Menu ENN Search

Impact of cash transfers on child nutrition in Niger

Baraka buying millet at Ourafane market with the monthly cash payment from Save the Children

Summary of evaluation1

A recent Save the Children survey conducted in southern Niger found that half of the population could not afford a balanced diet in a typical year. So in 2008, Save the Children in partnership with the CRCSR/ PGCA2 of Tessaoua district decided to implement a pilot cash transfer project targeting the poorest households. This was evaluated in 2009 and the key findings are represented below.

Beneficiaries were very poor households identified through Household Economy Approach (HEA) analysis and wealth ranking, and households with widows and people with disabilities. A total of 1500 beneficiaries were targeted. Priority was given to mothers and caregivers of children under five years. Cash transfers were only distributed in areas declared by the government as severely food insecure. Coverage was approximately one-third of the population. A total of 60,000 CFA francs, split into three distributions during the hunger gap, was delivered to each household. The cash was distributed to women. Households benefiting from the project were required to take part in awareness sessions on malnutrition and other public health activities. Monitoring of 100 households was conducted using HEA at three key points: before the project started, a month after the first cash distribution at the peak of the hunger gap, and a month after the third distribution. Monitoring also included anthropometric followup of children under five years, before the project and after each distribution.

The evaluation found that the cash transfer equated with an annual increase in household income of about one third. However, after receiving the cash transfer, beneficiary households gave up or reduced their reliance on certain sources of income that they used as coping mechanisms, e.g. credit, migration, working in other people's fields, or sale of animals. The fact that households chose to spend more time in their own fields, combined with good rainfall, resulted in a significant increase in their agricultural production, i.e. 50% more millet.

The cash transfer led to a significant change in expenditure patterns, which evolved according to seasonal needs. Generally, the cash was spent on buying food such as millet, cow's milk, meat, groundnut oil, cowpeas and pancakes. During the hunger gap there was a slight increase in purchase of staple food items compared to before the distribution, but the difference was even greater for non-staple foods. During the harvest period, the cash tended to be spent on non-food items like clothing, festivities and ceremonies. Spending on health care almost tripled compared with baseline. There was also a notable increase (69%) in spending on water as more people purchased from boreholes rather than open wells that are free of charge but possibly contaminated.

The month before the first distribution, households could only cover 84% of their minimum energy needs. A third of these households could not even cover 80% of needs. The month after the distribution, households were able to cover 99% of their minimum energy needs. A food aid intervention with millet would have cost an extra 6,340 CFA per beneficiary ($12.50) to cover the logistics for all three distributions.

The additional spending on food led to a substantial increase in intake of fats, proteins and micronutrients (calcium, folic acid and vitamin C). However, households still lacked micronutrients, particularly those found in animal products which remained too expensive for most households to purchase other than in small quantities.

Weight-for-height z-scores (WHZ) were calculated for each monitoring session using the 2006 WHO Growth Standards. Nutritional status of children under five as measured by mean weight-for-height z-score in targeted households improved after the first distribution. However this was not sustained as it declined between the second and third monitoring session. This decline coincided with the rapid escalation in child illness which is common during the lean period. In the same way, although the prevalence of global acute malnutrition (GAM) fell between the first and third distributions, it was not a statistically significant drop (see Table 1). The fact that GAM remained lower during the subsequent monitoring sessions may well reflect that children who were identified as acutely malnourished during the baseline monitoring were treated. Hence, although the overall nutritional status of children deteriorated, it does appear that the treatment programme was helping to protect the most severely malnourished.

Table 1: Monitoring results of cash transfers impact
  Monitoring 1 Baseline before the distribution (beginning of the lean season) Monitoring 2 After distribution 1 (middle of the lean season) Monitoring 3 After distribution 2 (end of the lean season) Monitoring 4 After distribution 3 (harvest season)
Mean WHZ z-score Confidence interval

-1.128 to -0.528

-0.821 to -0.350

-0.927 to -0.484

-0.998 to -0.613
GAM prevalence Confidence interval 21.3%

SAM prevalence Confidence interval 9.4%
(4.4 -14.5%)


Consequently, a key finding of the evaluation was that in this setting, cash transfers need to be complemented by interventions such as disease prevention and micronutrient supplements, so as to better protect children's nutritional status.

