Typology
Social Transfers in the form of pure income transfers such as pensions or child support benefits; combined with other services such as primary education, health and nutrition, or within an integrated poverty reduction programme, are increasingly being adopted by developing countries as part of a broader framework of social protection to support vulnerable groups against different kids of extreme deprivation. A growing body of empirical research throws light on the advantages and disadvantages of key features transfers. Common ground is emerging demonstrating the ability of transfers to reach the intended beneficiaries even in the most adverse conditions.
The role of social transfers in tackling poverty appear to go beyond supporting short-term consumption, and in several countries they aim at facilitating longer-term and multidimensional human development. This entails a shift in approach, from dealing with transitory income shortfalls to addressing the various causes of persistent deprivation, which in parallel reflects a goal of breaking down potential poverty traps rather than simply focusing on poverty alleviation. This approach is commonly found in the form of income transfers conditional upon human capital investment. Mexico’s Oportunidades programme and Brazil’s Bolsa Familia are the earliest examples of this kind.
Social pensions are pure income transfers, which have become an important component within the framework of social protection in countries such as South Africa, Brazil and Bangladesh. Social transfers are also important components within integrated poverty reduction programmes in Chile where a range of interventions combine to address shortfalls along seven dimensions of wellbeing among the extreme poor.
A growing number of studies points to positive and significant impacts of social transfers on poverty and well being. Special attention has been paid to the analysis of direct impacts, particularly on children, since they are perceived as effective channels to breaking down the inter-generational poverty trap that causes chronic poverty, although other studies also look at wider impact routes that affect the household. Static approaches to poverty analysis are dominant in impact assessment. This is not surprising. After all, poverty and welfare measures are well developed for the static case. Not least important is the fact that for empirical work, longitudinal survey data, which is ideally the best possible option for studying dynamic poverty (and well being), are scarce in most developing countries. However, emerging longitudinal household surveys from a small group of developing countries offer the opportunity to explore pioneering dynamic measures of chronic poverty.