At the 14th Africa Evidence Summit held at Inter Luxury Hotel at Addis Ababa on July 23-24,2026, Dr. Dessalegn Anshiso, together with his research team comprising Jemal Adem, Keleab Haile, Jemal Adal, Kumilachew A., Meneyahel Tesfaye, Alemnew Wolde, Henok Ewunetie, and Meskerem Jember, presented a study titled “Childcare as Economic Infrastructure: Women Economic Empowerment, Household Welfare, and Children Outcomes in Addis Ababa.” The presentation was delivered under the Scaling Care Innovations in Africa (SCI) initiative implemented by the Policy Studies Institute (PSI) in partnership with the Addis Ababa City Administration and ActionAid.
Dr. Dessalegn explained that the study examined childcare from a broader economic perspective, arguing that childcare should not only be understood as a social service but also as a form of economic infrastructure. He emphasized that accessible and quality childcare services could contribute to women’s economic empowerment, improve household welfare, support children’s development, and strengthen long-term human capital formation.
He noted that the research was part of a multi-year, IDRC-funded action research initiative designed to generate evidence on how investments in childcare could support inclusive economic development. The presentation highlighted the importance of evidence-based policymaking in designing childcare systems that benefit vulnerable households, especially women and young children.
Dr. Dessalegn began his presentation by explaining the motivation behind the study, which was based on three major considerations: policy momentum, evidence gaps, and the contribution of the research.
Regarding policy momentum, he explained that the Addis Ababa City Administration had committed to scaling up publicly financed daycare services to 1,000 daycare centres by 2026. He stated that this initiative specifically targeted low-income and vulnerable households, representing an important policy shift in which childcare was being positioned as a form of public infrastructure.
He emphasized that this policy direction reflected growing recognition that childcare services could remove significant barriers preventing women from participating in economic activities. According to him, when women lacked access to affordable childcare, they were often forced to reduce working hours, withdraw from employment, or carry a disproportionate burden of unpaid domestic responsibilities.
Dr. Dessalegn further explained that despite increasing global recognition of childcare as an economic investment, rigorous evidence on the labour-market and intergenerational effects of childcare interventions remained limited, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa. He noted that although childcare was widely expected to improve women’s employment outcomes and children’s development, there was still insufficient empirical evidence demonstrating these impacts in African settings.
He stated that the study sought to address this evidence gap by providing what he described as the first longitudinal difference-in-differences evaluation of publicly financed daycare in Ethiopia. He explained that the research was designed to test whether government-supported childcare services could generate measurable improvements in women’s employment, income, household welfare, women’s decision-making power, child development, and schooling outcomes among older siblings.
Dr. Dessalegn presented several structural facts to demonstrate why childcare investment was necessary. He explained that women continued to carry a significantly higher share of unpaid care responsibilities compared with men. Citing existing evidence, he noted that women performed approximately 3.2 times more unpaid care work than men, spending more than 26 hours per week on unpaid care compared with approximately six hours for men.
He argued that this unequal distribution of care responsibilities constrained women’s economic opportunities by limiting their ability to participate in paid employment, expand businesses, and achieve financial independence. He explained that childcare services could help address this imbalance by reducing women’s unpaid-care burden and enabling greater participation in productive activities.
Dr. Dessalegn also highlighted that children under five years old represented approximately 16 percent of Ethiopia’s population, while only about 21 percent were enrolled in pre-primary education. He explained that these figures demonstrated the need for stronger investment in early childhood care and development.
He emphasized that global evidence showed childcare played a critical role in promoting human capital development, increasing parental productivity, and supporting economic growth. Therefore, he argued that childcare should be considered a strategic investment rather than an expenditure.
Dr. Dessalegn introduced the Scaling Care Innovations in Africa (SCI) project as a multi-year initiative aimed at supporting the expansion of childcare services in Ethiopia. He explained that the project was led by PSI in collaboration with the Addis Ababa City Administration and ActionAid, with the objective of transforming childcare into strategic economic infrastructure.
He stated that the project supported the expansion of 1,000 daycare centres and examined how childcare could contribute to women’s economic empowerment and children’s development outcomes.
Dr. Dessalegn explained that the project had three main objectives. The first objective focused on women’s economic empowerment. He explained that the study examined whether access to childcare could increase women’s labour-market participation, enhance earnings and financial autonomy, and strengthen women’s bargaining power within households. He noted that reducing childcare responsibilities could allow women to devote more time to employment and income-generating activities.
The second objective focused on child development outcomes. He explained that the project assessed whether access to daycare could improve children’s nutrition, reduce stunting, and enhance developmental outcomes measured using the Global Scales for Early Development (GSED). He emphasized that early childhood was a critical period for cognitive, emotional, and physical development.
The third objective examined girls’ education and sibling outcomes. Dr. Dessalegn explained that childcare could reduce caregiving responsibilities among older siblings, particularly girls, allowing them to attend school more regularly and reduce absenteeism.
