2021
DOI: 10.1017/s1474746420000706
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

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

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 … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 38 publications
(37 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Such CCTs have been lauded for their ability to reduce poverty and promote human development (Krishnan et al, 2014;Bastagli et al, 2019). Despite these potential benefits, CCTs have been criticised for the additional burdens that conditionalities impose on beneficiaries, the unequal distribution of entitlements, the relatively small size of cash grants, challenges with service provision, disruptions to existing social relationships, and limitations to beneficiaries' sense of agency (Vadapalli, 2009;Benderly, 2011;Oduro, 2015;Fragoso, 2021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such CCTs have been lauded for their ability to reduce poverty and promote human development (Krishnan et al, 2014;Bastagli et al, 2019). Despite these potential benefits, CCTs have been criticised for the additional burdens that conditionalities impose on beneficiaries, the unequal distribution of entitlements, the relatively small size of cash grants, challenges with service provision, disruptions to existing social relationships, and limitations to beneficiaries' sense of agency (Vadapalli, 2009;Benderly, 2011;Oduro, 2015;Fragoso, 2021).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%