Which aspects of domestic and international politics are most influential in the implementation and success of Cash Transfers to alleviate intergenerational poverty 

INTRODUCTION  

Cash transfers can be defined as a philanthropic or social welfare programme aiming to improve social protection, improve human capital or reduce extreme poverty (Saaverdra, 2016). The schemes can be conditional cash transfers (CCTs), in which the recipients are given money under the condition that they meet certain criteria, such as increasing school attendance and test scores, or improving paediatric nutrition. The programs can also be unconditional cash transfers (UCTs), in which the money is transferred to the recipients with ‘no strings attached’ (Gennitan, 2021) meaning they can spend the money on how best suits them. I have been inspired by how effective they have proved in comparison to other schemes such as in-kind transfers and governmental development projects, and the prospects they bring in terms of intergenerational poverty alleviation. From my research, I have found that cash transfers, both UCTs and CCTs have proven to be the most effective method of poverty alleviation, with the donors, governments and NGOs playing a vital role in the implementation of the schemes which show great variety of outcome, as they are more tailored to, and controlled by, the individual, particularly in UCTs. Another interesting aspect is that in order to scale up the schemes, they require significant political support, and are ideally implemented in a stable political landscape, however in the areas which require this support the most, the politics are often most volatile and tenuous, which has significant impact on the success of the schemes. Throughout this essay, I intend to unpick the intricacies of the politics on the schemes and the implications of this on the effectiveness of the outcomes. This will be achieved through categoric analysis of domestic and international political landscapes on the schemes, with literature review on the design, implementation and successful aspects of the schemes. 

Initially implemented in the global south, cash transfers emerged as a method to decrease rates of extreme poverty following the United Nations creation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2012, with poverty eradication as the primary SDG. The schemes involve the transfer of money from charities, NGOs or governments directly into recipient bank accounts, which are usually connected to mobile phones (Stuart, 2023). In many cases of CCTs, the money is given to the mothers, who are then responsible for ensuring they promote activities for their children in line with the programs such as educational, healthcare or leisure based activities (Attanasio et al., 2005). In Latin America, the CTs were primarily introduced in Mexico in 1997, and now approximately 25% of the population in central and south America are positively impacted by the schemes (Borges, 2018). 

Importance of the programs 

CCTs originated in Latin America, and require eligible recipients to engage in certain stipulations, which are often related to healthcare (Lagarde et al., 1996 & 2007; Shei et al., 2014); education such as increasing school attendance rates and test scores (Baez & Camacho, 2011; Hadna &Kartika, 2017; Molina Milan et al., 2019); or improving child nutrition (De Groot et al., 2015; Manley et al., 2022); whereas UCTs involve the money being given to recipients unconditionally, without monitored progress, under the proviso that the individuals and the families know how to best spend the money in ways best suited to their unique situations. This has proven effective as many families have been able to alleviate themselves out of poverty, as suggested by the Economist, Hanlon (2010) ‘poverty is fundamentally about a lack of cash. It’s not about stupidity.’ 

Design of UCTs and CCTs 

The design of CCTs and UCTs are essential when analysing the successes of the schemes, as several political factors must be considered, such as the political landscape of the recipient nation, including current affairs. Economic and social factors are also both integral as the schemes do not work effectively without internal stability, an idea the essay will later unpick.  

Governmental influence is vital in regards of the successes of the schemes because they will have significant influence in the function of the programs, as differing ideological opinions on the programs can influence the extent to which they are utilised as a tool for poverty eradication or to build human capital.  

Successes can be monitored across several different fields, such as economic, political and social arenas. 

Roadmap through the essay 

Throughout the essay I attempt to analyse various aspects of the Cash transfer schemes (both conditional and unconditional), identifying the most successful aspects of the programs in order to answer my question. This will be done through a thematic approach, signposted by the sub-headings, to clearly mark what is being achieved in each section, demonstrating the breadth of my arguments in the domestic and international spheres.  

In order to cover the breadth of my argument, I have broken down the essay into sections relating to the question. This is first indicated by the ‘implementation’ section, consisting of sub sections focussing on economic and political stability and progress, followed by the ‘international politics’ section, predominantly relating to the actions and ideas of the donors, including and further impact they may have had on the programs, including effective outcomes and analysis which may be relevant for the future. The essay then moves to unpick the domestic politics and successful and unsuccessful outcomes of the schemes, such as corruption, violence and tension which have been associated to the programs, finishing with the intergenerational successes in both UCTs and CCTs, with a conclusion aiming to answer the question based on my research and analysis. 

