SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 Evidence at Your Fingertips Series Cash Transfer Payment Mechanisms: Do Outcomes Vary According to Payment Mechanism? Summary 1. Based on the most recent impact evaluation 3. More than the method of distribution, access to evidence, on its own, the payment mechanism used predictable and easy transfers, low transaction costs, to distribute cash—whether physical or digital— available services infrastructure, and social norms does not have notably different impacts on drive outcome indicators; at times, recipients may how recipients use cash or on outcome indicators prefer what is familiar to what is presumably such as consumption and food security, gender more efficient or equitable. equity and empowerment, and financial inclusion 4. A host of ecosystem factors must be and savings. considered when gauging the appropriate transfer 2. That said, digital transfers are a potentially payment mechanism, including the costs of physical cost-effective mechanism to reduce transaction payments, leakage, mobile network coverage and costs for implementers—by reducing distribution saturation, available agent operator network, costs and leakage—and for households—by digital literacy, gender and rural gaps in mobile reducing time spent collecting cash and providing a access and financial services, know-your-customer potential gateway to financial services. (KYC) requirements to open an account, security SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 when collecting the cash, and integration with “cash physical cash should be prioritized while the necessary plus” programming elements. investments are made. 5. Policy makers and implementers should ensure that 6. Where digital transfers are feasible, the potential adequate infrastructure is in place before relying efficiency gains and reduction in leakages upon digital technologies for cash distribution to and other transaction costs for beneficiaries and avoid further marginalization of vulnerable groups implementers may far outweigh the upfront costs who may lack access; if infrastructure is not available, of investing in appropriate infrastructure to reach excluded populations. Evidence Overview Robust recent evidence is available of the impact of cash- measured. The cash payment mechanisms reviewed transfer payment mechanisms on consumption and food include biometric cards to physical cash transfers, physical security, gender equity and empowerment, and financial cash with word-of-mouth messaging, and mobile phone inclusion. Data are lacking from 2016 onward on labor, payments with and without messaging. Digital payment education, and health and nutrition, so these outcomes mechanisms reviewed include digital wallets, direct areas are not included. Table 1 provides an overview of deposits to benefits-only accounts, savings-only accounts, the eight studies included in this brief: country context and fully functional bank accounts. and program name, payment mechanisms, and outcomes Table 1. Overview of Included Studies Country Program Scope of evaluation Outcome Consumption Gender Financial & food equity & inclusion & security empowerment savings Niger Zap M-Transfer Study (Cash vs cash + mobile messaging Digital wallet Digital Digital + vs digital wallet + messaging) messaging Pakistan JazzCash Messaging (Digital wallet uptake vs control)   X X Pakistan Benazir Income Support (Cash vs debit card vs smart card Programme Digitalization vs digital wallet)   X X Kenya M-Pesa Mobile Money Study (Cash vs digital wallet)   X   Malawi Savings Defaults (Cash vs direct deposit to savings X   X only accounts) India National Rural Employment (Cash vs smartcard benefits-only Generation Scheme and accounts) X X SSP Smartcards India Aadhar Smart Cards (Cash vs smartcard benefits-only X     accounts) Bangladesh COVID-19 Pandemic (Manual cash vs digital to payment X     Payments center) Sources: Aadil et al. 2019; Aker et al 2016; Brune et al. 2017; Ideas42 2020; Muralidharan 2016; Shonchoy et al 2020; Suri and Jack 2016. -2- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 Introduction messaging (via word-of-mouth or mobile notification) and digital cash transfers via mobile money linked to spending Cash-transfer payment mechanisms abound and and savings accounts or direct deposit into financial have diversified greatly in recent years. Payments accounts such as at local banks or financial centers for can be made manually (in person) on a set schedule cash-in, cash-out operation. at a brick-and-mortar location such as a bank, post office, or government office or digitally via mobile Several types of payment mechanisms were reviewed: money, biometrically authenticated smart cards or to a Cash payment mechanisms designated financial account, such as through a local bank or payment center. Research conducted before • Physical cash transfers with word-of-mouth messaging 2016 (Table 1) has shown that digital transfers may be • Physical cash transfers with mobile messaging more cost-effective for implementers than physical cash payments, expand customer