Abstract
What is the relationship between money and freedom? This is the broad question that this book addresses. It does so by examining the Bolsa Família, or Family Fund, the Brazilian conditional cash transfer programme that has gained much international attention. Additionally, it addresses the question as to cash transfers to very poor mothers (biological or adoptive), an issue which relates to how women’s freedom is affected by a regular monthly allowance.
The book is divided into five chapters. The first two are dedicated to theoretical issues and the clarification of key concepts. The authors work within the critical theory paradigm and discuss interesting concepts such as ‘social poverty’, ‘negative justice’ and ‘humiliation’ as the parameters to evaluate the impact of the cash allowance on women’s freedom and development possibilities, in a general sense, mainly through the lenses of the approaches of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum.
The third chapter is the ‘heart’ of the book. It synthesizes over 150 open interviews, conducted between 2006 and 2011 with beneficiary mothers of Brazil’s poorest regions—situated mainly in rural areas with difficult access to big cities and capitals. To entitle intentionally this chapter as ‘the heart’ of the book implies giving priority to unveiling the feelings of those mothers. This is interesting because it brings a humane aspect to the issue. The narratives may be especially interesting for an international public that may not be aware of Brazil’s deep social inequalities and injustices. Characteristic of this condition is the authors’ failure to run a survey with closed-ended questionnaires, due to the high illiteracy levels of the interviewees. Interviewees also had difficulty to express themselves in person, that is, they were not able to understand basic questions, which in turn led the authors to opt for a more informal conversation in order to capture impressions and perceptions. This subjective component was also important to the research design, because, by dealing with gender issues, the authors sought to grasp the impact of the regular allowances on women’s self-esteem. It is important to mention that the authors make an effort not to turn the analysis into a psychological one. Their intent is to understand if the money allowance would distance them from humiliation, which is a form of social oppression, in the terms of the concept used.
The fourth chapter briefly discusses poverty in Brazil, exploring it as a pluridimensional phenomenon. It also highlights the rights that were formally conquered with the 1988 Federal Constitution (after the dictatorship of 1964–1985) and their lack of enforcement. Arguing that constitutions are also a long-term plan, the authors conclude, through the interviews, that Bolsa Família is an efficient, although not sufficient, way to cope with poverty in its many facets.
A large part of the analysis that leads to that conclusion is done in the fifth chapter, where Leão Walquíria Rego and Alessandro Pinzani assess the relationship between money and autonomy. Based on the interviews, they point to 10 problems which Bolsa Família help to alleviate: (a) lack of basic conditions for a healthy life, such as sufficient food; (b) irregular income due to sporadic jobs; (c) high birth rates; (d) many accidents; (e) lack of credit; (f) invisibility and lack of voice; (g) inequalities inside the families; (h) shame; (i) child labour and school evasion and (j) the culture of resignation. How can the program tackle all the highlighted problems in various manners? The authors conclude that money’s material fungibility and social meaning are critical factors.
It is important to stress that with regard to the gender issue, the regular allowance grants more independence and self-confidence to women, which, for instance, gives them courage to leave violent husbands. The researchers identified that allocating the allowance to mothers seems to be a wise decision, as they tend to use the cash in the interest of the family (save for minor exceptions), usually buying food and school supplies for the children.
To summarize, the authors’ conclusion is that the program contributes dramatically to the construction of some basic capabilities that allow women to exercise basic individual rights, to gain more social respect in their families and communities, and to have more political autonomy. Additionally, as the program is designed to keep children in school and to immunize them, it enables mothers to make a greater civic and social contribution to society. The authors also point out some of the program’s administrative and bureaucratic problems, as well as one interesting negative and unintended consequence regarding nutrition. Because of the extra money, some mothers buy more industrialized foods, such as sweet cookies and snacks. Those foods make kids happier, and so the mothers become more satisfied, because feeding children industrialized foods is related to acquiring a higher social status. The authors also criticize the program’s personalist attachment to former President Lula. Their evaluation is, nonetheless, overwhelmingly positive. Rego and Pinzani consider Bolsa Família as an urgent and necessary policy both in social and moral terms.