Investing in Adolescent Girls in Sub-Saharan Africa Markus - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Markus Goldstein

Investing in Adolescent Girls in Sub-Saharan Africa

Opportunities?

Fact 1: Lots of youth

Fact 2: Girls are less likely to

be working

Fact 1: Lots of youth

Opportunities?

Fact 3: they are

having more children, younger

Opportunities?

Fact 1: Lots of youth Fact 2: Girls are less likely to

be working

For girls, adolescence is the critical time to intervene

• Risk of HIV/STI, unintended

pregnancy

• Early motherhood can limit future

earnings (path dependence)

• Barriers to labor market entry

– smaller networks/access to information – domestic work burden – concurrent labor market/fertility decisions.

So how about a program that targets girls?

• Think about ways to facilitate

the school to work transition

1. Need to take into account constraints unique to girls 2. Possibility of multi-dimensional intervention – not just job training, but other skills – both in their daily life (e.g. health) and “soft skills” for jobs

What do we know?

• Youth Employment literature: 2 meta-analyses

– Some, but not a lot of impact, not that much rigorous evaluation, some more positive impacts for women

• IDB review by Ibarraran and Schady (2009) and WB’s Youth

Employment Inventory (Betcherman 2007)

• Girls Empowerment literature: 1 meta-analysis

– less rigorous analysis, not a lot of impact reported on economic

• utcomes
• DFID review by Dickson Bangpan (2012)

 Large question of impacts/functioning across contexts

• 1. EPAG - Liberia
• $4m, funded through WB AGI
• Target girls age 16-27 with:

1. Job or Business Skills training (6 months) 2. Placement/start-up support (6 months) 3. Life skills, e.g., communication, leadership, GBV.

• Led by Ministry of Gender,

implemented by NGOs

• 2. ELA - Uganda
• Run by BRAC, funded by

Mastercard & Nike

• Target girls 14-20 with:

1. Safe social space 2. Life skills training (focus

• n reproductive health)

3. Short livelihood training based on local market 4. In future: microfinance

How will we know if it works?

• Why evaluate?

– Girl space filled with lots of advocacy, but what about rigorous evidence on what works, what are the payoffs?

• Our approach: randomized

control trials

– Liberia: phase-in, 1300 girls in the first wave – Uganda: 100 villages in program, 50 in control

So, we collected lots of data

• Uganda: 4888 girls, 2 interviews, 2 years apart
• Liberia: 1620 girls, 2 interviews, 1 year apart
• Wide range of outcomes: not just employment but

also: self-confidence, savings, expenditures, health, GBV, time use, etc.

Did it work? Liberia

In terms of employment and earnings:

Employment 47% Earnings 32 USD per month (80%)

• Stronger effects for Business Skills trainees than for Job

Skills trainees

Savings by 36 USD

Did it work? Uganda

Employment and earnings outcomes:

Engagement in IGAs by 72%

• Driven by self-employment activities

Spending on themselves by 38% No adverse effects on schooling outcomes, e.g. enrollment or time spent on studying

Impacts beyond economics in Uganda

Fertility: reported motherhood decreases by 26% Proportion of those always using a condom increases by 26% No effect on use of other contraceptives or reported STDs Incidence of sex against their will drops by 41%

And changing gender roles in Uganda

Impacts beyond economics in Liberia

No impact on fertility – actual or desired No impacts on contraception, # of boyfriends, incidence of GBV Positive impacts on self confidence, satisfaction with job

• utcomes

Is it worth it? Liberia

• Cost per beneficiary:

– 1650 USD for Job Skills track – 1200 USD for Business Skills track

• Compare to 700-2000 USD for Jovenes

programs in Latin America

• Set this against average monthly

increase in earnings:

– 2 years to recoup investment (Business Skills) – 8 years to recoup investment (Job Skills)

Is it worth it? Uganda

• Cost per potential beneficiary is

$17.9 in year 2

• Corresponds to

– .54% of hh income at baseline – 21% of a girl’s self-reported annual expenditures

• Set this against:

– increase in employment – lower fertility – drop in sex against her will

Do these experiences translate to other contexts?

• Ongoing analysis of data from South Sudan

– ELA program implemented before the 2013 conflict – Results will let us look at household level exposure to conflict and how girls fared with, and without, the program

• Ongoing early analysis from Sierra Leone

– Program interrupted by Ebola epidemic (then continued) – Analysis will allow us to look at ELA program components (is it the skill training? Microfinance? Club space?) – And we will be able to look at Ebola affected households & communities versus those without to see the epidemic shifted the trajectory of program impacts

This is based on work by a bunch of folks

• Liberia: Franck Adoho, Mattias Lundberg, Dala T. Korkoyah Jr., Afia

Tasneem, plus the Bank task team (AFRHD and PRMGE) and Ministry

• f Gender and Development
• Uganda: Oriana Bandiera, Niklas Buehren, Robin Burgess, Selim

Gelusci, Markus Goldstein, Imran Rasul, Munshi Sulaiman, plus the BRAC Uganda country team

www.worldbank.org/en/programs /africa-gender-innovation-lab