000			04051cam a22004694a 4500
001			musev2_99671
003			MdBmJHUP
005			20240815120853.0
006			m o d
007			cr||||||||nn|n
008			211115t20222022miu o 00 0 eng d
020			_a9780472902774
020			_z9780472132928
020			_z9780472038978
020			_z9780472129805
035			_a(OCoLC)1285295990
040			_aMdBmJHUP _cMdBmJHUP
100	1		_aBorges, Fabián A., _eauthor.
245	1	0	_aHuman Capital versus Basic Income : _bIdeology and Models for Anti-Poverty Programs in Latin America / _cFabián A. Borges.
264		1	_aAnn Arbor, Michigan : _bUniversity of Michigan Press, _c2022.
264		3	_aBaltimore, Md. : _bProject MUSE, _c2022
264		4	_c©2022.
300			_a1 online resource: _billustrations
336			_atext _btxt _2rdacontent
337			_acomputer _bc _2rdamedia
338			_aonline resource _bcr _2rdacarrier
506	0		_aOpen Access _fUnrestricted online access _2star
520	3		_a"Latin America underwent two major transformations during the 2000s: the widespread election of left-leaning presidents (the so-called left turn) and the diffusion of conditional cash transfer programs (CCTs)—innovative social programs that award regular stipends to poor families on the condition that their children attend school. Combining cross-national quantitative research covering the entire region and in-depth case studies based on field research, Human Capital versus Basic Income: Ideology and Models of Anti-Poverty Programs in Latin America challenges the conventional wisdom that these two transformations were unrelated. In this book, author Fabián A. Borges demonstrates that this ideology greatly influenced both the adoption and design of CCTs. There were two distinct models of CCTs: a “human capital” model based on means-tested targeting and strict enforcement of program conditions, exemplified by the program launched by Mexico’s right, and a more universalistic “basic income” model with more permissive enforcement of conditionality, exemplified by Brazil’s program under Lula. These two models then spread across the region. Whereas right and center governments, with assistance from international financial institutions, enacted CCTs based on the human capital model, the left, with assistance from Brazil, enacted CCTs based on the basic income model. The existence of two distinct types of CCTs and their relation to ideology is supported by quantitative analyses covering the entire region and in-depth case studies based on field research in three countries. Left-wing governments operate CCTs that cover more people and spend more on those programs than their center or right-wing counterparts. Beyond coverage, a subsequent analysis of the 10 national programs adopted after Lula’s embrace of CCTs confirms that program design—evaluated in terms of scope of the target population, strictness of conditionality enforcement, and stipend structure—is shaped by government ideology. This finding is then fleshed out through case studies of the political processes that culminated in the adoption of basic income CCTs by left-wing governments in Argentina and Bolivia and a human capital CCT by a centrist president in Costa Rica."
588			_aDescription based on print version record.
650		7	_aEconomic policy. _2fast _0(OCoLC)fst00902025
650		7	_aEconomic assistance, Domestic. _2fast _0(OCoLC)fst00901671
650		7	_aBasic income. _2fast _0(OCoLC)fst00948803
650		0	_aBasic income _zLatin America.
650		0	_aEconomic assistance, Domestic _zLatin America.
651		7	_aLatin America. _2fast _0(OCoLC)fst01245945
651		0	_aLatin America _xEconomic policy.
655		7	_aElectronic books. _2local
710	2		_aMichigan Publishing (University of Michigan), _epublisher.
710	2		_aProject Muse. _edistributor
830		0	_aBook collections on Project MUSE.
856	4	0	_zFull text available: _uhttps://muse.jhu.edu/book/99671/
999			_c235397 _d235396