When Aid Arrives Matters: Early Cash Transfers Improve Outcomes After Floods

As extreme weather events increase in frequency and severity around the world, policymakers and humanitarian organizations are under growing pressure to respond faster. Flooding alone now affects tens of millions of people each year, and recent estimates suggest that nearly two billion people worldwide live in areas at substantial flood risk, with the greatest exposure concentrated in South and East Asia. A new study from the World Bank, the World Food Program, and Harris scholars (Assistant Professor Erin Kelley, Assistant Professor Gregory Lane)— examines whether delivering aid before or immediately after floods—rather than later in the season—meaningfully improves households’ ability to cope with flood shocks.

Using randomized controlled trials in Bangladesh and Nepal, the researchers show that the timing of humanitarian cash assistance can materially shape outcomes. Their findings show that providing cash assistance within days of a flood improves households’ short-term food security and mental well-being. Moreover, households that receive assistance early maintain outcomes that are at least as good as—and in some cases better than—those of households that receive assistance several months later, suggesting an overall superior trajectory for those who receive assistance early.

The study evaluates a Forecast-based Anticipatory Action (FbAA) program implemented by the World Food Programme (WFP) in flood-prone regions. Unlike traditional humanitarian assistance, which often reaches households weeks or months after a disaster, FbAA uses modern flood forecasting systems to trigger rapid cash transfers when a flood is imminent or has just occurred. Villages in both Bangladesh and Nepal were randomly assigned to receive either early FbAA transfers or the same amount of cash later, after floodwaters had receded.

In the weeks immediately following flooding—a period of acute stress—households receiving early cash fared significantly better. FbAA households had higher food consumption scores, were 4 percentage points more likely to reach acceptable food security levels, and relied less on harmful coping strategies such as skipping meals. These improvements were driven in part by more diverse diets, including increased consumption of protein-rich foods.

Earlier assistance also improved mental well-being. Households receiving FbAA reported lower levels of depression and higher life satisfaction, with effect sizes that compare favorably (per dollar spent) to much larger anti-poverty programs. In Bangladesh, early cash recipients also borrowed less and saved more, helping explain improvements in both food security and psychosocial health.

Importantly, these early gains did not fade over time. By the medium and long run—after all households had received their transfers—outcomes converged across groups. Early recipients were no worse off later, suggesting that FbAA does more than simply shift benefits earlier in the calendar. In Bangladesh, where the study included a third group that had not yet received assistance, early cash recipients continued to show significantly higher food security months after the flood.

“These results were not obvious ex ante. Cash assistance could, in principle, generate similar benefits regardless of when it is delivered. Providing payments earlier might simply shift those benefits forward by a few months, with households receiving transfers later ultimately ending up just as well off,” said Kelley. “From a policy perspective, however, the findings provide strong justification for delivering post-flood assistance as quickly as possible, as it puts people on a better trajectory.”

The consistency of these results across two countries strengthens the case for rapid, even anticipatory action as a scalable policy tool. Nepal and Bangladesh differ in geography, institutions, and aid delivery systems, yet the impacts of early cash transfers were remarkably similar—pointing to the broader applicability of the approach in flood-prone settings.

“What’s striking is how robust the findings are across contexts,” said Lane. “For policymakers designing climate adaptation and disaster response systems, this provides strong evidence that acting on credible forecasts can meaningfully improve lives.”

As climate change continues to intensify flooding across South Asia and beyond, the results suggest that disaster-response systems worldwide could improve outcomes by rethinking not just how much aid is delivered, but when it arrives.

Lane and Kelley’s co-authors from the World Bank are Paul J. Christian, Florence Kondylis,  and Odbayar Batmunkh; and from the World Food Program are Felipe A. Dunsch, Jonas Heirman, , Jennifer Waidler, Nidhila Adusumalli, and Kriti Malhotra. The study can be accessed here.