohnf costingalternativetransfermodalities