drinking to 13%). The other paper, using data from 1998 and 2000 and a propensity score matching approach, finds a reduction in adolescents that have had alcoholic drinks (12% reduction in rural areas, 2% in urban areas) and in those that have smoked (14% in rural areas, 4% in urban areas) (Gutiérrez, et al. 2004). A third study, from Uganda, uses a randomized design to estimate the impact of cash transfers provided through early childhood development centers on the number of days that children (aged 1 to 7 years) drank beer in the week preceding the survey (Gilligan and Roy 2013)<sup>5</sup> . They find an insignificant reduction of 20% in the frequency of consumption.

Finally, a randomized evaluation estimates the impact of Oportunidades on the probability of alcohol abuse, and finds that beneficiaries of the program are significantly less likely to have a habitual drinker present in the household than non-beneficiaries (Angelucci 2008). These studies add to the evidence that the net effect of cash is likely to be either insignificant or negative. The distribution of results is very similar if one includes only estimates on expenditure levels and not on the proportion of income spent or these other outcomes (Table 5 and Figure 2).

There are several potential sources of heterogeneity in the impact of cash transfers on temptation goods, including program design (e.g., conditional versus unconditional cash transfers), geographic variation, or variation in how long households have been receiving the transfers. However, with so few significant effects, it is difficult to identify heterogeneity. We have 31 estimates from conditional cash transfer programs and 11 estimates from unconditional cash transfer programs.<sup>6</sup> Table 7 shows the distribution of estimates (from negative and significant to positive and significant) for the two groups; we observe essentially the same pattern, with 84% and 73% of estimates being negative for conditional cash transfer programs and unconditional cash transfer programs, respectively. The proportions are almost identical when we consider estimates from randomized trials only.

Likewise, if we separate the studies in Latin America from those in Asia and in Africa, there are no clear differences, albeit with slightly greater heterogeneity in Latin America (Table 8). We find that 79% of estimates in Latin America are negative, compared to 88% of estimates from other regions. There is also no evidence of differences related to the length of time people have been receiving transfers. The time during which beneficiaries have been receiving transfers is – on average – 1.9 years, and ranges from 6 months to 5.5 years, with no clear relationship

> 5 In the Karamoja sub-region of Uganda, where this program was implemented, it is common to make a local homebrewed weak beer from sorghum and for both adults and young children to consume this, as well as the beer residue (Gilligan and Roy 2013).

> 6 For this comparison of conditional and unconditional transfer programs, we exclude the 2 estimates from the evaluation of The Kenya Cash Transfer Program for Orphans and Vulnerable Children, which imposed conditions in 3 of the 7 districts in which it was implemented.

9