Scholarlink

<p>There are increasing calls for economic assistance in the form of social safety nets (SSNs) to be designed and implemented to promote women’s economic inclusion and agency, contributing to closing gender disparities globally. Here we investigate the extent to which SSNs affect women’s economic achievements and agency through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials implemented in low- and middle-income countries. We searched six databases utilizing search strings in English, French and Spanish through December 2024. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using an adapted version of the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Our sample includes 1,307 effect sizes from 93 studies, representing 218,828 women across 45 low- and middle-income countries. Using robust variance estimation meta-analysis, we show significant overall pooled effects (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.107, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.085–0.129), driven by increases in economic achievements (productive work, savings, assets and expenditures) and agency (voice, autonomy and decision-making). We find significant treatment effects for unconditional cash transfers (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.128, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001, 95% CI 0.097 to 0.159), social care services (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.122, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001, 95% CI 0.071 to 0.174), asset transfers (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.115, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001, 95% CI 0.071 to 0.160) and public work programmes (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.127, <i>P</i> = 0.031, 95% CI 0.015 to 0.239). We find comparatively smaller effects for conditional cash transfers (Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.059, <i>P</i> = 0.019, 95% CI 0.011 to 0.108) and found no evidence of effects for in-kind transfers. SSNs can empower women economically and socially; however, limitations and evidence gaps remain, including the need for further rigorous testing of design and operational components, the role of contextual factors and cost–benefit analysis with a gender lens.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Social safety nets, women’s economic achievements and agency in 45 countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月5日

查看全文
  • Amber Peterman,
  • Jingying Wang,
  • Kevin Kamto Sonke,
  • Janina Isabel Steinert

摘要

There are increasing calls for economic assistance in the form of social safety nets (SSNs) to be designed and implemented to promote women’s economic inclusion and agency, contributing to closing gender disparities globally. Here we investigate the extent to which SSNs affect women’s economic achievements and agency through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials implemented in low- and middle-income countries. We searched six databases utilizing search strings in English, French and Spanish through December 2024. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using an adapted version of the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Our sample includes 1,307 effect sizes from 93 studies, representing 218,828 women across 45 low- and middle-income countries. Using robust variance estimation meta-analysis, we show significant overall pooled effects (Hedges’ g = 0.107, P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.085–0.129), driven by increases in economic achievements (productive work, savings, assets and expenditures) and agency (voice, autonomy and decision-making). We find significant treatment effects for unconditional cash transfers (Hedges’ g = 0.128, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.097 to 0.159), social care services (Hedges’ g = 0.122, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.071 to 0.174), asset transfers (Hedges’ g = 0.115, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.071 to 0.160) and public work programmes (Hedges’ g = 0.127, P = 0.031, 95% CI 0.015 to 0.239). We find comparatively smaller effects for conditional cash transfers (Hedges’ g = 0.059, P = 0.019, 95% CI 0.011 to 0.108) and found no evidence of effects for in-kind transfers. SSNs can empower women economically and socially; however, limitations and evidence gaps remain, including the need for further rigorous testing of design and operational components, the role of contextual factors and cost–benefit analysis with a gender lens.