This paper critically examines Conditional Cash Transfers (CCTs), a development intervention which provides mothers of school-age children in extreme poverty with a cash subsidy conditional on their children’s attendance at school and health clinics. The paper uses evaluations of CCTs in order to assess the evidence for their claim to empower women. It analyses the assumptions underlying the definitions of empowerment used in the evaluations, including that stipends give women increased economic autonomy which in turn leads to higher status and greater decision-making power. It also advances alternative measures of empowerment – for example, whether or not CCPs have contributed to a reduction in domestic violence. The paper is based particularly on insights from the well established Mexican CCT programme Progresa/Oportunidades. The programme seeks to strengthen mothers’ responsibilities for children’s health and education and to improve the nutritional status of children.
The paper argues that:
– Claims that CCTs empower women are weakly supported by the evidence. Some studies indicate that they have led to conflict in households and violence against women. Others note that transferring money to women directly does not alter their role in decision-making over household expenditure.
– CCTs reinforce assumptions that it is primarily women’s role to ensure their children go to school and are properly looked after.
The paper calls for programme design to challenge existing gender norms, particularly the way in which care responsibilities are so often considered the natural domain of women. This not only limits opportunities for women; it also marginalises men who are or would like to be more involved in care-giving.