approach to the program prevents it from being so. A critical examination reveals
that 59% of the poor were excluded from PBF and 70% from Opportunidades, while
49% of the beneficiaries of PBF and 36% of Opportunidades were found to be
non-poor. Targeting issues connected with CCTs lead to under-coverage and
inclusions of the non-poor while administrative costs reach up to 30% of the
transfer (Saad-Filho, 2014). This passive approach brings poor into the market
as buyers and plays no role in changing the structures of poverty.
Socio-economic and political injustices on the basis of religion or caste that
enable market exclusion need to be addressed before the upward trajectory of
the poor can be materialized and made sustainable. This is only possible where
poverty is recognized as multidimensional and efforts to reduce it include
aspects of social justice and universal protection rather than simply injecting
minimum resources at the household level (Deavearux and McGreggor, 2014).