Dr. Dessalegn explained that SCI Ethiopia was organized around three major pillars: evidence generation, capacity-building support, and partnerships and policy engagement.
Under the first pillar, Evidence Generation, he explained that the study employed a rigorous longitudinal evaluation of workplace and publicly financed childcare models. He stated that the research used a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative surveys with qualitative methods, including focus group discussions, key informant interviews, and structured observations.
He explained that the mixed-methods approach allowed the researchers to measure the impact of childcare services while also understanding the experiences and perspectives of households, caregivers, and stakeholders.
Under the second pillar, Capacity-Building Support, Dr. Dessalegn explained that the project focused on strengthening the childcare workforce and improving service quality. He reported that more than 1,300 childcare workers had been trained through the initiative. He also explained that disability inclusion measures had been supported through the provision of 48 wheelchairs and 64 hearing aids.
Furthermore, he stated that the project contributed to the development and standardization of guidelines related to childcare health, safety, inclusion, and training manuals for childcare workers. He emphasized that expanding childcare services required attention not only to access but also to quality and inclusiveness.
Under the third pillar, Partnerships and Policy Engagement, he explained that the project facilitated high-level policy dialogues, dissemination workshops, stakeholder consultations, community engagement activities, advocacy initiatives, and media outreach. He noted that these activities were designed to ensure that research evidence informed policy decisions and future investments in childcare.
Dr. Dessalegn presented the main research question guiding the study: “How does access to childcare affect household and women’s economic empowerment, job performance, unpaid-care burden, paid work, child development, and siblings’ schooling and absenteeism?”
He explained that the research focused on Public-Financed Daycare (PFD) provided by the Addis Ababa City Administration. He described the daycare model as fully government-financed and targeted toward low-income and vulnerable households with children aged between six months and four years.
He explained that the daycare centres were community-based and aligned with the Addis Ababa City Administration’s policy commitment to expand childcare services. The study applied a difference-in-differences (DiD) methodology to estimate the impact of childcare access.
Dr. Dessalegn explained that the study followed 1,975 households, consisting primarily of primary caregivers with children aged between six months and four years. The sample included 769 beneficiary households receiving publicly financed daycare services and 1,206 non-beneficiary households serving as the comparison group.
He further explained that the research covered 29 publicly financed daycare centres and involved two rounds of data collection conducted between 2024/25 and 2025/26.
He stated that the research combined quantitative household surveys with qualitative focus group discussions, key informant interviews, and structured observations to provide a comprehensive understanding of childcare impacts.
Dr. Dessalegn explained the identification strategy used to estimate the impact of daycare access. He stated that eligible households were identified through a vulnerability screening process conducted by social workers and community members.
He explained that households were nominated based on their vulnerability, low-income status, and having children aged six months to four years. Admission to daycare was determined by available capacity, with the most vulnerable households receiving priority.
He emphasized that households did not self-select into treatment. Instead, households that passed the same vulnerability screening but could not access daycare due to limited spaces were placed on a waiting list and used as the comparison group.
The researcher explained that this design allowed the study to compare similar households and estimate the effects of childcare access using a difference-in-differences approach.
Dr. Dessalegn reported that the baseline analysis showed strong balance between beneficiary and comparison households. He explained that there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in key outcomes, including unpaid care hours, paid work hours, household income, mental health indicators, and child nutrition measures.
He noted that the similarity between groups strengthened confidence that observed changes after the intervention could be attributed to access to daycare services rather than pre-existing differences.
Dr. Dessalegn presented the first major finding related to time use and women’s economic empowerment. He explained that access to childcare transformed unpaid care from an individual household responsibility into an enabling public service.
He reported that daycare access reduced women’s unpaid-care burden, decreased time spent on direct childcare responsibilities, and increased women’s participation in paid employment.
The findings indicated that access to daycare reduced women’s unpaid care hours by approximately 2.5 hours and increased women’s paid work hours by approximately 6.8 hours.
He further explained that income gains were particularly significant among female-headed households, suggesting that childcare services could have stronger economic effects among households where women carried greater responsibility for household income and caregiving.
Dr. Dessalegn concluded that childcare services could serve as an important mechanism for increasing women’s economic participation, improving financial independence, and strengthening household welfare.
The presenter then discussed findings related to child development and household spillover effects. He explained that developmental trends improved among both beneficiary and comparison groups over time.
He noted that child developmental scores and sibling absenteeism trends showed positive improvements. However, he explained that the difference-in-differences estimates were not yet statistically significant because children had experienced daycare exposure for only a relatively short period of approximately six to eight months.
Dr. Dessalegn emphasized that the study found no evidence of adverse effects associated with publicly financed daycare. He explained that longer-term follow-up would be required to fully capture potential effects on child development, nutrition, and educational outcomes among siblings.