coverage for participating • Physical cash transfers without messaging mobile network operators, and provide avenues to increase financial inclusion for the poor, among other • Biometric cards to physical cash transfer potential benefits. However, recent studies show that Digital payment mechanisms these benefits are not guaranteed. • Mobile money or digital wallet Recent studies have provided additional details and nuance to these earlier findings given the rise in electronic • Direct deposit to benefits-only account government-to-person payments and innovations at the • Direct deposit to savings-only account onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This review examines the impacts of physical cash transfer payments with • Direct deposit to fully functional bank account Key Questions 1. How does the payment mechanism used for a cash transfer affect household-level health and nutrition, consumption, savings, and behavioral patterns such as expenditures on temptation goods such as alcohol, tobacco, prepared foods, and sweets? 2. Do digital payments increase financial inclusion through savings, remittances, investments, access to financial goods and services, or other means? 3. To what extent, if any, are digital transfers more cost-effective for implementers (cost to deliver) and beneficiaries (ability to access and use)? 4. What might be needed for digital cash transfers to generate greater reductions in transaction costs to implementers or recipients than physical transfers? 5. What are salient gaps in recent evidence on cash transfer payment mechanisms? -3- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 Key Findings physical cash, electronically through mobile money (m-transfer), and manually through physical cash with Recent studies have found an increase in experimentation notification on a mobile phone.2 The researchers found with delivering digital transfers instead of physical that households receiving an m-transfer mobile money cash to reduce transaction costs for implementers and payment to a digital financial account were more likely recipients, increase control over entitlements, increase than physical cash recipients to buy diverse goods, timeliness and convenience, reduce corruption and including protein and energy-rich foods. This increased leakages, and encourage on-ramps to financial inclusion their dietary diversity by 9 percent to 16 percent for at (Gelb, Mukherjee, and Navis 2020). This may also lead to least six months after receiving the transfer. In addition, fiscal savings for implementers and better time use for households were more likely to buy non-staple grains recipients, yet effective implementation of digital transfers such as rice and corn and more likely to purchase requires a basic digital infrastructure of functioning specialty goods such as oil and meat, and their children identification systems, mobile phone access, and financial ate the equivalent of an additional one-third of a meal accounts for recipients, which many countries may per day. lack (Gelb, Mukherjee, and Navis 2020). Furthermore, digitalization is a tool, not the only solution for improved In Bangladesh during the COVID-19 pandemic, some service delivery and inclusivity, particularly for the most households (2.4 percent of 5,640 phone survey vulnerable groups. In these cases, in addition to building participants) with access to digital social assistance an infrastructural foundation for digital payments, it payments used these to ensure food security and basic is necessary to institute measures to bridge the digital consumption during a time when lockdowns severely divide for excluded groups. limited their livelihoods (Shonchoy et al. 2020). This is critical because, at the time, as many as 68 percent of surveyed respondents who primarily received physical Consumption and Food Security cash had received none or only a fraction of the full value of their entitlements. As a result, 51 percent Digital cash transfers may not automatically increase of physical cash recipients had reduced medication consumption simply by increasing access to financial intake, and 22 percent had reduced food intake.3 Direct resources. Recent studies outlined below have shown deposit digital transfer recipients were 60 percent that digital cash recipients may choose to increase their more likely to have received the transfer at the height consumption or increase their dietary diversity, especially of the lockdown—two to three months sooner than during times of crisis such as drought and pandemic. those who received physical cash. The main reasons for consumption smoothing included receiving money In a study of a monthly cash transfer targeting women on time, losing less money to leakage (20 percent during an extreme drought period in Niger (Aker et al. more likely to receive the full transfer value than cash 2016), a 22,000 CFA franc transfer ($45)1 was provided recipients), and having easy access to a nearby cash-in, through three delivery channels: manually through cash-out point.4 1 The value is slightly less than two-thirds of total annual gross domestic product per capita. 