This part presents the theories and conceptual issues as well as the empirical reviews that drive the study. With respect to the theories, cultural theory of poverty, the entitlement theory and human capital theory form the theoretical framework of the study; thus, laying the foundation for this research. The combination of these theories was necessary because each one of them alone is insufficient in explaining beneficiaries’ utilisation of social cash transfers. They, therefore, complemented each other in illuminating the usage of LEAP grant.
As to the cultural theory of poverty, it postulates that both the poor and the rich have diverse forms of values, dogmas and behavioural norms (Gajdosikienë, 2004; Sameti, Esfahani & Haghighi, 2012). …show more content…
Royce submits that education is crucial to a person being triumphant and its absence triggers poverty. The assertion that scholarship is the primary aspect to enhance human capital (Kwon, 2009) is, therefore, appropriate. Ogujiuba, Obi and Dike (2011) have also advanced that people differ in their investment in education and training as it is dependent on their anticipated gains. According to Ogujiuba et al., the difference in attitude towards investing in education and training is due to the cost consideration. As a result, only those who will be remunerated by amply greater lifespan earnings will go ahead to invest; these, mostly, are the youth (Davis & Sanchez-Martinez, 2014; Ogujiuba et al., 2011). The theory also holds that disparities in earnings relate to divergences in productivity (Royce, 2009). Considering the assertions that investment in education influences earnings, it serves as a basis for examining LEAP beneficiaries’ utilisation of grant for children’s educational …show more content…
Soares et al. (2008) for example, noted that beneficiaries of the Paraguayan Tekoporã cash transfers programme did not spend all their grants on consumables, but saved some and invested them in income generating activities. According to Soares et al., the beneficiaries invested in both farm and non-farm enterprises. Similarly, Mutambara (2011) reports that in Zimbabwe, beneficiaries of the cash transfer scheme also invested some of their stipend in petty trading. As pertains to Ghana, Joha (2012) also indicates that beneficiaries of LEAP invest a fraction of their cash transfer into guinea fowl farming. Utilisation of the transfer from a social cash programme influences the pace at which beneficiaries’ poverty will reduce and their eventually exit from such schemes, if exit is conditioned on the attainment of programme objectives. This typology of utilisation of the grant ensures that the beneficiaries earn extra income to finance their consumption and it as well promotes self-sufficiency. The succeeding section presents the methodology that underpins the
As to the cultural theory of poverty, it postulates that both the poor and the rich have diverse forms of values, dogmas and behavioural norms (Gajdosikienë, 2004; Sameti, Esfahani & Haghighi, 2012). …show more content…
Royce submits that education is crucial to a person being triumphant and its absence triggers poverty. The assertion that scholarship is the primary aspect to enhance human capital (Kwon, 2009) is, therefore, appropriate. Ogujiuba, Obi and Dike (2011) have also advanced that people differ in their investment in education and training as it is dependent on their anticipated gains. According to Ogujiuba et al., the difference in attitude towards investing in education and training is due to the cost consideration. As a result, only those who will be remunerated by amply greater lifespan earnings will go ahead to invest; these, mostly, are the youth (Davis & Sanchez-Martinez, 2014; Ogujiuba et al., 2011). The theory also holds that disparities in earnings relate to divergences in productivity (Royce, 2009). Considering the assertions that investment in education influences earnings, it serves as a basis for examining LEAP beneficiaries’ utilisation of grant for children’s educational …show more content…
Soares et al. (2008) for example, noted that beneficiaries of the Paraguayan Tekoporã cash transfers programme did not spend all their grants on consumables, but saved some and invested them in income generating activities. According to Soares et al., the beneficiaries invested in both farm and non-farm enterprises. Similarly, Mutambara (2011) reports that in Zimbabwe, beneficiaries of the cash transfer scheme also invested some of their stipend in petty trading. As pertains to Ghana, Joha (2012) also indicates that beneficiaries of LEAP invest a fraction of their cash transfer into guinea fowl farming. Utilisation of the transfer from a social cash programme influences the pace at which beneficiaries’ poverty will reduce and their eventually exit from such schemes, if exit is conditioned on the attainment of programme objectives. This typology of utilisation of the grant ensures that the beneficiaries earn extra income to finance their consumption and it as well promotes self-sufficiency. The succeeding section presents the methodology that underpins the