Power, and how it is exercised within social relations is pivotal in explaining policy change. However, its analysis as an explanatory variable in understanding social protection policy uptake processes in developing countries remains unexplored. Using two cases of cash transfer programmes in Kenya, we examine the dynamics of power relations in the uptake of social protection policies. This article contributes to recent scholarship examining the adoption process in African countries but in departure demonstrates that asymmetrical power relations between actors are/have been central to the uptake of the programmes. The study found that within social relations in the policy space, agents exercised power in three ways. First, by controlling the policy agenda by insertion of experts; second, by excluding other actors through a process of depoliticisation; and third, by influencing the preference of domestic actors through social learning.

Policymaking is no longer exclusively a national affair. Due to globalisation, global agendas easily influence and permeate national plans through policy transfer, diffusion and learning. One such recent global agenda is social protection policies in the form of cash transfers. Studies examining the process of adoption and making of such policies portray a benign learning approach. However, these approaches represent an incomplete view of the dynamics that characterise the adoption of policies. Social protection policymaking arenas are sites of power and resistance which are mutually constituted and exhibited through various forms. Drawing from the nexus of policy transfer and power, this article investigates the forms of power and resistance in the social protection policymaking space by examining the Cash Transfer for Orphans and Vulnerable Children (CT-OVC) and the Hunger Safety Net Programme (HSNP) in Kenya. The findings indicate that, as international actors attempted to impose their agendas, political elites resisted in two ways: firstly, by suppressing the action of other actors, and secondly, by asserting alternatives in the policy process. The findings suggest that even in enduring asymmetrical social relations, ‘subordinate’ actors in policy development arenas find space to exercise power through resistance, and exhibit the capacity to influence processes.  Marion Ouma, South Africa Research Chairs Initiative (SARChl): Social Policy, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa. Email: marion.ouma@gmail.com

The mandate of the institute is to undertake applied research and policy analysis on structural changes affecting developing and transitional economies, to provide a forum for the advocacy of policies leading to robust, equitable, and environmentally sustainable growth, and to promote capacity strengthening and training in the field of economic and social policy-making. Its work is carried out by staff researchers and visiting scholars in Helsinki and via networks of collaborating scholars and institutions around the world.

No abstract