2 The mobile treatment arms with mobile money and physical cash were introduced to isolate the impact of the mobile device technology specifically. 3 Digital cash transfer recipients were not randomized because of the geographic introduction of the program. They were typically less vulnerable than other recipients and owned mobile phones, had mobile money accounts, and came from wealthier households, earning almost double that of cash recipients. 4 In total, they received 400 takas (~US$4) more than their counterparts. All statistics were robustly significant at the 5 percent level. -4- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 In line with the results in Niger and Bangladesh, them, increases her access to financial services, and frees biometrically authenticated payments (smart cards) women’s time from cash payment collection so that they through India’s rural employment (National Rural can work more, often increases women’s bargaining power Employment Generation Scheme) and pension schemes (Bastalgi et al. 2016). These gains are not possible without in Andhra Pradesh were evaluated (Muralidharan et al. access to mobile phones, financial accounts, financial 2016). In a large, robust randomized evaluation with 19 literacy, and identification documents required for KYC million people, researchers found that digital transfers lead requirements, which many women are excluded from. to faster implementation, greater predictability, and less When the pathway to digital transfers opens the door to corruption and leakage of transfers and had significantly financial inclusion for previously unbanked women, there lower transaction costs of time use for recipients and is strong potential for more-gender-equitable and even corruption costs to the government than cash, which in transformative impacts. Recent studies echo previous turn drove stronger consumption-smoothing results for findings that digital transfers can increase gender equity recipients. and empowerment. Across the studies reviewed, recipients of digital Poor and less-educated women outside the workforce are cash transfers appeared to be better able to smooth the least likely to have a financial account, mobile phone, consumption when transfers were directly deposited or official identification, three of the essential criteria into their accounts, increasing ease of access to their for basic digital infrastructure to function effectively and money. Digital cash transfers do not seem to affect inclusively (Gelb, Mukherjee, and Navis 2020). In a survey spending on temptation goods, debunking the idea of 144 countries, researchers found that only 53.6 percent that easing access to financial resources will lead to of women outside the workforce have access to any unplanned spending. In Malawi, a study found that financial account (48.3 percent to their own account) and consumption of temptation goods was not greater 67.3 percent own a mobile phone. Figure 1 indicates the in people who received a one-time lumpsum digital share of financial and mobile inclusion according to sex. cash transfer (to saving accounts) during a food crisis than in those who received physical cash (Brune et al. A combined lack of access to financial services and poor 2017). Likewise, another study found that less than 1 mobile penetration among women have led to the gender percent of recipients bought temptation goods such as gap in digital financial inclusion globally. This is important doughnuts, cookies, and tea (Aker et al. 2016). because, although many schemes have been designed to increase financial inclusion of women by providing digital transfers, addressing the underlying social impediments Gender Equity and Empowerment that prevent access to financial services and mobile access is crucial to reversing the gender gap (Gelb, Mukherjee, Previous studies have shown that digital cash transfers and Navis 2020). These schemes fail when women lack have different outcomes than physical cash transfers access to mobile technology, digital or financial literacy to depending on the sex of the payment recipient. In manage accounts, and financial services coupled with the particular, the more discrete nature of digital transfers, digital cash transfers. which allows women to choose when and how to withdraw funds and notify their partner about receiving -5- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 Figure 1. Composition of Financial and Mobile Inclusion Who has an account? Who has a mobile phone? Males Females Males Females 70.1% 61.8% 84.6% 75.4% In the workforce Out of the workforce In the workforce Out of the workforce 69.7% 53.6% 83.0% 67.3% Poorest quintile At most primary ed Poorest quintile At most primary ed 48.0% 48.4% 62.8% 60.2% Richest quintile At least tertiary ed Richest quintile At least tertiary ed 62.1% 77.7% 74.1% 91.1% Sources: Findex 2017; Gelb, Mukherjee, and Navis 2020. In Pakistan, where only 7 percent of women had JazzCash digital wallets by up to 34 percent (ideas42 financial accounts and 5 percent had ever received 