IMPLEMENTATION 

Economic and political stability 

In order for the redistributive schemes to work, the countries in which they are implemented in must have a high level of internal stability, exhibiting unity in economic, social and political arenas for the implementation to become successful (Siachiwena, 2023).  This includes a sustainable tax base in order to facilitate the redistribution of money and resources (Scarlato, 2019) with efforts from the World Bank to reduce the impact of domestic elites. Even once implemented, the design and structure of these political institutions can still affect the outcome of the policies (Stein et al., 2009).  

The schemes do not work without economic stability, which has been an issue for many African nations as in many cases, they are in more of a state of crisis and debt to international countries, making the effectiveness a potential problem. National and international events can impact this further such as a recent rise in electricity shortages which has affected the stability of the recipient nations (Mendelevitch, 2017). The importance of the global landscape and geographical influence should not be overlooked, as the influence of other countries can shape the actions of the donors in order to support the recipient nations (Borges, 2018). This is because the countries can become influenced by neighbouring countries decisions particularly why they extricate themselves from neocolonial rule from the West (Garmany, 2016). These factors can pose significant restraints on the potential for the schemes to function and are certainly worth considering as potential implications, however they are not necessarily deterministic of the outcome, and can be worked around to achieve success, as removal of these factors is not always possible.  

It can therefore be argued that there is an impracticality of cash transfer programs in Africa due to frequent natural disasters, high levels of corruption and issues with agriculture (Siachiwena, 2023), so instead some African nations use the programs for social protection and welfare support. By 2005, 28 countries had implemented CCT and UCT programmes in Africa, and by 2018 every African nation had them in place (Siachiwena, 2022).  

A stable functioning government is equally as integral (Siachiwena, 2023), and the politicians must consider the popularity of the programs in order to achieve re-election.  Linos’ (2013) study illustrated how the implementation of a CCT increased the re-election of a Honduran mayor by 39%, although caused no increase on voter turnout (Tobias et al., 2014).  In some cases they are forced to address economic stabilisation and must demonstrate their accountability to the people, and subsequently they are more likely to achieve re-election if their policies are in line with public interest (Siachiwena, 2023). Therefore, the political imposition of cash transfers is a notable feature and is integral in the implementation. 

Policies promoted internationally and by the African union have changed from food aid to cash (Scarlato, 2019) and have proven to be ‘fiscally affordable, cheaper than food imports’ (Devereux, 2006). Although some governments have been sceptical as they have tendency to appeal internationally for food instead of cash, which is more of an emergency response without longer term or intergenerational impacts (Devereux, 2006) and therefore it is unlikely that they will be implemented by the government.  

Progressions of the recipients 

Progress can become altered by economic growth (Leipziger, 2001) including trade barriers. An increase in Grade Point Average can help alleviate countries out of poverty longer term as they are able to ‘grow themselves’ out of poverty as services improve and the welfare of the state can better support itself (Pribble et al., 2009) and poverty rated increase when the country faces national debt (Pribble et al., 2009).  

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 

DONORS 

Ideas and intervention 

As the cash transfers have gained traction and recognition in the political arena as an effective tool to eradicate poverty. The political dynamics can involve power struggles between interest groups, keen to gain power, influence or money.  Some donors argue that philanthropy and UCTs allow for the circumnavigation around powerful elites or corporations who maintain a control over a country’s economy, and therefore prevents more radical political influence.   

Implementing UCTs requires political desire, will and consensus, which is often swayed by public opinion or electoral politics, and therefore are tied up with the local or national political intensions.   

Stuart (2023) suggests an increasing numbers of donors displayed a desire to become involved in the schemes and some have felt motivated and compelled to increase their intervention beyond the sole act of donating. They may have felt an obligation to bring their own ideas to the design schemes, which arguably stems from a place of vanity and can cause interference in the function and success of the programs. The donors may choose to intervene to obtain a more clear sense of where their money is going, although Ozler (2020) suggests that this can be achieved instead by defining the condition of the CCTs. This could mean adding clarity to what is meant by the terms, for example stating a condition as ‘improving test scores by 10% on average in an academic year’ instead of just ‘improving test scores.’ In many instances, their intervention was a hinderance (Stuart, 2023), as the donors do not (and cannot) fully understand each individual situation and therefore cannot make a well informed decision of where the money should go, making this a problematic factor when analysing the successes of the schemes. 

Tech billionaires (Jack Dorsey, Twitter; Brian Acton, WhatApp; MacKenzie Scott, former wife of Jeff Bezos) have embraced this ‘trust based philanthropy’, where vast amounts of money has been given in a sense of urgency and idea of greater impact in opposed to the ‘philanthrocapitalism’ of former years, and bringing management approaches to the non-profit arena but instead tying up NGOs in bureaucracy justifying impact. NGOs argue that success means more than a simple metric of profit. Although this trust-based philanthropy, otherwise known as UCT, has become somewhat of a trend in America, and aiming to be beyond the binds of politics, the trust based philanthropy aims to redistribute power between the wealthy funders and the non-profit organisations, addressing systemic inequity. It aims to empower communities by answering the rising demand for localisation, addressing local and community issues of race, the history of systems and politics (John, 2023), and challenge the mistrust and polarisation that can characterise the political landscape, particularly in America (Arista, 2022).   