In his presentation at the 14th Africa Evidence Summit, Dr. Dessalegn emphasized that childcare should be viewed as a critical component of economic infrastructure rather than merely a social service.
He argued that investment in childcare had the potential to generate multiple benefits, including increasing women’s labour-market participation, reducing unpaid-care burdens, improving household welfare, supporting children’s development, and strengthening future human capital.
He concluded that the SCI Ethiopia study provided important evidence demonstrating the economic and social value of investing in childcare systems. He stressed that expanding accessible, affordable, and quality childcare services could contribute significantly to Ethiopia’s broader goals of gender equality, inclusive economic growth, and sustainable development.
Dr. Dessalegn Sedebo presented the third set of findings, which examined the effects of formal childcare on siblings' education and school outcomes. He reported that access to childcare significantly reduced the amount of unpaid domestic work undertaken by school-aged children. Specifically, girls' unpaid work declined by an average of 8.5 hours per week, while boys' unpaid work decreased by 3 hours per week. He further noted that girls' school enrolment improved from 94.09% at baseline to 95.91% at midline. According to Dr. Dessalegn, these findings suggested that formal childcare enabled school-aged siblings to devote more time to their education instead of replacing mothers in providing childcare at home.
Turning to maternal mental health, Dr. Dessalegn explained that the study assessed mental well-being using a mental health index, the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and the WHO-5 Psychological Well-being Index. He reported that participation in formal childcare significantly improved mothers' mental well-being by reducing perceived stress and enhancing overall psychological well-being. However, he pointed out that the intervention did not produce a statistically significant reduction in symptoms of clinical depression as measured by the PHQ-9, indicating that the short-term benefits were concentrated primarily on stress reduction rather than clinical depression.
Dr. Dessalegn also discussed the influence of household dynamics on maternal mental health. He stated that mothers who experienced greater fear of household backlash exhibited significantly poorer mental health outcomes, including higher stress levels and lower psychological well-being. Furthermore, he explained that a wider gap between women's desired and actual decision-making power within the household was consistently associated with worse mental health outcomes. These findings, he argued, underscored the importance of strengthening women's agency and bargaining power as part of broader efforts to improve maternal well-being.
Presenting the findings on household decision-making, Dr. Dessalegn observed that joint decision-making already accounted for 57 percent of household decisions at baseline. By the midline survey, joint decision-making had increased by an additional 2 percentage points, while decisions made solely by husbands had declined by 2.5 percentage points. He highlighted that the most notable improvement occurred in decisions concerning major household purchases, where joint decision-making increased by 5 percentage points and spouse-only control decreased by 6.3 percentage points. He interpreted these changes as evidence that women's increased earnings contributed to greater bargaining power and more equitable participation in household decision-making.
Regarding fertility intentions, Dr. Dessalegn reported that access to formal childcare had little overall impact on women's fertility plans. He noted that 82 percent of public daycare users stated that childcare had no effect on their fertility intentions. While a small proportion of women reported slightly more positive intentions toward having children, he emphasized that the overall effect was modestly pronatalist rather than anti-natalist. Consequently, he concluded that childcare services were broadly fertility-neutral.
Dr. Dessalegn then presented evidence on women's own perceptions of the benefits of childcare. He explained that users consistently reported that childcare enabled them to enter the labour market, work longer hours, improve punctuality, and reduce absenteeism. According to him, these findings demonstrated that childcare directly activated women's labour supply by freeing them from unpaid caregiving responsibilities.
Summarizing the overall results of the study, Dr. Dessalegn stated that formal childcare led to a substantial reduction in women's unpaid childcare responsibilities while significantly increasing their participation in paid work. He reported that women's earnings increased following access to childcare, although no statistically significant change was observed in total household income during the study period. He further noted improvements in maternal mental well-being and positive trends toward greater participation in household decision-making. Based on these findings, he concluded that childcare should be viewed as an investment that generates economic, social, and intergenerational returns rather than merely as a social protection intervention.
In his concluding remarks, Dr. Dessalegn outlined two major policy recommendations. First, he argued that childcare should be financed through economic development budgets rather than welfare budgets. He explained that access to childcare reduced women's unpaid care responsibilities and increased paid work by an average of 4.2 hours per week, with the largest income gains observed among women-headed households. He cautioned that treating childcare solely as a social protection programme underestimated its economic returns and limited its potential for large-scale expansion.
Second, Dr. Dessalegn recommended that the expansion of childcare services should be accompanied by employment pathways and measures to address household backlash. He explained that the additional time made available through childcare could only be translated into employment where suitable job opportunities existed. Therefore, he advocated linking childcare centres with job-matching services, skills development programmes, and support for women working in the informal sector. At the same time, he emphasized the need for light-touch household engagement initiatives aimed at reducing fear of backlash and promoting supportive family environments, thereby maximizing both the economic and social benefits of childcare.