2020). mobile payments in 2017 and widespread low literacy and patriarchal constraints caused further limitations, Digital transfers have been used to enhance social the Benazir Income Support Program experimented with empowerment in addition to financial empowerment. In cash versus smart cards, mobile banking, and debit Niger, digital transfers increased women’s empowerment, cards. Despite challenges, digital transfers enhanced bargaining power on expenditures, and labor force the status of women in the household and community participation (Aker et al. 2016). Recipients of digital yet fell short of formal financial inclusion by providing transfers spent less time traveling to receive and waiting limited specialty accounts, which did not offer an array for their transfers (20 hours saved)6 and were 7 percent of financial services (Cheema et al. 2016). Now Pakistan to 13 percent more likely to plant crops such as okra, is piloting fully functional accounts to enhance gains from earning income from the added productivity. Likewise, digital payments. Similarly, in neighboring Bangladesh, direct deposits of women’s wages from the National Rural the Primary Education Stipend Program5 has increased Employment Generation Scheme into individual bank financial inclusion through mobile money accounts, which accounts in Madhya Pradesh, India, enabled the women two-thirds of mothers reported gave them greater control to increase their labor market participation despite wages over the stipend and enhanced bargaining power (Gelb remaining flat (Field et al. 2016). In Kenya, women et al. 2019). Despite this, 90 percent of women cashed receiving mobile phone-based digital money transfers out in full immediately, limiting the potential for financial were better able to save, increase their financial resilience, inclusion. A separate experiment in Pakistan overcame and shift into greater income-generating activities; this this hurdle by testing gender-centric incentive messages, included a 22.3 percent increase in financial savings for which increased women’s enrollment in and use of female-headed households and a 9.4 percent increase in engagement in business and sales (Suri and Jack. 2016). 5 The Primary Education Stipend Program provides a monthly stipend of 100 takas ($1.20) to mothers based on school attendance. 6 A time savings of 20 hours per day at $3 per day wage equates to $7.50 saved or 20 kg of grain per transfer. -6- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 As elsewhere, women in all three cases highlighted the via mobile phones) (Aker et al. 2016), although this ability to conceal the arrival and use of the transfer from same group of mobile money recipients did not use their their partners as the main reason for their ability to accounts for remittances, savings, or other services like determine its use, including on more diverse foods and those who received mobile money with a message alert. better clothing for children. This suggests a need for messaging, training, nudging, and support to create an on-ramp to financial inclusion. Likewise in India, although digital transfers reduced time Financial Inclusion and Savings to collect wages and stimulated a 41 percent decrease in leakage of funds, lack of incentives for banks and low Recent studies have shown that digital transfers made to a digital literacy for customers precluded recipients from financial account may induce greater upfront savings than using the formal financial accounts effectively for savings physical cash transfers, although households receiving or investments (Muralidharan 2016). cash may catch up over a short time horizon (Brune et al. 2017). To reap longer-term benefits of financial inclusion, Digital cash transfers are strongly correlated with financial a program must include key features to onboard recipients inclusion but not causally linked (Gelb et al. 2020). For to broader goods and services rather than a limited example, in recent years, India has seen a significant specialty account just for benefits. increase in coverage of the Aadhaar digital identification system and the proportion of new financial accounts In Malawi, a windfall experiment was conducted in (from 35 percent in 2011 to nearly 80 percent in 2017) which households received a transfer of 25,000 kwacha to receive government-to-person payments. The benefit (approximately $60) in cash or directly deposited into from this scheme is limited though, because households their bank accounts (Brune et al. 2017). An automatic lack the ability to use the accounts for financial activities savings component was randomized with payment timing other than payment collection. This illustrates how access (immediate, one day, eight days), with all households to digital cash transfers can be correlated with but not required to return to the bank to receive payment. cause financial inclusion. Of those receiving direct deposits in a formal financial account, 84 percent to 86 percent withdrew the transfer Implementers can address several key access barriers that on the same day, and 95 percent to 97 