Concerns  

Different political ideologies view the implementation of CCT and UCTS through different lenses, with libertarians, for example, considering the influx of cash from philanthropic donations as a distorting factor in a free market. One key proponent of this classic liberalism was George Ayittey, the Ghanaian economist and author, who was a strong advocate for free market economics, individual liberty and democratic governance in Africa. He is considered a proponent of classical liberalism and social justice, and has been critical of both authoritarian regimes and corrupt practices within African governments. Ayittey (2004, 2011) believed that Africa’s inherent problems may have started with colonialism but really remained because Africa was not free of modern oppressive native autocrats and advocated for the empowerment of African people through economic development, entrepreneurship through UCTS, and the creation of strong democratic institutions. Overcoming tribalism and corruption were fundamental to developing strong political situations in Africa, developing a need for accountability in African politics.   

Ideologically, it can be argued that aspects of socialism broadly supports UCTs as a vehicle for wealth distribution and reducing societal inequality, due to the individual autonomy stemming from the support of redistributive economics, however others have argued that  the root causes of inequality and poverty are not addressed through the programs.  They argue that UCTs are more efficient, due to lower administrative costs and however the debate around equality versus equity and whether UCTs result in genuine wealth redistribution.   

Misspending  

Conservative philanthropists have expressed concerns that their donations to UCTs will be spent on substance misuse or wasteful spending (Evans, 2014), creating dependence on the state and disincentivising work. Others from a conservative leaning perspective, may see UCTs as a method of simplifying welfare, bypassing wasteful bureaucracy and ultimately reducing social cohesion.  However research shows that this is extremely rare, as suggested by the give directly website (2019), where 0% was spent on alcohol and tobacco (Haushofer and Shapiro, 2019), highlighting the effective functioning of the schemes as the overwhelming majority of recipients have used the money for the “right reasons.” 

Some donors have wanted to avoid ‘impulsive philanthropy’ (Schmidt, 2022) where the money is not best spent, and is not used exactly for poverty alleviation, which is more prone to occurring in unconditional schemes due to the lack of monitoring after the money is given, and the lack of rigidity with their spending. For example, one recipient spent a day in a taxi for no specific purpose, and enjoyed a round-trip from his village in Kisumu to Nairobi, which was an unnecessary expense as he didn’t use the money for its intended purposes (Schmidt, 2022).  

Work ethic 

Many donors exhibited ‘Thatcherite’ ideas (Pribble et al., 2009), displaying concerns around complacency spreading among recipients, that their work ethic may be damaged (Siachiwena, 2023; Hickey, 2021). Subsequently, some donors favoured programs that gave recipients incentives to persevere and continue their efforts to alleviate themselves from extreme poverty instead of relying on external, paternalistic support. As an extension of these capitalist ideas stemming from the donors, some donors have urged governments to increase their state funding for cash transfers as they have been reluctant to donate themselves because they do not aim to disincentivise the recipients (Hickey, 2021; Siachiwena, 2023), although there has been ‘no systematic evidence that cash transfers discourage work’ (Give Directly website). Therefore, these donor concerns can be seen as a disruptive factor to the successes of the schemes because they interrupt progressions and impact being made. The increase in financial resources for the families can act in the opposite way, as the recipients of the schemes tend to feel more motivated with this increase in money, as on the whole, they feel more able to alleviate themselves from poverty, meaning this has opposite effects on individuals and communities work ethics than what has been suggested and feared by some donors. 

Analysis – for future implementation 

In order for the schemes to work most optimally where donor intervention is present, the philanthropists must act in a politically informed manner and understand the domestic landscapes in order for successful function of the schemes (Siachiwena, 2022). This is integral and possibly unachievable because each location and individual face unique challenges, and are impacted in different ways by current affairs and the rapidly changing political landscape therefore it can be more strongly argued that a lack of donor intervention is ideal to avoid any potential hinderance from them.  

However, some donors however, have felt keen to push their own ideas on how to spend the money onto others, and want to have an impact by using their thoughts too, when perhaps it would be more effective to allow the recipients this privilege and responsibility (Cheng and Wagener, 2001). The latter can be more destructive than constructive, as donors often have differing views and opinions as to how best spend the money, and lack knowledge and insight into the individual lives of the recipient, meaning they cannot make a well-informed decision (Cheng and Wagener, 2001).   

