Table 11.
Estimated Impacts of Treatment on Social Outcomes
| Share of children in school, aged 5–15 | Share of teenagers in school, aged 16–20 | Index of women’s attitudes | Index of (1)–(5) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Girls | Boys | Girls | Boys | |||
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | |
| Panel A: Full sample | ||||||
| Treatment | 0.009 (0.019) |
−0.028* (0.015) |
0.002 (0.020) |
−0.02 (0.024) |
−0.075** (0.037) |
−0.021 (0.030) |
| Control group mean | 0.68 | 0.732 | 0.166 | 0.279 | 0.034 | −0.042 |
| Number of clients | 3001 | 3155 | 1677 | 1627 | 1444 | 4761 |
| Hochberg p-value | 0.986 | |||||
| Panel B: Business owners at baseline | ||||||
| Treatment | −0.039 (0.029) |
−0.002 (0.023) |
0.001 (0.030) |
−0.029 (0.037) |
−0.088 (0.054) |
−0.031 (0.042) |
| Control group mean | 0.705 | 0.715 | 0.168 | 0.312 | 0.026 | −0.035 |
| Number of clients | 1201 | 1222 | 657 | 630 | 561 | 1906 |
| Hochberg p-value | 0.601 | |||||
| Panel C: Business owners at baseline, business started before SKS entry | ||||||
| Treatment | −0.040 (0.030) |
−0.019 (0.025) |
−0.009 (0.035) |
−0.001 (0.040) |
−0.081 (0.064) |
−0.042 (0.047) |
| Control group mean | 0.700 | 0.720 | 0.174 | 0.308 | 0.022 | −0.032 |
| Number of clients | 963 | 972 | 505 | 507 | 444 | 1517 |
| Hochberg p-value | 0.620 | |||||
| Panel D: Business owners at baseline, business started after SKS entry | ||||||
| Treatment | −0.035 (0.064) |
0.091* (0.055) |
0.064 (0.062) |
−0.107 (0.099) |
−0.095 (0.108) |
0.052 (0.086) |
| Control group mean | 0.716 | 0.672 | 0.115 | 0.380 | −0.014 | −0.076 |
| Number of clients | 216 | 226 | 134 | 107 | 101 | 349 |
| Hochberg p-value | 0.760 | |||||
| Panel E: Non business owners at baseline | ||||||
| Treatment | 0.043* (0.022) |
−0.047** (0.019) |
−0.006 (0.026) |
−0.025 (0.028) |
−0.056 (0.048) |
−0.015 (0.039) |
| Control group mean | 0.664 | 0.740 | 0.171 | 0.263 | 0.035 | −0.047 |
| Number of clients | 1719 | 1857 | 980 | 970 | 857 | 2739 |
| Hochberg p-value | 0.693 | |||||
Notes
Each column reports the impact of treatment (imposing the insurance requirement) on the indicated outcome variable from the endline survey. Panel B limits the sample to business owners at baseline, panel C restricts the sample to business owners at baseline whose businesses started before the entry of SKS in the business owner’s village (using the date of the first loan as reported in the administrative data), panel D restricts the sample to business owners at baseline whose business started after the entry of SKS, and panel E restricts the sample to non business owners at baseline. In columns (1)–(4), the outcome variables are the shares of household children that are in school (by age and gender). In column (5), the outcome variable is an index of adolescent girls’ self-reported attitudes concerning: whether men should be more educated than women; whether men should eat before women; the ideal age of marriage for women; whether women should have children immediately after marriage; and the ideal number of children. The index in column (5) reflects an equal-weighted average across responses to each question, after the responses are normalized to have mean 0, standard deviation 1, and the sign of the response oriented toward a more positive number reflecting more ‘progressive attitudes’ (e.g. for the questions above: ‘No’, ‘No’, older ages, ‘No’, fewer children). In column (6), the outcome variable is an index reflecting the equal-weighted average of the component variables in columns (1)–(5) (each normalized to have mean 0, standard deviation 1). In columns (1) and (2), the sample is restricted to households with children between the ages of 5 and 15. In columns (3) and (4), the sample is restricted to households with children between the ages of 16 and 20. In column (5), the sample is restricted to households with girls between the ages of 14 and 19. All regressions control for the randomization stratification groups (SKS branch and above/below median number of clients within branch), and robust standard errors clustered by village are reported in parentheses.
The Hochberg p-value reflects the statistical significance of the treatment effect on the index in column (6), adjusting for multiple hypothesis testing across the three summary outcomes (business, consumption, social impacts) in Tables 7, 9 and 11.
denote statistical significance at the 1%, 5%, 10% level, respectively.