Children drinking 'la boule' a watery porridge made from millet that is generally drunk at breakfast

The evaluation showed that the cash transfers considerably decreased (and even removed) the need for households to resort to damaging distress strategies. For instance, 10% of households had to mortgage their land and 7% had to sell their land in the three months prior to the project. Only 1% of households mortgaged their land, and none had to sell land, during the timeframe of the project. Also, the cash transfer enabled no less than 21% of beneficiary households to restart income-generating activities such as small-scale trade, selling cooked meals, butchery, and making and selling oil. The money invested in the local economy had a positive effect on all local trade, particularly in milk and oil. Another outcome was that recipients were less desperate to earn money, and so could work in their own fields. The drop in competition for paid work pushed up the local wage rate. As a result, the very poorest in the community, who did not receive cash transfers through the project, benefited from higher rates of pay.

Targeting was a challenge during the programme. It was difficult for community leaders to accept that only households meeting certain criteria would be entitled to direct support. When the cash distributions took place, it was difficult for some people to accept that they would not receive anything, while their neighbours did. During implementation of the project, several checks were necessary to ensure that beneficiary lists were accurately targeting the poorest households. This caused tensions in some villages and required strong negotiation skills to reduce envy and in some cases, to protect leaders' status. A key learning point is that traditional community leaders cannot be held fully accountable for the targeting; government authorities should officially validate and be accountable for targeting. Furthermore, contrary to popular belief, the social cases (households headed by widows or people with disabilities) were not necessarily the poorest or the most vulnerable to malnutrition.

Overall, the evaluation showed that beneficiary households used the cash to cover their basic food needs, diversify their diets and protect their longer-term survival. The targeting process contributed to the project's cost-effectiveness. If the same amount of money had been transferred equitably to all households, each would have received about three times less. There is still a need to further investigate and pilot different approaches to targeting that are easier to implement and more readily acceptable to communities.

Although cash transfers appear to be an efficient way to tackle food insecurity among the poorest households in Niger in the short term, a key question is whether their cost would allow implementation on a larger scale. To provide 20% of the poorest rural Nigerien population, i.e. 2 million people, with the same amount of cash transfer, it would cost 21 billion CFA (US$41 million). This is almost equivalent to the amount spent by the European Union (EU) and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) on humanitarian assistance in Niger during the 2005 food crisis. Large-scale cash transfers would only be feasible for the Nigerien government if donors substantially increased their financial support.

Finally, while the project also demonstrates contribution to a certain economic dynamism, favouring reflation and strengthening petty trade and other livelihood activities, all these gains are likely to be reversed when the next food crisis occurs. In order for the poorest populations to build a solid resilience to face shocks, and to lift themselves out of the poverty trap, regular and predicable support is required. At the same time, it is important that complementary measures (such as appropriate agricultural and rural development policies) are in place, and appropriately funded.

Show footnotes

1Save the Children UK (2009). How cash transfers can improve the nutrition of the poorest children. Evaluation of a pilot safety net programme in southern Niger. Save the Children 2009. Full report at:

2Regional and Sub-Regional committees for the Prevention and Management of Food Crisis

More like this

FEX: Food, goats and cash for assets programmes during emergency drought response inKenya

By Geoff Brouwer Geoff Brouwer worked as a research and communications consultant for World Renew-formerly the Christian Reformed World Relief Committee (CRWRC) - in Kenya...

FEX: Swaziland Cash and Food Transfer Programme

By Rosie Jackson Rosie Jackson currently works for Save the Children UK as an Emergency Food Security & Livelihoods Advisor. Based in London, she provides technical support to...

FEX: Evaluation of post 2007 election violence recovery programme in Kenya

Summary of report1 The Safaricom vehicle at Kinyach Police Post – the distribution point for the cash transfer project Evaluation headlines: The NGO, Concern Worldwide,...

FEX: ‘Zap’ it to me: short-term impacts of a mobile cash transfer programme

Summary of working paper1 Hadijatou with her cash, Toro village In 2010, Concern Worldwide developed a humanitarian programme in response to the 2009/10 Niger drought and food...

