Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T07:12:31.203Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In-cash Transfers: from Passive to Empowered Beneficiaries in the Global South

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2021

Katarina Pitasse Fragoso
Katarina Pitasse Fragoso*
Affiliation:
Centre for Metropolitan Studies, São Paulo University, Brazil, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Over the last few years, there has been an increase in discussions advocating in-cash programmes as a way to alleviate poverty. Indeed, this represents a leap forward in comparison to in-kind programmes. However, little progress, at least in developing countries, has been achieved in answering the question of how the state should transfer the means of redressing deprivation to those who are living in poverty. This article addresses this issue by challenging anti-poverty programmes through a social-egalitarian framework. My main argument starts from the perspective that in-cash transfers are a necessary but not sufficient mechanism for poverty alleviation. I acknowledge that cash alone does not guarantee the poor an equally active role in influencing the public-policy decisions that affect their lives. I then suggest a participatory device to complement the cash-transfer proposal in order to give institutional opportunities to the poor to decide, together with practitioners, what should be done at the level of local public services.

Keywords

Anti-poverty programmescash transferssocial egalitarian approachparticipatory device
Type
Article
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 21 , Issue 3: THEMED SECTION: Towards a Sustainable Welfare State , July 2022 , pp. 352 - 368
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abers, R., King, R., Votto, D. and Bradão, I. (2018) Porto Alegre: Participatory Budgeting and the Challenging of Sustaining Transformative Change , World resources report case study , Washington, DC: World Resources Institute, www.citiesforall.org [accessed 10.03.2019].Google Scholar
Alkire, S., Foster, J. E., Seth, S., Santos, M. E., Roche, J. M. and Ballon, P. (2016) ‘Normative choice in measurement design’, in Muldimensional Poverty Measurement and Analysis, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 186-214.Google Scholar
Anderson, E. (2010) The Imperative of Integration, Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, A. (2015) Inequality: What can be Done?, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banting, K. and Kymlicka, W. (2017) The Strains of Commitment: the Political Sources of Solidarity in Diverse Societies, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrietos, A. (2011) ‘Conditions in antipoverty programmes’, Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 19, 1, 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bidadanure, J. (2014) Treating Young People as Equals: Intergenerational Justice in Theory and Practice, PhD dissertation , University of York.Google Scholar
Bidadanure, J. (2019) ‘The political theory of universal basic income’, Annual Review of Political Science, 22, 481-501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, L. (2008) ‘Deliberation, storytelling, and dialogic moments,’ Communication Theory, 18, 93–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brasil (2008) ‘Ministério do Desenvolvimento Social e Combate à Fome’, Financiamento da Assistência Social no Brasil. Caderno SUAS, ano 3, nº 3, Brasília: https://www.mds.gov.br/webarquivos/publicacao/assistencia_social/Cadernos/Suas_Evolucao_Recursos_III.pdf [accessed 20.05.2020].Google Scholar
Brando, N. and Fragoso, P. K. (2020) ‘Capability deprivation and the relational dimension of poverty: Testing universal multidimensional indexes’, in Beck, V., Hahn, H. and Lepenies, R. (eds.), Dimensions of Poverty. Philosophy and Poverty, vol 2. Cham: Springer, 301-19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, R. (2008) Revolutions in Development Inquiry, London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Cornwall, A. and Fujita, M. (2012) ‘Ventriloquising ‘the Poor’? Of voices, choices and the politics of ‘participatory’ knowledge production’, Third World Quarterly, 33, 9, 1751-65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deveaux, M. (2016) ‘Beyond the redistributive paradigm: what philosophers can learn from poor-led politics’, in Gaisbauer, H. P., Schweiger, G. and Sedmak, C. (eds.), Ethical Issues in Poverty Alleviation, Cham: Springer, 225-45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eger, T., Damo, A. and Schabbach, L. (2018) ‘Entre “pobres” e “vulneráveis”: a fluidez das categorias de intervenção no processo de implementação do Programa Bolsa Família a partir de uma etnografia junto a assistentes sociais’, Revista brasileira de Sociologia, 7, 15, 53-80.Google Scholar