Effective ideas from the donors 

In some cases, donors have brought ideas which have proved advantageous to the development of the schemes, as some have encouraged adoption of a neoliberal framework, which has been attempted in Latin America following a Keynesian model, as this aids the redistributive economics which is integral to the schemes. This can be beneficial, as the Keynesian model is well suited to redistributive economics, therefore this model may enable more efficient functioning of the programs resulting in more stable economics and possibly political systems. 

Libertarian donors exhibit altruistic attitudes (Eikenberry and Mirabella, 2017), as they hope to give money to better the lives of the recipient, empower them and allow them the freedom and liberty to make the best decisions suited to them and how is best to spend the money for their individual circumstances. This psychologically encourages further progress when given to the individual to make their own decisions free from the burden of the donor intervention, an idea correlated closely to the unconditional programs. 

DOMESTIC POLITICS 

Scalability 

In Rwanda, the winning party in the election aimed to scale up cash transfer schemes for political advances and to replace fragmented schemes, with aims of building social protection and decreasing political unrest (Scarlato, 2019). A large issue in Rwanda was the rural-urban poverty split, as the significant regional differences hampered political consensus for large scale anti-poverty measures (Scarlato, 2019). This lack of aforementioned integral internal unity may be the reason it has not worked so effectively here, as the social, economic and political landscape in Rwanda is not as in tact as ideally required for these schemes to work effectively. 

Successes 

A benefit of cash transfers is that they help build up the provincial economies as the money spent by the recipients locally naturally builds community networks around them, as the non-recipients also benefit (Ozler, 2020). For example a market-goods trader may not be eligible to receive money from the schemes directly as they may be situated in a higher economic position in society and on the “poverty ladder,” but if the recipients of the CTs in that village or town do receive money from the schemes, and spend it at the markets, which is highly likely, these market trades will therefore benefit from the CTs too. However, as the demand increases and the supply remains fairly constant for certain products, this can cause a dramatic price rise for certain products in local markets (Ozler, 2020), which can be detrimental for growing children as goods such as protein rich foods see prices skyrocket and become inaccessible to those in extreme poverty. On the whole, this local spending is an extremely valuable benefit of the schemes as the ‘recycled’ money that recirculates into the economy means extreme poverty is less likely to remain entrenched in society and intergenerational progress can be made because the domestic economy is more stable therefore living standards and quality of life increase as the countries develop, meaning the future generations are less likely to live in these same conditions of extreme poverty as their predecessors.  

Ineffective outcomes 

Schmidt (2022) argues that internal redistribution through local authorities may work more effectively, as they can allocate the money on a more individual basis.  Some of the money may be used to fund village projects such as improving community facilities, which would therefore extend the benefits of the schemes to the non-recipients and may help intergenerational alleviation from poverty, as the recipient nations, towns and villages are able to construct better public resources as a result of this local redistribution. The money can also be recycled in the economy, as explained in local markets, instead of charities buying resources from global companies (Bregman, 2017), a flaw of Sachs’ Millennium Villages Project (Munk, 2013). One million mosquito nets were given to people in sub-Saharan Africa, however, this then put the mosquito net sellers out of business. When these nets needing repairing or renewing, there were no mosquito net sellers to be found, as there was no market any more. Although this local redistribution can be problematic as the ‘native autocrats’ (Ayittey, 2004, 2011) will often use the money for their own purposes and corruption is part of the culture and social norm (Graeff, 2004). Charities such as Give Directly make efforts to remain apolitical (Stuart, 2023) to prevent any issues with local corruption and scandalous behaviour from these authorities, and to avoid any potential for significant violations (Schmidt, 2022).  

Domestic corruption 

This domestic corruption can be seen as there is an increase in ‘bitter money’ obtained through theft, exchange of undesirable goods, contraband, land, drugs, etc. which results in ‘possessive individualism’ and can result in further corruption among the people as some of the more wealthy recipients in some instances have become envious of poorer recipients gaining money from the schemes so scared them out of it highlighting jealousy and the competitive nature in capitalism (Schmidt, 2022). 

Ideological implications  

Left wing nations and politicians tend to support the schemes more (as redistributive economics is a core socialist value), although the origins of CCTs and UCTs stemmed from the right wing neo-liberal values (Scarlato, 2019) and are not wholly favoured in the left.  For example, in Nicaragua, the left-wing leader Ortega worked to overcome dictatorships, civil war and natural disasters, using cash transfers as a method for wealth redistribution, until his return to more authoritarian methods. The government in Venezuela and other Latin American countries hoped that low income workers would find industrial jobs as the countries modernised, and formal employment increased. The left were focused on basic income, the right on the development of human capital (Scarlato, 2019). Some countries moulded their own schemes to suit local needs, such as Costa Rica’s ‘Avancemos CCT’ to reduce child labour and increase school attendance, which was effective at least in reducing the hours of labour children were engaged in, if not the academic outcomes, more focus on education was required. Cash transfers are no panacea, but can be effective in simple behaviour changes which can impact on health and education outcomes to some degree, depending on the political goodwill and landscape.   

