2024-06-23-世界银行-安全网能减少基于性别的暴力吗_怎样_（英）_16页_494kb

Evidence Brief: Can Safety Nets Reduce Gender-Based Violence?

This technical note examines the relationship between cash transfer programs and gender-based violence (GBV), focusing on the potential for these safety nets to reduce violence against women and children, even when not explicitly targeted at GBV prevention.

Key Findings

1. Overwhelming Positive Effects: A substantial body of evidence indicates that cash transfers significantly reduce intimate partner violence (IPV) and, to some extent, violence against children, across various contexts.
2. Consistent Impact Across Forms of Violence: The positive effects are observed for physical, emotional, and controlling behaviors in most studies, though findings on sexual violence are nuanced.
3. Heterogeneous Effects: While overall effects are positive, reductions in GBV are not uniform. Factors such as the recipient's sex, household structure, education level, and cultural context influence outcomes.

Impact Pathways

Cash transfers reduce GBV through three primary mechanisms:

• Reduced Poverty and Food Insecurity: Decreases stress and negative coping mechanisms.
• Women's Empowerment: Increases bargaining power, financial control, and self-esteem.
• Increased Social Capital: Strengthens social networks, which can raise the "cost" of violence for men.

Design Considerations

1. Transfer Design Features:
   • Recipient Sex: Transfers to women consistently show positive effects on GBV, though impacts on men are limited and context-dependent.
   • Transfer Size and Frequency: Evidence is inconclusive; predictability and control over resources are key.
   • Payment Methods: Digital payments may be more convenient for women and allow better resource management.
   • Accompanying Measures: Combining cash transfers with group-based training, nutrition sessions, or livelihood programs enhances the reduction of GBV.

Evidence Overview

• Impact Pathways: Cash transfers reduce GBV primarily through poverty reduction, empowerment, and social capital accumulation.
• Study Findings: A meta-analysis shows a significant reduction in various forms of IPV; however, not all studies report reductions.
• Heterogeneous Effects: GBV risk varies by context and household structure, making program design crucial for effectiveness.

Challenges and Limitations

1. Risk of Backlash: Empowering women through cash transfers can increase violence as men may resist changing traditional gender roles.
2. Limited Evidence for Certain Contexts: Research gaps exist, particularly in understanding the long-term effects and impacts in non-Latin American regions.

Future Research Directions

• Understand mechanisms behind cash transfer impacts.
• Evaluate design choices through rigorous impact evaluations.
• Develop cost-effective interventions to prevent GBV.
• Address heterogeneity and diversification of GBV typologies.

In conclusion, cash transfers show considerable promise for reducing GBV through thoughtful design and complementary activities. Continued research and operational experimentation are essential to maximize these positive effects while mitigating risks.