Regarding whether the effect would have been larger if the subjects got more cash -- in the original Progresa study, the ` size of the cash transfer is large, c

Regarding whether the effect would have been larger if the subjects got more cash -- in the original Progresa study, the ` size of the cash transfer is large, corresponding to about a 25 percent average increase in income of households living in extreme poverty' [0] (p.4). (Though in dollar amounts, if they are using the 'extreme poverty' metric of $1.25/day/person, we're talking about a lot less money in absolute terms). So there's something to this. But this is hard to square away with this newest study's findings of modest adverse impacts on labor participation rates. This, combined with null health effects, suggests that the CCTs are performing an income substitution effect, and that what people are doing with their newfound free-time is probably leisure rather than other forms of 'work' (i.e. exercising, cooking healthier meals, etc.) that policymakers might wish the subjects undertake. [0] https://www.povertyactionlab.org/sites/default/files/publications/449%20Progresa%20Health%20Gertler%202001.pdf https://www.povertyactionlab.org/sites/default/files/publica...