Indignity in Cash Transfers

The Senior Citizen’s Grant in Uganda

in The International Journal of Social Quality
View More View Less
  • 1 Makerere University gbantebya@yahoo.com
Restricted access

Abstract

Although development policy approaches in Uganda and elsewhere have changed over time, many of them share a failure to consider and respond to the potential for shaming, given the persistent presence of social norms and practices shaped by poverty. Research evidence of the lived experiences and practices of the providers and beneficiaries of the Senior Citizens’ Grant (SCG) antipoverty measure had spaces and a process of dignity building and shaming. The overriding policy implication that antipoverty policymakers need to be aware of is that antipoverty policies that create spaces for poverty shaming are counterproductive and less than optimally effective in achieving antipoverty objectives than policies that impart a sense of dignity in the participants. The latter kind of policies has a greater capacity to deliver on antipoverty objectives by recognizing the participants’ rights and promoting their human dignity, equitable participation, social inclusion, political voice, and individual or collective agency.

Contributor Notes

Grace Bantebya Kyomuhendo is a Professor in the School of Women and Gender Studies at Makerere University Uganda, a distinguished social anthropologist, and an experienced trainer researcher and advocate for gender equality and social transformation. She has published widely, including the collection, coedited with Elaine Chaste, Poverty and Shame: Global Experiences (Oxford University Press, 2015).

The International Journal of Social Quality

(formerly The European Journal of Social Quality)

  • Alkire, S. 2002. Valuing Freedoms: Sen’s Capability Approach and Poverty Reduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Chase, E., and G. Bantebya Kyomuhendo, eds. 2014. Poverty and Shame: Global Experiences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Fraser, N. 2005.“Reframing Justice in a Global World.” New Left Review 36: 6888.

  • Gubrium, E., and I. Lødemel. 2014.“Relative Poverty in a Rich Welfare State: Experiences from Norway.” In Chase and Bantebya Kyomuhendo 2014: 188201.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gubrium, E., S. Pellisery, and I. Lødemel, eds. 2013. The Shame of It: Global Perspectives on Anti-poverty Policies. Bristol: Policy Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lister, R. 2004. Poverty. Cambridge: Polity Press.

  • Lynd, H.M. (1958) 1999. On Shame and the Search for Identity. London: Routledge.

  • Republic of Uganda. 2014. Poverty Status Report 2014: Structural Changes and Poverty Reduction. Kampala: Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Scheff, T. 2000. “Shame and the Social Bond.” Sociological Theory 18: 8498.

  • Sen, A. 1983.“Poor, Relatively Speaking.”Oxford Economic Papers 35: 153169.

  • Walker, R., G. Bantebya Kyomuhendo, E. Chase, S. Choudry, E.K. Gubrium, J.Y. Nicola, I. Lødemel, et al. 2013.“Poverty in Global Perspective: Is Shame a Common Denominator?Journal of Social Policy 42 (2): 215233.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 11 11 5
Full Text Views 9 9 0
PDF Downloads 2 2 0