The Politics of Social Cash Transfers Implementation: Insights from the Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty Programme in Ghana.

Social protection has become legitimised and embedded in the politics of many

developing countries as a means to address poverty and social exclusion; and

it has found favour across different political ideology adherents. This, in part,

is due to recognition of its importance to help stabilise society through social

safety-nets. However, this is not without challenges. This paper investigated the

politics of social intervention implementation, utilization of transfer funds, and

whether or not such programmes influence citizens’ sense of loyalty and ability

to criticise government, with a focus on the Livelihood Empowerment Against

Poverty (LEAP) in Ghana. The study was conducted through qualitative semi-

structured interviews in two districts in the central region of Ghana. Findings

show that information and access to the programme was fairly available to all,

and cash transfer funds were used for food, care of orphans and grandchildren,

health expenses, security for loans, small businesses and home repairs. Findings

also indicate that participation in programme did influence perception and sense

of attachment to the state positively. However, whereas some beneficiaries felt

constrained in their ability to criticise government, others were prepared to do

so regardless of benefits received. Thus, it concludes that social interventions

may limit the ‘exercise of voice’ but do not shut it down entirely; this remains an

important finding for social interventions policy and democracy promotion.