IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jda/journl/vol.54year2020issue4pp117-127.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact Of Child Labor Eradication Programs In Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriel Weber Costa
  • André Carraro
  • Felipe Garcia Ribeiro
  • Mariane Furtado Borba

    (São Paulo School of Economics, Brazil
    Federal University of Pelotas, Brazil
    Federal University of Pelotas, Brazil
    University of São Paulo, Brazil)

Abstract

After a period of falling child labor rates, Brazil has witnessed an increase in its incidence. There are two main federal policies against child labor in the country. The Child Labor Eradication Program (PETI) was created in 1996, designed with a conditional cash transfer approach that requires families to pull their children from labor situation and to have them attend school. The Bolsa Família Program (PBF) targets families living in poverty and extreme poverty via cash transfers conditional on school attendance and vaccination of children. Despite the PBF not directly addressing child labor, the two programs have been in integrated management since 2005. We use a comprehensive dataset covering the entire Brazilian population in 2010 to estimate the effect of each program individually on labor supply of children, both in terms of the extensive margin (probability of labor) and the intensive margin (weekly hours worked conditional on working). We adopt a Propensity Score Matching methodology, flexibly selecting covariates among a wide list of variables related to demographics and socioeconomic indicators of the children and their households, using the algorithm proposed by Imbens (2015) based on the repeated estimation of likelihood ratio tests. In order to consider possible heterogeneous effects, we also perform all estimation procedures separately for each Brazilian region. Our results suggest that the PBF is only able to reduce the probability of child labor in the South region, while the PETI only does so in the Southeast region. Disturbingly, both programs seem to increase the likelihood of child labor in the North and Northeast regions, which are the poorest in the country. On the other hand, when considering the intensive margin of child labor, we find that both PBF and PETI seem to be effective in diminishing weekly hours worked among children in the entire country (except for PETI in the South and Midwest, with less precise estimates). Our estimates also suggest that PETI conditionalities are not closely monitored. Furthermore, with the evidence indicating the programs can only partially reduce hours worked but are unable to remove children from the labor market, we interpret that cash transfer amounts might be insufficient to discourage child labor, especially those from PETI, which have not been updated since 1996.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriel Weber Costa & André Carraro & Felipe Garcia Ribeiro & Mariane Furtado Borba, 2020. "The Impact Of Child Labor Eradication Programs In Brazil," Journal of Developing Areas, Tennessee State University, College of Business, vol. 54(4), pages 117-127, October-D.
  • Handle: RePEc:jda:journl:vol.54:year:2020:issue4:pp:117-127
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/738665/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Polyxeni Kechagia & Theodore Metaxas, 2023. "Capital Inflows and Working Children in Developing Countries: An Empirical Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Alhassan Abdullah & Inès Huynh & Clifton R. Emery & Lucy P. Jordan, 2022. "Social Norms and Family Child Labor: A Systematic Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-21, March.
    3. Cepaluni, Gabriel & Chewning, Taylor Kinsley & Driscoll, Amanda & Faganello, Marco Antonio, 2022. "Conditional cash transfers and child labor," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Child Labor; Impact Evaluation; Brazil; Public Policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply
    • J82 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Standards - - - Labor Force Composition
    • J88 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Standards - - - Public Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jda:journl:vol.54:year:2020:issue4:pp:117-127. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Abu N.M. Wahid (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbtnsus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.