In some cases, the left opposed UCTs and CCTs as evaluations showed that, to be effective, the more narrow the target, the more likely the cash transfers were to appear to have achieved their goal. However, narrow targets were not then achieving the universal progress that the cash transfers aimed for. There were criticisms of ‘clientelism’ or ‘vote buying’ (Frey, 2019), however, Brazil’s Bolsa Familia programme illustrated that redistributive policies that are shielded from political intermediaries actually increase the quality of political candidates and electoral competition.   

Violence  

Contrary to the overriding aim of CCTs, recent research has shown that CCTs can in fact increase violence in the areas it is aiming to reduce the effects of (Zizumbo-Colunga, 2023). Although this essay is not looking specifically at benefits and disadvantages, the politics behind the increased violence in the areas of Latin America with CCFs is an important consideration. This is because the sudden injection of cash, often given to women, can trigger men to aim to control the cash, become violent to influence women to get the money, resulting in criminal predation, and social discord as not everyone receives the cash, and this situation results in political conflict.  Again, some recent research has countered some longer standing research, that CCTs can influence political behaviour and clientelism more than was previously realised (Schober, 2022).  

Political tension between CCTs and UCTs 

CCTs appear to come from a right-wing political perspective, and as a result, there can be quite an ideological divide between the two forms of cash transfer system and their underlying philosophy regarding the alleviation of extreme poverty and human and societal development. While CCTs incentivise behaviours with conditional assistance, this paternalistic, right wing approach has riled some countries, who believe that this ‘neoliberal and ‘pre-packaged’ approach is not appropriate to them. For example, Argentina was strongly opposed to CCTs and their role in social welfare such as the Seguro de Capacitación y Empleo (2006) and the Universal Child Allowance (Asignación Universal por Hijo) which was introduced in 2009. Critics believe that the stigmatisation and dependency of those in the programme reinforced their self-view, and that of others, that they were passive recipients, rather than agents who could make decisions that were best for themselves of their families’ situation (Mourelo & Escudero, 2017).  There were arguments that certain vulnerable groups or individuals were being excluded, perpetuating social and societal inequalities (Amarante & Brun, 2018). The bureaucratic burden was criticised for the time and human resources taken from other social programmes or initiatives and were not solving the root causes of poverty or structural inequalities in Argentina  allowing people to create sustainable livelihoods.   

It was the politicisation that caused a widespread uproar, with critics claiming that the CCTs were used for political advantage and programmes were manipulated in order to secure votes in specific constituencies. This undermined the legitimacy nationally, and there remains deep divides in Argentina about the use of CCTs, and their role in poverty development an inequality (Arza, 2020).   

INTERGENERATIONAL BENEFITS  

Conditional Cash Transfers 

Research from the University of Manchester identified that a range of long-lasting advantages were achieved from the implementation of cash transfers, such as education and healthcare improvements, tax revenues, etc. (Bregman, 2017) which are long lasting, supporting the schemes as tools to alleviate poverty intergenerationally, as many have been able to alleviate themselves from extreme poverty (Give Directly website). Long term benefits of CCTs include improvements in healthcare (such and diet quality) and education, most notably increasing school attendance and test scores and decreasing dropout rates (Ozler, 2020), GDP building, and support in employment (Borges, 2018; Attansio et al., 2009; Ozler, 2020). 

What is common in the political landscape of these benefits is the need for political will, and the need for stability for the effects to have anything beyond an immediate alleviation of the effects of poverty. The evidence of long-term effects mostly supports the conclusion that time spent in school and away from work or child marriage, has the most effective long –term result, however there are fewer benefits on beneficiaries’ cognitive skills, their learning or socio-economic skills (Molina Millán et al., 2019). For there to be long-term, even intergenerational impacts on learning and cognition, it takes more than just time in school, it is too simple a metric. But politically, the important situation is that the situation is stable, and families do not keep their children away from school because of the dangerous environment, they can walk to school, and there is enough money to avoid them being married or working from a very young age, so the political environment is fundamental to the CCTs being able to function in the longer term. Socio-economic and long-term evaluations are harder to analyse, partly due to the age of the recipients and also due to methodological challenges facing all longer-term evaluations particularly in the global south (Molina Millán et al., 2019).   

