Why Measuring Child-Level Impacts Can Help Achieve Lasting Economic Change

"This paper is intended as a starting point for discussion and advocacy around measuring the impacts of economic strengthening on children, in order to ensure their wellbeing and break the cycle of intergenerational poverty."

The paper presents an argument for the systematic monitoring and evaluation of child well-being related to economic strengthening efforts. Motivated by growing evidence linking children's physical and psychological health with their future economic opportunities and potential, since 2008, Supporting Transformation by Reducing Insecurity and Vulnerability with Economic Strengthening (STRIVE), funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and managed by FHI 360, and the Child Protection in Crisis (CPC) Network have engaged in research, implementation, and evaluation of economic strengthening programmes intended to positively affect the lives of children in adversity around the world.

Based on the current state of implementation and research, the brief observes that:

• "Addressing the wellbeing of the upcoming generation is key to the successful and sustainable alleviation of poverty." For example, according to the document: "Economic strengthening can complement health, education and other interventions by enhancing people's willingness to participate (for example, by increasing income and reducing opportunity costs) and lowering barriers to employing new skills and knowledge (by enabling the purchase of more nutritious food, for instance). Development practitioners hope that such multi-sectoral approaches will lead to better outcomes for individual participants, and ripple outward to reach their households, communities and broader populations."
• "Economic strengthening programs have transformative potential for improving the lives of children and youth, but have also yielded negative results in some cases." For example, "studies have...shown that in the short-term, household economic activities may have no or even negative impacts on children's wellbeing, such as risks of decreased school attendance or increased child labor."
• "Substantial gaps remain in our understanding of how children and youth are affected by economic strengthening programs." Questions that remain are, for example: What are the household-level impacts of economic strengthening interventions? To what extent does improving household welfare translate to improved child well-being, and what helps or hinders this? To what extent do positive child-level impacts today in fact translate to better economic outcomes for individuals and communities in the future?

In order to build on opportunities and address gaps and risks, the authors offer a series of recommendations, such as: "Practitioners should monitor children's wellbeing in order to maximize benefits and minimize harm". This might involve collaborating with local universities, research firms, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and other groups that may have the expertise, capacity, and vested interest needed to undertake data collection that would not otherwise be possible.

Other communication-related lessons to emerge from the document include the notion that donors and practitioners may benefit from investing in tool development, documentation, and publication of data, as well as sharing best practices for evaluation and monitoring of child-level impacts. "A stronger evidence base will improve project design and implementation, leading to more efficient and effective interventions that will generate greater momentum in poverty alleviation for coming generations."