The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cash, food, or vouchers? Evidence from a randomized experiment in northern Ecuador
Open accessAbstract
The debate over whether to provide food-assistance and the form that this assistance should take has a long history in economics. Despite the ongoing debate, little rigorous evidence exists that compares food-assistance in the form of cash versus in-kind. This paper uses a randomized evaluation to assess the impacts and cost-effectiveness of cash, food vouchers, and food transfers. We find that all three modalities significantly improve the quantity and quality of food consumed. However, differences emerge in the types of food consumed with food transfers leading to significantly larger increases in calories consumed and vouchers leading to significantly larger increases in dietary-diversity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Conditional Cash Transfers: Reducing Present and Future Poverty
Fiszbein, A., & Schady, N. R. (2009) · World Bank, Washington, DC eBooks · doi:10.1596/978-0-8213-7352-1 · Cited by 1,849
Training, Wages, and Sample Selection: Estimating Sharp Bounds on Treatment Effects
LEE, D. S. (2009) · Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-937x.2009.00536.x · Cited by 1,399
Making choices in health: who guide to cost-effectiveness analysis
(2004) · Revista Española de Salud Pública · doi:10.1590/s1135-57272004000300012 · Cited by 1,259
Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit
Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., & Kremer, M. (2006) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/t0333 · Cited by 1,191
Guidelines for Constructing Consumption Aggregates for Welfare Analysis
Deaton, A., & Zaidi, S. (2002) · doi:10.1596/0-8213-4990-2 · Cited by 873
Beyond baseline and follow-up: The case for more T in experiments
McKenzie, D. (2012) · Journal of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2012.01.002 · Cited by 871
Conditional Cash Transfers : Reducing Present and Future Poverty
Fiszbein, A., Schady, N., Ferreira, F. H. G., Grosh, M., Keleher, N., Olinto, P., & Skoufias, E. (2009) · Cited by 870
Evaluating Welfare Reform in the United States
Blank, R. M. (2002) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/002205102762203576 · Cited by 664
Chapter 61 Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit
Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., & Kremer, M. (2007) · Handbook of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/s1573-4471(07)04061-2 · Cited by 545
Evaluating Welfare Reform in the United States
Blank, R. M. (2002) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/.40.4.1105 · Cited by 421
Cited by
Poverty eradication in a carbon constrained world
Hubacek, K., Baiocchi, G., Feng, K., & Patwardhan, A. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00919-4 · Cited by 266
Stein, D., Bergemann, R., Lanthorn, H., Kimani, E., Nshakira-Rukundo, E., & Li, Y. (2022) · BMJ Global Health · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2021-007747 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Hidrobo, M., Hoddinott, J., Peterman, A., Margolies, A., & Moreira, V.
- Venue
- Journal of Development Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-03
- Volume
- 107
- Pages
- 144-156
- ISSN
- 0304-3878 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3122367854
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 28
- FWCI
- 40.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cash, food, or vouchers? Evidence from a randomized experiment in northern Ecuador. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2013.11.009
- The paper
- Hidrobo, M., Hoddinott, J., Peterman, A., Margolies, A., & Moreira, V. (2014). Cash, food, or vouchers? Evidence from a randomized experiment in northern Ecuador. Journal of Development Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2013.11.009
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