Unconditional Cash Transfers  

Bregman (2017) has identified a great deal of personal progress and rehabilitation made, with the vast majority of recipients making significant efforts to alleviate themselves from poverty within months having received additional cash support. Research (Bastagli et al., 2019) considered 35 indicators of success under the areas of poverty, education, health and nutrition, financial, work and empowerment. The recipients have felt empowered to make their own decisions and flourished under the flexibility that the unconditional schemes gave them as they have been able to shape their own futures instead of being given relatively ineffective resources which do not suit their needs, skillset, personal ambition or interest (Bregman, 2017). Unconditional schemes have proven to be more beneficial in a social context, improving mental health, reducing teen pregnancies, and resulting in later average marriage ages (Ozler, 2020). UCTs are therefore important for achieving vital outcomes, but not necessarily the ‘desired outcomes’ that conditional schemes provide (Ozler, 2020) and the unintended effects of philanthropy or giving are said to be fundamental in development, in 82% of researched cases in Latin America, Africa and Asia, alcohol and tobacco consumption declined (Evans et al., 2014; Gazeaud et al., 2023) and none has been spent on drugs (give directly website). Kenya saw an increase in living standard and increase in assets (Haushofer & Shapiro, 2018) after three years, which was important during a significant period of political stalemate and impasse as well as due to drought, which resulting in socio-economic challenges (UNDP, 2017). Due to how politics and power run in countries like Kenya, where the ruling party has all the power and opposition have almost no role and certainly no impact, and where the judiciary, parliament and the electoral commission are subservient to the President (Hanson, 2008), if a programme such as UCTs can give the edge politically in voting behaviours, then they become key political weapons.    

CONCLUSION 

In conclusion, it can be seen that cash transfers are an effective way to alleviate poverty, with a range of impacts. Some are longer term than others, but all are beneficial nevertheless with a range of domestic and international politics at play for effectiveness to occur. Unity in political, social and economic fields are integral for the schemes to work most effectively as a sustainable base of a country will enable redistribution of resources most effectively. Economic stability is the most important out of the three named fields and for that, political stability is required as a requisite.  

A greatly beneficial aspect of the schemes, which I would argue should be encouraged in the future of poverty alleviation is the recycling of money in the local economies, as this enables intergenerational poverty alleviation, which is necessary for longer term goals to be achieved and poverty to be avoided in the future. This is an aspect in which cash transfers demonstrate best, as other schemes related to poverty alleviation such as micro-finance, social security, good governance, and increasing job or work opportunities do not often enable the local economies to be built up in this way.  

When looking into the future and the design of the schemes, I would argue that donor intervention should be limited in CTs because it contradicts the fundamental aspects if the programs, specifically in UCTs, because it does not encourage individualism and does not support the unique lives of the individual, as their contributions are often unhelpful and do not typically result in positive outcomes. The donors simply do not, and cannot understand each individual environment and are therefore fundamentally are unable make a well-informed contribution. There is also sufficient evidence to suggest it has hindered the progress of many schemes, even when in touch with local authorities. 

I have found no evidence that either conditional or unconditional cash transfers are superior, and therefore would argue that they should both be used in conjunction however the intended aims should be considered prior to their implementation. Conditional schemes have proven superior for achieving desired outcomes whereas unconditional schemes can be used for solving poverty more generally, but with a greater risk attached. There have been some identified pitfalls of the schemes however on the whole, they are very efficient and effective tools to reduce global poverty. Sociologically, CCTs tend to exhibit lower levels of unrest and conflict than UCTs as they are more stringently monitored, but their effectiveness is arguably compromised as a result. Politically, there is little differentiation between UCTs and CCTs however for them to be most successful, the political situation in which they are implemented is ideally stable, and the programs should not be politicised domestically to obtain electoral success and should not be used as a vehicle to support political campaigns around election time.  

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Amadi, L. (2020) globalization: the changing liberal international order: a review of literature [online] Science Direct, available at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590051X20300046?ref=pdf_download&fr=RR-2&rr=8178064a1b2a21cb (accessed 25/09/2023) 

Amarante, V; Brun, M; (2018) Cash transfers in Latin America: Effects on poverty and redistribution. [online] economia. Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/90025861 (accessed 01/03/2024) 

Arza, C. (2018) Cash transfers for families and children in Argentina, Brazil and Chile: segmented expansion or universal benefits? [online] Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, Cambridge university press. Available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-international-and-comparative-social-policy/article/abs/cash-transfers-for-families-and-children-in-argentina-brazil-and-chile-segmented-expansion-or-universal-benefits/8DC9AD07D0B688E93694CF9C77AFD992  (accessed 01/03/2024) 

Attanasio O, Battistin E, Fitzsimons E, Mesnard A, Vera-Hernández M (2005) HOW EFFECTIVE ARE CONDITIONAL CASH TRANSFERS? EVIDENCE FROM COLOMBIA [online] UCL discovery, institute for fiscal studies, available at https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/14766/ (accessed 12/09/2023) 

Baird S, Chirwa E, McIntosh C and Özler B, 2010. The short‐term impacts of a schooling conditional cash transfer program on the sexual behaviour of young women [online] health economics, online Wylie library available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/hec.1569 (accessed 01/03/2024) 

Borges, F. A. (2018) Neoliberalism with a Human Face? Ideology and the Diffusion of Latin America’s Conditional Cash Transfers [online] JSTOR available at  https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/resrep02738.pdf?refreqid=fastly-default%3A933d12d3bc9a706e824a62e2cd5457f1&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&origin=&initiator=search-results&acceptTC=1 (accessed 10/10/2023) 

Bregman, R (2017) utopia for realists: and how we can get there. Holland, Bloomsbury publishing.   

