Conditional Cash Transfer Programmes in Brazil, Argentina and Scotland: A comparative analysis of their conceptions

Abstract

This article compares three Conditional Cash Transfer Programs (CCTPs), the Bolsa Família Program, the Asignación Universal por Hijo, and the Universal Credit, in Brazil, Argentina, and Scotland, respectively, from the perspective of their conceptions and meanings. The methodology used is policy analysis, focusing on the political and ideological contexts in which these policies were formulated. Their objectives, conceptions, and arguments that guide the selection of beneficiaries and conditionalities are analyzed and compared. In the three countries, CCTPs have become the primary strategy for combating poverty in the context of fiscal austerity. In Argentina and Brazil, with historical deficits in access to social rights, the programs have reduced the worst rates of income poverty and expanded social inclusion through conditionalities in health and education. They have represented a movement to combat inequalities without changes in the structural conditions that sustain them. In Scotland, Universal Credit broke with the universalist conception of welfare, of meeting people's basic needs, a retraction of social assistance, with a punitive logic aimed at behavioral changes among the poorest, with adverse effects, especially on the most vulnerable populations.