FEX: Comparing cash and food transfers: findings from a pilot project in Sri Lanka

By Lili Mohiddin (Oxfam GB), Manohar Sharma (IFPRI), Anette Haller (WFP Rome) Lili Mohiddin, Manohar Sharma & Anette Haller Lili Mohiddin has been an Emergency Food Security...

FEX: Cash, food or vouchers? Evidence from a randomised experiment in northern Ecuador

Summary of research1 Location: Northern Ecuador What we know: There is ongoing debate on the most effective form of food assistance: cash, food vouchers or food...

FEX: Income and employment support (Special Supplement 3)

5.1 Introduction The provision of cash as an emergency response has the potential to impact on all elements of the livelihoods framework by providing the means to protect or...

FEX: Impact evaluation of cash, food vouchers, and food transfers among Colombian refugees and poor Ecuadorians in urban Ecuador

Summary of evaluation1 Evaluation headlines: Levels of food insecurity and associated anaemia are high amongst Columbian refugees and poor Ecuadorians in the northern...

FEX: Delivery of Social Protection Programmes in Kenya

By Clemensia Mwiti and Nupur Kukrety Clemensia Mwiti is a Humanitarian Support Professional (HSP) in Emergency Food Security and Livelihoods. Nupur Kukrety is the Social...

FEX: Gender impact analysis of unconditional cash transfers in south central Somalia

Summary of published research1 A woman tiedyes clothing Location: Somalia What we know already: Cash transfer programming can positively impact on nutrition and food...

FEX: Cash supported income generation activities in Southern Sudan

By Emily Sloane and Silke Pietzsch Emily Sloane was a Food Security and Livelihoods Trainee at ACF-USA supporting the evaluation of the project's income generating activities...

FEX: Cash-for-work in urban setting in Guinea

By Damien Helleputte and Julien Jacob Damien Helleputte is technical coordinator of the Accion Contra el Hambre mission in Guinea since 2008. Julien Jacob is currently...

FEX: Impact evaluation of a cash-transfer programme for Syrian refugees in Lebanon

By Christian Lehmann and Daniel T. R. Masterson Daniel Masterson is a PhD student in Political Science at Yale University. Daniel worked for UNHCR in Syria in 2007 and 2008....

FEX: Nutrition security emergency programming in diverse urban contexts

By Marie Sardier, Joanna Friedman, Maureen Gallagher and Julien Jacob Marie Sardier is Food Security and Livelihoods Advisor with Action contre la Faim (ACF) in Paris...

FEX: Emergency Food Security and Livelihoods Project in Amhara and Oromia regions

By Sarah Coll-Black and Matt Hobson Sarah Coll-Black is a Social Protection Specialist working with the World Bank in Ethiopia and Kenya. She has been involved with Ethiopia's...

FEX: Food insecurity and mental health among community health volunteers in Ethiopia

By Sarah Coll-Black and Matt Hobson Sarah Coll-Black is a Social Protection Specialist working with the World Bank in Ethiopia and Kenya. She has been involved with Ethiopia's...

FEX: Adapting a resilience improvement programme in conflict: Experiences from Yemen

By Mustafa Ghulam and Mohammed H Alshama'a Mustafa Ghulam is a Food Security and Livelihoods Progamme Manger with Save the Children, based in Yemen. He has 20 years of...

FEX: Addressing urban food security through electronic cash transfer in Kenya

By Sumananjali Mohanty Sumananjali Mohanty has been working with Oxfam Kenya programme for the past four and half years, initially as the Urban Food Security and...

FEX: Postscript: Dealing with urban emergency: lessons from Oxfam’s EFSL activities in three cities

By Ian MacAuslan and Laura Phelps Ian MacAuslan leads Oxford Policy Management (OPM)’s education, early childhood development and labour portfolio and is a senior...

FEX: What affects the cost of delivering cash transfers in humanitarian settings?

By Clare O'Brien and Fidelis Hove Clare O'Brien is a senior consultant in the Poverty and Social Protection team at Oxford Policy Management, a development...


Reference this page

Impact of cash transfers on child nutrition in Niger. Field Exchange 39, September 2010. p39.