Bruening, M. (2013) How a universal income would affect poverty [online] desmos. Available at http://www.desmos.org/blog/10/3/13/how-universal-basic-income-would-affect-poverty (accessed 25/08/2023) 

Cheng, S W and Wagener, A (2001) Altruism and donations [online] Lucius & Lucius Verlagsgellschaft mbH, JSTOR. Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20714959.pdf?refreqid=fastly-default%3A0e74bb2e03d66792026b1dc91066b44e&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&origin=&initiator=search-results&acceptTC=1 (accessed 23/20/23) 

Cortes D F, Gallego J M  and Maldonado D, (2011). On the design of education conditional cash transfer programs and non-education outcomes: the case of teenage pregnancy. SSRN [online] Available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1888668 (accessed 03/02/2024) 

Devereux, S. (2006) cash transfers and social protection [online] centre for social protection, institute for development studies, University of Sussex. Available at https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=121048cab91ace0c8b4d6a81ea134704e64ce8d2 (accessed 12/11/2023) 

Evans, D. and Popova, A (2014) Cash Transfers and Temptation Goods: A Review of Global Evidence. [online] SSRN, world bank. Available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2439993 (accessed 27/03/2024) 

Eikenberry, A. M. and Mirabella, R. M. (2017) Extreme Philanthropy: Philanthrocapitalism, Effective Altruism, and the Discourse of Neoliberalism. [online] Cambridge core, Cambridge university press. Available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics/article/abs/extreme-philanthropy-philanthrocapitalism-effective-altruism-and-the-discourse-of-neoliberalism/AA01CBBC72E955FCD19BE1AE21E22FC2 (27/03/2024) 

Frey, A.(2019) Cash transfers, clientelism, and political enfranchisement: Evidence from Brazil. [online] Journal of Public Economics, science direct. Available at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0047272719300672  (accessed 01/03/2024) 

Garmany, J. (2016) Neoliberalism, governance, and the geographies of conditional cash transfers [online] Political geography, science direct. Available at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0962629815000827  (accessed 11/03/2024) 

Gazeaud J, Mvukiyehe E,  Sterck O (2023) Cash Transfers and Migration: Theory and Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial. MIT press direct [online] available at https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/105/1/143/98204/Cash-Transfers-and-Migration-Theory-and-Evidence (accessed 25/10/2023) 

Gennitan, L. A., Shafir, E., De Hoop, J. (2021) Behavioral Insights into Cash Transfers to Families with Children. Sage journals, behavioural science and policy association. [online] available at https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/237946152100700107 (accessed 29/03/2024) 

Graeff, P. (2004) Why should one trust in corruption?: The linkage between corruption, norms and social capital. [online] New institutional economics of corruption, Routledge. Available at https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780203413920-7/one-trust-corruption-peter-graeff (accessed 01/03/2024) 

Hanlon, J. (2010) Just give money to the poor. The development of revolution from the global south [online] presentation for OECD. Available at http://www.oecd.org/dev/pgd/46240619.pdf (accessed 23/08/2023) 

Hickey S, Bukenya B (2019) The politics of promoting social cash transfers in Uganda: The potential and pitfalls of “thinking and working politically” Wiley online library, development policy review [online] available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/dpr.12474 (accessed 12/11/23) 

Kovski N, Pilkauskas N V, Michelmore K and Shaefer HL, 2023. Unconditional cash transfers and mental health symptoms among parents with low incomes: Evidence from the 2021 child tax credit. SSM-Population Health, 22, p.101420. science direct [online] available at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235282732300085X (accessed 08/09/2023) 

Kumar, S L; CalvoFriedman, A; Freeman, A L; Fazio, D; Johnson, A K; Seiferth, F; Clapp, J; Davis, N J; Schretzman. M; Springer, B; Arcilla, H N; Kaplan, S A; Berry, C A; Doran, K M; (2022) An Unconditional Cash Transfer Program for LowIncome New Yorkers Affected by COVID19  New York academy of medicine, journal of urban health [online] available at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11524-022-00693-9 (accessed 18/11/2023) 

Mendelevitch, R; Oei, P. Y. (2017) The impact of policy measures on future power generation portfolio and infrastructure: a combined electricity and CCTS investment and dispatch model [online] Energy systems, springer link. Available at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12667-017-0242-z (accessed 11/03/2024) 

Mourelo, E L; Escudero, V. (2017) Effectiveness of active labour market tools in conditional cash transfers programs: evidence for Argentina. [online] World Development, science direct. Available at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305750X1730044X (accessed 01/03/2024) 

Munk, N. (2013) The idealist: Jeffrey Sachs and the quest to end poverty. England, signal publishing. 

