{"title":"Cash and in-kind transfers in India: contexts, preferences and evidence","authors":"Aurolipsa Das, Narayan Sethi","doi":"10.1108/ijse-03-2023-0158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Since the last decade, debates regarding the efficiency and effectiveness of the forms of transfer, i.e. in the form of in-kind or cash transfers, have been gaining momentum. This paper aims to explore the preferences revealed by the beneficiaries, the role of contextual conditions in moulding these preferences, factors associated with the transfer scheme that defines the preferences and the rationale behind such responses. Design/methodology/approach The study conducted involves primary data collected from an Indian state, Odisha. 308 beneficiaries of the Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS) were interviewed concerning specific objectives in a rural district (Mayurbhanj) and another highly urbanised district (Khordha). Findings The comparative results show that the strength of the contextual conditions significantly influences the preferences of the beneficiaries in the rural district as compared to the effect on the beneficiaries of the urban district. Education seems to have an insignificant impact in rural areas. However, income and standard of living have positive significant effects on shaping the preferences for cash or in-kind transfers. Originality/value Examining the strength of the contextual conditions and emphasising beneficiaries' perspectives would stimulate a better understanding of the implementation of the proposed quasi-Universal Basic Income. The study would hence, be instrumental in dealing with the transition towards cash transfers in the Indian context where the co-responsibility of both stakeholders, the government and the beneficiaries, should be given equal weightage. Peer review The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/IJSE-03-2023-0158","PeriodicalId":47714,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ECONOMICS","volume":"113 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ECONOMICS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijse-03-2023-0158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose Since the last decade, debates regarding the efficiency and effectiveness of the forms of transfer, i.e. in the form of in-kind or cash transfers, have been gaining momentum. This paper aims to explore the preferences revealed by the beneficiaries, the role of contextual conditions in moulding these preferences, factors associated with the transfer scheme that defines the preferences and the rationale behind such responses. Design/methodology/approach The study conducted involves primary data collected from an Indian state, Odisha. 308 beneficiaries of the Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS) were interviewed concerning specific objectives in a rural district (Mayurbhanj) and another highly urbanised district (Khordha). Findings The comparative results show that the strength of the contextual conditions significantly influences the preferences of the beneficiaries in the rural district as compared to the effect on the beneficiaries of the urban district. Education seems to have an insignificant impact in rural areas. However, income and standard of living have positive significant effects on shaping the preferences for cash or in-kind transfers. Originality/value Examining the strength of the contextual conditions and emphasising beneficiaries' perspectives would stimulate a better understanding of the implementation of the proposed quasi-Universal Basic Income. The study would hence, be instrumental in dealing with the transition towards cash transfers in the Indian context where the co-responsibility of both stakeholders, the government and the beneficiaries, should be given equal weightage. Peer review The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/IJSE-03-2023-0158
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Social Economics publishes original and peer-reviewed theoretical and empirical research in the field of social economics. Its focus is on the examination and analysis of the interaction between economic activity, individuals and communities. Social economics focuses on the relationship between social action and economies, and examines how social and ethical norms influence the behaviour of economic agents. It is inescapably normative and focuses on needs, rather than wants or preferences, and considers the wellbeing of individuals in communities: it accepts the possibility of a common good rather than conceiving of communities as merely aggregates of individual preferences and the problems of economics as coordinating those preferences. Therefore, contributions are invited which analyse and discuss well-being, welfare, the nature of the good society, governance and social policy, social and economic justice, social and individual economic motivation, and the associated normative and ethical implications of these as they express themselves in, for example, issues concerning the environment, labour and work, education, the role of families and women, inequality and poverty, health and human development.