percent withdrew digital transfers pose by:7 money in the first week. Savings default (automatic) participants retained higher savings initially, but this did • Creating free, simple enrollment processes for not lead to a level of total savings different from that of identification authentication. the cash group. Regardless of physical cash transfer or direct deposit, within two weeks, participants had spent • Simplify KYC requirements, including online methods. half of the transfer (one month’s food cost). The savings default had no lasting impact on smoothing consumption • Collaborating with mobile network operators to and ultimately spending the money in full. expand access to mobile services. The study in Niger also demonstrated the need for • Allowing non-banks to offer payment services and deliberate design to achieve financial inclusion. pushing for interoperability between mobile network Evaluating consumption and dietary diversity, recipients operators. of mobile money outperformed two groups (those who received physical transfers and those who were alerted 7 Several recommendations can be found in Gelb et al. 2020, Table 1. Policy Directions for Universal JAM. -7- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 • Promoting shared digital infrastructure across service together with responsive grievance redress mechanisms providers. should be the primary goal, with fiscal savings to the implementer as an added gain. • Establishing online payments for person-to- government services. Despite benefits, several potential pitfalls of digital transfers require regulation and consumer protection. • Integrating support systems and ensuring that needs The 2017 Global Financial Inclusion and Consumer of vulnerable groups are accounted for. Protection Survey Report (World Bank Group 2017) found that KYC regulations formed some of the most stringent barriers to access for poor and vulnerable Implementation Considerations populations when implementers shifted from physical cash to digital transfers (Gelb et al. 2020). Seventy-five Studies since 2016 reinforce previous findings that percent of 144 reporting countries required proof of underscore the potential for digital cash transfers to result residence, 69 percent proof of nationality, 44 percent in better beneficiary outcomes and service delivery than proof of income, and 35 percent proof of employment physical cash transfers, but this relies on establishing to open a formal bank account (World Bank Group the right foundation for digital cash transfers in a cost- 2017). Even countries with simplified KYC requirements effective manner without increasing transaction costs or can unintentionally create barriers to service delivery excluding vulnerable populations. When these conditions such as requiring identification and proof of address. In are not in place, recipients tend to prefer familiar physical Jharkhand State, India, digitalization requiring beneficiary cash transfers. The needs of recipients and constraints of authentication inadvertently quintupled exclusion, with the environment must be considered when determining elderly adults and individuals with disabilities faring the the appropriate mechanisms to offer in a given context. worst despite government efforts to streamline delivery Adoption of physical cash transfers should be prioritized and fight corruption (Drèze and Khera, 2015). When in environments where digital transfers cannot thrive systems are improperly designed, or populations are because of challenges such as poor mobile connectivity, poorly sensitized and prepared to integrate into the new lack of formal identification, low financial and digital digital methodology, the consequences can be grave for literacy, and high levels of informality of the workforce. the most vulnerable populations. Key considerations for effective digital payments As implementers such as governments commit to the include demand- and supply-side considerations such upfront investments required on the demand and supply as widespread ID, mobile phone, and financial account sides to transition to digital transfers, the benefits are coverage, as well as digital literacy, financial literacy, and significant. This includes reductions in transaction costs support systems for the most vulnerable people, who may for recipients and implementers alike. For example, in be excluded. Even with these measures in place, digital Niger, m-transfers were 20 percent cheaper to implement cash transfers do not unambiguously improve household per transfer than cash distribution (Aker et al. 2016) and welfare (Aker et al. 2016). Digital cash transfers can the National Rural Employment Generation Scheme in also be used to exclude or perpetuate power dynamics, India saved the government approximately $38 million particularly through corruption, which has been seen per year in reduced corruption and leakage (Muralidharan to occur when fiscal savings is the primary goal of 2016). In particular, mobile money can be effective in implementation (Gelb et al. 2020). For implementers to areas of mobile penetration