Ohrnberger, J; Fichera, E; Sutton, M; Anselmi, L; 2020. The worse the better? Quantile treatment effects of a conditional cash transfer programme on mental health. [online] London school of hygiene and tropical medicine, oxford academic. Available at https://academic.oup.com/heapol/article/35/9/1137/5900848?login=false (accessed 13/02/2024) 

Ozler, B. (2020) How should we design cash transfer programs? [online] available at https://blogs.worldbank.org/developmenttalk/how-should-we-design-cash-transfer-programs 

Porras, I; Steele, P; and Mohammed, E Y; (2016) The role of conditional transfers for poverty reduction and ecosystem management [online] JSTOR, available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/resrep02738.pdf?refreqid=fastly-default%3A933d12d3bc9a706e824a62e2cd5457f1&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&origin=&initiator=search-results&acceptTC=1 (accessed 04/01/2024) 

Pribble, J. et al. (2009) Politics, Policies, and Poverty in Latin America [online] Comparative Politics, JSTOR. Available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/40599215. (accessed 28/11/2023) 

Putnam-Walkerly, K (2020) Delusional altruism: why philanthropists fail to achieve change and what they can do to transform giving. [online] John Wiley & Sons. Available at https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=487ODwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR13&dq=Delusional+altruism:+why+philanthropists+fail+to+achieve+change+and+what+they+can+do+to+transform+giving&ots=R3qGaS6p1D&sig=xWwqWEkQKPEbBArntjTWbJrtlzI#v=onepage&q=Delusional%20altruism%3A%20why%20philanthropists%20fail%20to%20achieve%20change%20and%20what%20they%20can%20do%20to%20transform%20giving&f=false (accessed 17/01/2024) 

Robinson, W I (2004) Global Crisis and Latin America [online] Bulletin of Latin American Research, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 135–53. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27733633  (accessed 28/11/2023) 

Saavedra (2016) The effects of conditional cash transfer programs on poverty reduction, human capital accumulation and wellbeing. [online] UN organisation. Available at https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/egms/docs/2016/Poverty-SDGs/JuanSaavedra-paper.pdf (accessed 27/03/2024).  

Scarlato, M; d’Agostino, G (2019) The Political Dimension of Cash Transfers in Latin America and Sub‐Saharan Africa: A Comparative Perspective. [online] Wiley library online. Available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/polp.12332 (accessed 15/11/2023) 

Schmidt, M (2022) The gift of free money: on the indeterminacy of unconditional cash transfers in western Kenya [online] Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. Available at https://rai.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1467-9655.13655 (accessed 29/10/2023) 

Sloman, P (2021) Welfare in a Neoliberal Age: The Politics of Redistributive Market Liberalism [online ] UCL Press, JSTOR available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv1smjwgq.11  (accessed 28/11/2023) 

Stuart, R. (n.d.) GiveDirectly website [online] Available at https://www.givedirectly.org/research-at-give-directly/ (accessed 27/03/2024) 

Stuart, R (2023) ‘Just Giving People Money is Really Effective at Ending Extreme Poverty. So Why Aren’t Big Aid Agencies Embracing Cash Transfers?’ UN dispatch [podcast] 3 April. Available at https://undispatch.com/just-giving-people-money-is-really-effective-at-ending-extreme-poverty-so-why-arent-big-aid-agencies-embracing-cash-transfers-rory-stewart/ (accessed 12^th September 2023). 

Siachiwena, H (2022) International donors, domestic politics, and the expansion of social cash transfers in Malawi [online] online Wylie library, development policy review. Available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/dpr.12660 (accessed 02/12/2023) 

Tyagi, V; Webber, S (2020) A rusting gold standard: Failures in an Indonesian RCT, and the implications for poverty reduction [online] Sage journals. Available at https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0308518X20971638 (accessed 19/10/2023) 

Whiteford, P. (2023) What Difference Does Government Make? Measuring Redistribution in a Comparative Perspective [online]. ANU press, JSTOR. Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/j.ctt6wp80q.23.pdf?refreqid=fastly-default%3Ad0d4fadf54570250bb0dabd560fd2858&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&origin=&initiator=search-results&acceptTC=1