Social Contracts for Development: Bargaining, Contention, and Social Inclusion in Sub-Saharan Africa

Abstract

Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved.

Follow the hand that feeds you? The effects of non‐governmental cash transfers on citizenship

“…Likewise other low‐income country contexts (Plagerson et al, 2012), definitions and experiences of citizenship are embedded in multifaceted boundaries between individual and collective identities (Thompson & Tapscott, 2011), emerging from particular historical contingencies and spatialities, and moulded by factors such as ethnicity and gender, among others (Alava et al, 2019). Comparably to the rest of Sub‐Saharan Africa, furthermore, the recent expansions in social protection are increasingly shaping (and being shaped by) the social contract (Cloutier et al, 2021). At the same time, the rise in NGO presence, attributed to their comparative advantages in a variety of spheres (Lister, 2003) tends to build parallel social contracts at the local level (Bukenya, 2016).…”

“…Comparably to the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa, furthermore, the recent expansions in social protection are increasingly shaping (and being shaped by) the social contract (Cloutier et al, 2021). At the same time, the rise in NGO presence, attributed to their comparative advantages in a variety of spheres (Lister, 2003) tends to build parallel social contracts at the local level (Bukenya, 2016).…”

“…As social protection represents a key element of the social contract (Kabeer et al, 2010; Roberts, 2012), and CT themselves are perceived as a state‐citizen contract (Plagerson et al, 2012), these programs could—if implemented correctly and transparently—strengthen citizens/recipients' commitment to the social contract and potentially lead to improvements in the perceived legitimacy of the state. Nevertheless, negative influences of cash handouts on citizenship‐related indicators are also possible (Hevia, 2016; Roberts, 2012), often because of flaws in programs' design (Alik‐Lagrange et al, 2021; Cloutier et al, 2021). In other words, social protection maintains a privileged role in shaping beneficiaries' citizenship (Plagerson et al, 2012; Sabates‐Wheeler et al, 2020).…”

“…In summary, even though the available evidence is limited and not always consistent, it is argued that non‐governmental social assistance programs like CTs could yield several effects 2 on citizenship (Table 1): As the implementing NGO partially ‘substitutes' itself to the government in social service provision, the perception of NGOs' legitimacy could increase (Banks et al, 2015; Fowler, 1991); At the same time, whereas governmental legitimacy could potentially deteriorate (Schuller, 2009; White, 1999), the direction of the latter effect is less clearly individuated by the related literature; The interactions with non‐governmental agents are likely to intensify due to the CT (in varying magnitudes, depending on program design characteristics; Cloutier et al, 2021); Finally, an improvement in NGO‐citizen relations could potentially come at the expense of state‐citizen interactions . Nevertheless, as the experience of state‐citizen interactions is closely linked to individuals' perceptions of the state (Plagerson et al, 2012), and given the scarce and mixed (positive and null) empirical evidence on the dimension, we hypothesise, similarly to state perceptions, an unclear effect. …”

“…The interactions with non-governmental agents are likely to intensify due to the CT (in varying magnitudes, depending on program design characteristics;Cloutier et al, 2021); Analytical framework: hypothesised effects of non-governmental CTs on citizenship.…”