where payment choices are succeed in establishing a strong foundation, increasing limited, such as remote unbanked areas outside of formal efficiency and improving service delivery for beneficiaries financial institutions. -8- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 Emerging Insights For recipients, predictability of receiving transfers matters as much as payment mechanism. Therefore, if cash is Whether a household receives cash manually or digitally more reliable because of constraining factors on digital appears to have limited effect on overall consumption and transfers such as mobile phone penetration, coverage, expenditure, although effects on how that cash is spent, or access to agent networks, that is the mechanism such as for dietary diversity, vary based on payment that policy makers should endorse and adopt. If digital mechanism. Payment mechanisms also have limited transfers have more advantages where a robust mobile effect on financial inclusion except where designed as infrastructure exists, barriers to digital literacy are an intentional program outcome, although by making relatively low, and authentication fail safes are in place payments easier, reducing transaction costs, freeing up when technologies do not perform, digital transfers time, and providing pathways to savings or other financial should likely supersede cash as the mechanism of choice. services, digital cash transfers have been found to increase The key policy path should be providing beneficiaries a food security in times of crisis, working hours for income choice, whether through cash, digital transfers, or both. generation especially for women, and empowerment. This is possible only when the necessary infrastructure is in Implementers should avoid overreliance on digital or place; digital transfers may not be as conducive at least assumption that digital transfers will automatically initially in countries where identification systems, mobile yield positive welfare outcomes for households, such phones, bank accounts, and cash withdrawal services are as an increase in consumption, dietary diversity, less abundant. These environments will require greater gender equity, or financial inclusion. Households need upfront investment by implementers to access hard-to- onboarding and sensitization and support, including reach populations before digital transfers are established, training and messaging, in many contexts, which can be although ultimately cash in hand matters more than facilitated with stepwise introduction to digital transfers. payment mechanism to drive welfare outcomes such Implementers should aim for mobile money wallets, but as consumption, food security, financial inclusion, and if that is not possible, digital transfers can be made to an empowerment for households in need. account with nearby check-in, check-out, as the target group prefers. COVID-19 presented a global test case for accelerating development of strong, well-coordinated, robustly It is also important to highlight that “cash plus” (e.g., designed cash-transfer systems, specifically those nutrition training) activities are often organized face to leveraging digital payment mechanisms. For longer-term face on payment days, especially when transfers are paid benefit across social assistance programs, governments manually to beneficiaries. In moving to digital payments, and central banks would be best placed to invest in programs must adjust modalities to deliver these plus development of digital architecture for social benefits elements, which have been found to affect a range of programming by working with the private sector, such outcomes, by figuring out when and how to provide as mobile network operators and banks, to address accompanying measures (Roy et al. 2021). supply-side challenges and civil society and others to support demand-side barriers such as low digital and Further research is needed into the long-term effects of financial literacy. This would include development of digital cash transfers to demonstrate whether greater identification systems such as biometric authentication control over resources, bargaining power, ease of access, processes, correspondent regulation and policies, and availability of financial products and services have payment infrastructure, simplified KYC processes, and long-term impacts on household welfare indicators such digital literacy training. as health and nutrition, education, and empowerment. -9- SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 References Aadil, Arshi, Alan Gelb, Anurodh Giri, Anit Mukherjee, Kyle Navis, and Mitul Thapliyal. 2019. “Digital Governance: Is Krishna a Glimpse of the Future?” Working Paper 512, Center for Global Development, Washington, DC. https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/digital-governance​ -krishna-glimpse-future-working-paper.pdf. Aker, Jenny C., Rachid Boumnijel, Amanda McClelland, and Niall Tierney. 2016. “Payment Mechanisms and Antipoverty Programs: Evidence from a Mobile Money Cash Transfer Experiment in Niger.