Ehmke, E. (2015) India’s Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, Extension of Social Security (ESS) Paper No. 49, Geneva: International Labour Organization.Google Scholar
Fizbein, A. and Schady, N. (2009) Conditional Cash Transfers: Reducing Present and Future Poverty, Washington: World Bank publications, 45-65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, A. (2003) ‘Deliberative democracy, Chicago style; grass-roots governance in policing and public education’, in Fung, A. and Wright, E. (eds.), Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance, London and New York: Verso, 111-43.Google Scholar
GAPLAN (1992) Anuário Estatístico 1991, Porto Alegre: Prefeitura Municipal de Porto Alegre.Google Scholar
Granlund, S. and Hochfeld, T. (2019) “That child support grant gives me powers’ – exploring social and relational aspects of cash transfers in South Africa in times of livelihood change’, The Journal of Development Studies, 56, 6, 1230-44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guettabi, M. (2019) What do we know about the effects of the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend?, Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska Anchorage, https://scholarworks.alaska.edu/handle/11122/10581 [accessed 06.04.2020].Google Scholar
Gutmann, A. and Thompson, D. (2004) Democracy and Disagreement, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hanlon, J., Barrientos, A. and Hulme, D. (2010) Just Give Money to the Poor: The Development Revolution from the Global South, Bloomfield: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
Harman, L., Bastagli, F. Hagen-Zanker, J., Sturge, G. and Barca, V. (2016) Cash Transfers: What does the Evidence Say? An Annotated Bibliography, London: Overseas Development Institute, www.odi.org/projects/2797-social-protection-literature-review-poverty-impact [accessed 10.06.2020].Google Scholar
Heath, J. (2009) Economics without Illusions: Debunking the Myths of Modern Capitalism, New York: Crown business.Google Scholar
Jones, H. (2016) ‘More education, better jobs? A critical review of CCTs and Brazil’s Bolsa Família programme for long-term poverty reduction’, Social Policy and Society, 15, 3, 465–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, P., Nuñez, S. and Waltenberg, F. (2019) ‘Renda Básica da Cidadania: what lessons could Latin America’s largest basic income program bring to research on universal basic income’, Global Americans, 12 December, https://theglobalamericans.org/2019/12/renda-basica-da-cidadania-what-lessons-could-latin-americas-largest-basic-income-program-bring-to-research-on-universal-basic-income/ [accessed 06.06.2020].Google Scholar
Khader, S. (2011) Adaptive Preferences and Women’s Empowerment, Oxford: Oxford University press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, J. and Johnson, J. (1997) ‘What sort of equality does deliberative democracy requires?’, in Bohman, J. and Rehg, W. (eds.), Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, Cambridge: The MTI Press: Cambridge, 279-320.Google Scholar
Krause, S. (2008) Civil Passions: Moral Sentiments and Democratic Deliberation, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lister, R. (2004) Poverty, London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
McGee, R. and Norton, A. (2000) Participation in Poverty Reduction Strategies: A Synthesis of Experience with Participatory Approaches to Policy Design, Implementation and Monitoring, IDS Working paper, https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/20.500.12413/3440/Wp109.pdf?sequence=1 [accessed 06.06.2020].Google Scholar
Morinescu, I. (2018) No Strings Attached: the Behavioural Effects of U.S. Unconditional Cash Transfer Program, Working paper 24337: National Bureau of Economic research, https://www.nber.org/papers/w24337 [accessed 06.06.2020].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narayan, D., Patel, R., Schafft, K., Rademacher, A. and Schulte, S. (2000) Voices of the Poor: Can Anyone Hear Us? Vol. 1, New York: Oxford University Press for the World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piketty, T. (2015) A Economia da Desigualdade, Rio de Janeiro: Intrínseca.Google Scholar
Pinzani, A. and Rego, W. (2013) Vozes do bolsa família: autônomia, dinheiro e cidadania, São Paulo: Editora da UNESP.Google Scholar
Pitasse Fragoso, K. (2017) ‘Les programmes conditionnels de lutte contre la pauvreté sont-ils justes ?’, Revue Quart Monde, 241, 1, 19-23.Google Scholar
