9
3. Strategies and arrangements for cash transfers that aim to reduce poverty
amongst women and contribute
to their empowerment
In this part, we consider whether there are specific strategies, measures and arrange- ments in the cash transfer system in South Africa that are aimed at reducing pov-
erty amongst women and that contribute to the economic empowerment of women. Constitutionally speaking, women and men are equal before the law in South Africa, and
unfair discrimination is prohibited. Cash transfers are gender-neutral and not necessar- ily aimed at reducing poverty amongst and enhancing empowerment of women per se.
Nevertheless, cash transfers in South Africa are indirectly related to the well-being and empowerment of women, but in two contradictory ways. On the one hand, more women
than men receive grants, and therefore it is often implied that women benefit more from social assistance Section 3.1. As discussed later e.g. sections 5.1 and 5.4, cash
transfers increase the incomes of women, which in turn may enhance their economic decision-making power within the households. On the other hand, it is also argued that
social grants, particularly the CSG, reinforce traditional gender roles and therefore leave women in a subordinate position in society Section 3.2. Thus, although cash trans-
fers improve women’s control of household expenditures, and have been shown to be associated with positive employment outcomes for some women, they can also be seen
to support a traditional view of women as caregivers, thus detracting attention from the economic burden that women carry as providers for their households and the barriers
they experience with regard to entering formal labour markets. We elaborate on these two trends in the following section.
3.1. Gender-neutral but reaching more women
The Child Support Grant is quite innovative in its design, as it encompasses two con- cepts that are gender-neutral yet cognizant of the South African situation: the concepts
of “follow the child” and “primary caregiver”. The idea is that the grant follows the child in that the child is the immediate beneficiary, yet the recipient of the CSG is the
primary caregiver, who is defined as the person who takes primary responsibility for the child. This design takes into consideration the complex household structures in poorer
households in South Africa where mothers are not always able to live with the child for instance due to the need to migrate for work Budlender and Woolard, 2006; Lund,
2006b. Of course, the policy designers hoped that most caregivers would be the bio- logical mother or father of the child, and that is indeed the case, with the large majority
of CSG applicants claiming to be the mother Lund, 2008b.
In cases where a CSG recipient is not the biological mother, she is often the grand- mother, aunt or other female relative of the child Budlender and Lund, 2011; Vorster