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 65 (1): 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1086/687578. Bastagli, Francesca, Jessica Hagen-Zanker, Luke Harman, Valentina Barca, Georgina Sturge and Tanja Schmidt, with Luca Pellerano. 2016. “Cash Transfers: What Does the Evidence Say?” Overseas Development Institute, London. https://cdn.odi.org/media/documents/11316.pdf. Brune, Lasse, Xavier Giné, Jessica Goldberg, and Dean Yang. 2017. “Savings Defaults and Payment Delays for Cash Transfers: Field Experimental Evidence from Malawi.” Journal of Development Economics 129: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2017.06.001. Cheema, Iftikhar, Simon Hunt, Sarah Javeed, Tanya Lone, and Sean O’Leary. 2016. “Benazir Income Support Programme: Final Impact Evaluation Report.” Oxford Policy Management, Oxford. https://www.opml.co.uk/files/Publications/7328-evaluating-pakistans-flagship-social​ -protection-programme-bisp/bisp-final-impact-evaluation-report.pdf?noredirect=1. Drèze, Jean, and Reetika Khera. 2015. “Understanding Leakages in the Public Distribution System.” Economic and Political Weekly 50 (7): 39–42. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24481393. Field, Erica, Rohini Pande, Natalia Rigol, Simone Schaner, and Charity Troyer Moore. 2016. “On Her Account: Can Strengthening Women’s Financial Control Boost Female Labor Supply?” https://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/schaner_fba.pdf. Gelb, Alan, Anit Mukherjee, Kyle Navis, Mahmuda Akter, and Jannatul Naima. 2019. “Primary Education Stipends in Bangladesh: Do Mothers Prefer Digital Payments over Cash?” https://www.cgdev.org/publication/primary-education-stipends-bangladesh-do-mothers-prefer-digital​ -payments-over-cash. Gelb, Alan, Anit Mukherjee, and Kyle Navis. 2020. “Citizens and States: How Can Digital ID and Payments Improve State Capacity and Effectiveness?” Center for Global Development. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/citizens-and-states-how-can-digital-id-and-payments​ -improve-state-capacity. Ideas42. 2020. “Bringing Digital Finance Tools to More Women: Behaviorally Informed Text Message Campaigns in Pakistan.” https://www​ .ideas42.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/JazzCash-Project-Brief_2.pdf Muralidharan, Karthik. 2016. “Building State Capacity: Evidence from Biometric Smartcards in India.” American Economic Review 106 (10): 35. https://www.povertyactionlab.org/sites/default/files/research-paper/Building-State-Capacity_Feb2016.pdf. Roy, Shalini, Melissa Hidrobo, John F. Hoddinott, and Akhter Ahmed. 2021. “Transfers, Behavior Change Communication, and Intimate Partner Violence: Post-Program Evidence from Rural Bangladesh.” In Securing Food for All in Bangladesh, edited by Akhter Ahmed, Nurul Islam, and Mustafa K. Mujeri, 549-90. Dhaka, Bangladesh: University Press Limited. https://doi.org/10.2499/9789845063715_15. Shonchoy, Abu S., Natalia Rigol, Benjamin Roth, Shreya Chandra, Ana Paula Franco, and Reshmaan Hussam. 2020. “Safety Net and Pandemic: The State of Social Benefit Payments during COVID-19.”. https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/The%20State%20of%20Social%20 Benefit%20Payments%20in%20Bangladesh%20during%20COVID-19.pdf. Suri, Tavneet, and William Jack. 2016. “The Long-Run Poverty and Gender Impacts of Mobile Money.” Science 354 (6317): 1288-92. https://www​ .jefftk.com/suri2016.pdf. World Bank Group. 2017. Global Financial Inclusion and Consumer Protection Survey, 2017 Report. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. https:// doi.org/10.1596/28998. - 10 - SOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS | P  OLICY & TECHNICAL NOTE MARCH 2024 | No. 34 Evidence at Your Fingertips Series This note is part of thematic briefs in the series including: • Evidence Briefs on Cash Transfers: Overview and Ten Key Messages • Cash Transfer Size: How Much Is Enough? • Cash Transfer Timing: How Transfer Duration and Frequency Contribute to Outcomes • Cash Or In-Kind Transfers: Do Outcomes Vary According Transfer to Modality? • Can Safety Nets Reduce Gender-Based Violence? How? The series is launched with that aim that these be living documents. In that spirit, the team welcomes suggestions on materials and topics to be covered in the future series that can serve as useful, practical references for practitioners of social protection. The series is a joint initiative by Innovations for Poverty Action and the World Bank’s Social Protection and Jobs Global Practice comprising Nathanael Goldberg, Lauren Whitehead, Savanna Henderson, Ana Alatriste Tamayo, Julie Kedroske, Ugo Gentilini, Yuko Okamura, Mohamed Almenfi, Hrishikesh TMM  Iyengar, and Mia Blakstad. For any questions regarding this brief, please reach out to socialprotection@poverty-action.org and malmenfi@worldbank.org © 2024 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: +1 (202) 473 1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications: The World Bank Group 1818 H Street NW Washington, DC 20433, USA fax: +1 (202) 522 2625 e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Project XXXXX