Rank, M. (2017) ‘ Toward a new paradigm for understanding poverty’, in Brady, D. and Burton, L. M. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Social Science of Poverty, Oxford: Oxford University Press, doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199914050.013.39.Google Scholar
Satterthwaite, D. and Mitlin, D. (2014) Reducing Urban Poverty in the Global South, London, New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
Scanlon, T. (2018) Why does Inequality Matter? Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scheffler, S. (2015) ‘The practice of equality’, in Fourie, C., Schuppert, F. and Helmer, I. (eds.), Social Equality: On What it Means to be Equals, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 21-44.Google Scholar
Segall, S. (2005) ‘Unconditional welfare benefits and the principle of reciprocity’, Politics, Philosophy and economics, 4, 3, 331-54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom, New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Shelby, T. (2016) Dark Ghettos: Injustice, Dissent, and Reform, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard, 17-80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skogan, W. and Hartnett, S. (1999) Community Policing, Chicago Style, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Soares, F., Ribas, R. and Osório, R. (2010) ‘Evaluating the impact of Brazil’s Bolsa Família: cash transfer programs in comparative perspective’, Latin American Research Review, 45, 2, 173-90.Google Scholar
Standing, G. (2011) The Precariat: the New Dangerous Class, London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Streeck, W. (2012) ‘Citizens as customers: considerations on the new politics of consumption’, New Left Review, 76, 27-47.Google Scholar
Suplicy, E. (2007) Renda de Cidadania – a Saída é Pela Porta, São Paulo: Editora Cortez.Google Scholar
UNICEF (2012) The South African Child Support Grant Impact Assessment: Evidence from a Survey of Children, Adolescents and their Households, Pretoria: UNICEF South Africa.Google Scholar
United Nations (2015) The World’s Women 2015: Trends and Statistics, New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
Vanderborght, Y. (2014) ‘The tensions of welfare state reform and the potential of a universal basic income’, in Dermine, E. and Dumont, D. (eds.), Activation Policies for the Unemployed the Right to Work and the Duty to Work, Brussels: P.I.E. Pieter Lang, 209-22.Google Scholar
Van Parijs, P. (2018) From Conditional Cash Transfers to Unconditional Basic Income?, Policy brief, Alternative Policy Solutions project, American University Cairo.Google Scholar
Van Parijs, P. (2020) ‘Basic Income positive results from Finland’, Social Europe Blog, https://www.socialeurope.eu/basic-income-positive-results-from-finland, [accessed 10.06.2020].Google Scholar
Van Parijs, P. and Vanderborght, Y. (2017) Basic Income: A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and Sane Economy, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, A. (forthcoming) Residential Integration, on the Terms of the Disadvantaged. Google Scholar
Wampler, B. (2012) ‘Participation, representation, and social justice: using participatory governance to transform representative democracy,’ Polity, 44, 4, 666-82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wisor, S. (2012) ‘After the MDGs: citizen deliberation and the post-2015 development framework’, Ethics and International Affairs, 26, 1, 113-33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, J. (1998) ‘Fairness, respect, and the egalitarian ethos’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 27, 2, 97-122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, J. (2015) ‘Social equality and social inequality’, in Fourie, C., Schuppert, F. and Helmer, I. (eds.), Social Inequality: On What it Means to be Equals, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 209-25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, J. (2019) ‘Poverty, social expectations, and the family’, in Brando, N. and Schweiger, G., (eds.), Philosophy and Child Povert, Cham: Springer, 69-89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, J. (2020) ‘Beyond poverty’, in Beck, V. and Lepenies, R. (eds.), Dimensions of Poverty, Cham: Springer, 23-39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, J. and de-Shalit, A. (2007) Disadvantaged, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, I. (1990) Justice and the Politics of Difference, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Young, I. (2004) ‘Situated knowledge and democratic discussions’, in Andersen, J. and Siim, B. (eds.), The Politics of Inclusion and Empowerment, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 19-35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar