631601

research-article2016
ISW0010.1177/0020872816631601International Social WorkReininger et al.

Article i s w

International Social Work

1­–13
Conditional cash transfers: © The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
Social work and eradicating sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0020872816631601
poverty in Chile isw.sagepub.com

Taly Reininger
Universidad Andres Bello, Chile

Borja Castro-Serrano
Universidad Andres Bello, Chile

Marcela Flotts
Universidad Andres Bello, Chile

Mónica Vergara
Universidad Andres Bello, Chile

Ana Fuentealba
Universidad Andres Bello, Chile

Abstract
The following article revises conditional cash transfers (CCTs) in Latin America, followed by
an examination of the history of poverty reduction programs in Chile since the 1960s and the
installation of CCT programs in the country with a particular focus on the role of social work in
their design and implementation. The article concludes with a discussion of the challenges social
work faces in actively participating in the redesign and implementation of the new CCT model
from a human rights and social justice focus.

Keywords
Chile, conditional cash transfers, ethical family wage, Latin America, poverty

Introduction
Since the late 1990s, conditional cash transfer (CCT) programs have been heralded as the ‘magic
bullet’ for overcoming poverty (Adato and Hoddinott, 2007; Bastagli, 2010; Fiszbein and Schady,

Corresponding author:
Taly Reininger, Escuela de Trabajo Social, Universidad Andres Bello, Av. Republica 252, Santiago de Chile, Chile.
Email: treininger@unab.cl
Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016
2 International Social Work 

2009; Smith et al., 2013). Originating in Latin America, CCT programs have now begun to spread
throughout the developing world, with new programs sprouting rapidly in Asia as well as in parts
of Africa (Fiszbein and Schady, 2009).
The widespread adoption and exponential growth of CCTs are largely due to the publication of
the positive effects of CCTs on health and educational outcomes as well as dominant political eco-
nomic ideologies that seek maximum program efficiency (Adato and Hoddinott, 2007). Fiszbein
and Schady (2009) also attribute the popularity of CCTs to the wide versatility of the program
model, which allows countries to specifically tailor programs according to the particular country’s
context. Such is the case, for example, of the Cash Transfer for Orphans and Vulnerable Children
in Kenya that targets orphans of HIV/AIDS, and the Female Secondary School Assistance program
in Bangladesh that specifically seeks to increase female education in the country.
The CCT program Puente, or Bridge Program in English, developed in Chile in 2006, has also been
identified as an innovative approach to cash transfers due to its family psychosocial accompaniment
component (Fiszbein and Schady, 2009; Larrañaga et al., 2014; Martorano and Sanfilippo, 2012).
Nevertheless, despite its innovative focus, recent political and economic developments in Chile have
led to a redesign of the Chilean CCT program. The following article revises CCTs in Latin America,
followed by an examination of the history of poverty reduction programs in Chile since the 1960s and
the installation of CCT programs in the country with a particular focus on the role of social work in
their design and implementation. The article concludes with a discussion of the challenges social
work faces in actively participating in the redesign and implementation of the new CCT model.

CCTs in Latin America

In 2013, according to data from the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
(CEPAL, 2014), 28.1 percent of the population in Latin America lived in poverty with 11.7 percent
living in situations of extreme poverty. These percentages amount to 165 million people living in
poverty in the region. Despite Latin America’s vast geographic terrain, the countries within the
region share similar political, social, and cultural histories, facilitating the rapid and vast expansion
of CCTs in the region.
Latin America has historically been characterized by its permanent and relatively high levels
of poverty and inequality. The region’s developmental pattern can be traced back to colonial times
in which wealth through land ownership and political power was accumulated by a few, leading
to the entrenchment of the systematic inequality visible in the region to this day (Ferreira and
Walton, 2004; Huber et al., 2006). Nevertheless, despite the intimate relationship between poverty
and inequality, both have been addressed separately by public policies differencing in objectives,
methodologies and intensity with priority focus being placed on addressing poverty rather than
inequality.
During the 1980s, the debt crisis in the majority of the countries in Latin America led to a strong
restriction in public social spending, which initiated residual and targeted social policies aimed at
eradicating poverty (CEPAL, 2010). With the return to democratic governments in the region after
the installation of various dictatorial regimes, social spending was channeled toward the poor and
vulnerable, which allowed for the implementation of new social policies seeking to balance eco-
nomic growth with social equity. Thus began a new era in the fight against poverty in the region.
CCT programs began to be implemented in the region in the mid 1990s, differing in coverage
and operational implementation (Cecchini and Madariaga, 2011; Fiszbein and Schady, 2009).
According to data from CEPAL (2014), 18 Latin American countries now implement CCT pro-
grams with a coverage of over 25 million families, which translates into approximately 113 million
individuals, or 19 percent of the region’s population. The rapid and vast expansion of CCT programs

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

Reininger et al. 3

Table 1.  Active conditional cash transfer programs in Latin America (15 countries).

Country Program name Start year Coverage 2010 (%)a

Argentina Asignación Universal por Hijo (Universal allocation 2009 8.3
per child)
Bolivia Bono Juacinto Pinto (Juacinto Pinto transfer) 2006 17.5
Bono Madre Niño-Niña (Mother and child transfer) 2009
Brazil Bolsa Familia (Family bag) 2003 26.4
Chile Ingreso Ético Familiar (Ethical family wage) 2011 6.8
Colombia Familias en Acción (Family in action) 2001 25.2
Red Juntos (Together network) 2007
Subsidio condicionado a la asistencia escolar 2005
(Conditional transfer for school attendance)
Ecuador Bono Desarrollo Humano (Human development 2003 44.3
transfer)
El Salvador Comunidades Solidarias Rurales (Solidarity in rural 2005 8.2
communities)
Guatemala Mi Familia Progresa (My family progresses) 2008 22.6
Honduras Bono 10.000 Educación, Salud y Nutrición (10,000 2010 8.7
Education, health and nutrition transfer)
México Oportunidades (Ex Progresa) (Opportunities) 1997 24.6
Panamá Red de Oportunidades (Opportunity network) 2006 10.9
Paraguay Tekoporá 2005 8.6
Abrazo (Hug) 2005
Perú Juntos (Together) 2005 7.6
Dominican Solidaridad (Solidarity) 2005 21.2
Republic
Uruguay Asignaciones Familiares (Family allocations) 2008 11.6

Source: Cecchini and Madariaga (2011).

aPercentage in comparison with the total population.

in the region reveals the appeal of this policy for reducing poverty in the region. In terms of their
impact, results indicate that CCTs in Latin America tend to bring families closer to the poverty line
rather than overcoming poverty, due to their specific and targeted focus on families living in
extreme poverty (Cecchini and Madariaga, 2011). Table 1 shows the current programs imple-
mented in the region by country, identifying year of initiation as well as coverage.

A brief history of poverty programs in Chile

In comparison with other countries in Latin America, Chile has been distinguished as rapidly
reducing its poverty rate over the last two decades, situating it as one of the countries with the
lowest poverty rate in the region (Fernández, 2015). Despite this positive distinction, Chile has a
turbulent history of social policies aimed at poverty reduction.
In Chile during the late 1960s and early 1970s many of the policies aimed at curbing poverty
had a collective focus that sought to empower disenfranchised communities to actively partake
in their citizenship and improve their well-being (Larrañaga, 2010; Raczynski, 2008). This pro-
gressive focus on poverty reduction was briskly cut short with the military coup of 1973. Policies
during the military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet (1973–1990) greatly reduced and privatized
many arenas that were previously attributed to the state, such as education, social security, and

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

4 International Social Work 

health. The focus of poverty programs changed radically as well, seeking to insert individuals into
the market through employment programs rather than the empowerment of disenfranchised groups.
Emblematic programs implemented during this period were the Minimum Employment Program
(Programa empleo Mínimo (PEM)) initiated in 1975 and the Occupational Program for Heads of
household (Programa de Ocupación para Jefes de Hogar (POJH)), implemented in 1983, which
sought to curb the high unemployment rate through precarious employment insertion at the munic-
ipal level (Larrañaga, 2010).
A second historic development during Pinochet’s dictatorship was the creation of the socioeco-
nomic characterization survey (ficha de caracterización socioeconomic (CAS)) that sought to effi-
ciently identify and target state aid to those in need of or those ‘worthy of’ state aid (Ruz and
Palma, 2005). These programs were insufficient in adequately responding to the needs of a grow-
ing poor population and in 1990, when Chile began its transition to a democratically elected
government, the country registered close to a 40 percent poverty rate (Denis et al., 2010).
The return of democracy in 1990 marked a sharp paradigm shift with regard to state programs
aimed at reducing poverty. The government announced the objective of striving toward greater
equality and social justice, not only targeting priority groups such as children, youth, female heads
of household, ethnic minorities, older adults, and people with disabilities (Ruz and Palma, 2005),
but also with a focus on human rights and active citizen participation (Raczynski, 2008). Nevertheless,
while the poverty rate presented a constant reduction from 1990 to 2006, the indigent rate, or extreme
poverty, remained stagnant. It was due to the stagnation of extreme poverty that in 2006, the Lagos
presidency (2000–2006) announced the creation of the Chile Solidarity Social Protection system
(Chile Solidario) whose objective was to address the needs of families living in extreme poverty.
One of the pillars of the Chile Solidario system was the Bridge program (Programa Puente) that
sought the active participation of indigent families in overcoming poverty through their insertion
in the public welfare system (Larrañaga and Contreras, 2010). As shall be discussed in this article,
social work played a central role in the Bridge program. Social workers not only implemented the
program on the ground, but also played a protagonist role in its design, utilizing theories and meth-
ods espoused by the profession as well as a human rights framework (Saracostti, 2008).
Despite its innovative design, however, the Bridge program struggled with various implementa-
tion problems as well as evidence of its effectiveness (Carneiro and Galasso, 2007; Galasso, 2006;
Perticara, 2007; Raczynski, 2008). It was with the arrival of the first right wing government since
the return of the democracy in 2010 that Chile began a redesign of its poverty programs, imple-
menting the Ethical Family Wage program (Ingreso Etico Familiar), which borrowed heavily from
the conditional cash program designs that had been overtaking poverty policy in Latin America and
the rest of the developing world (Fiszbein and Schady, 2009).

Chile Solidario and the Bridge program

The Chile Solidario system was originally created due to the existence of a stagnant and hard
to reach indigent poor population that experienced exclusion from reaping the economic
benefits of Chile’s growing prosperity (Larrañaga and Contreras, 2010; Trucco and Nun,
2008). Under the assumption that families living in extreme poverty experienced exclusion
from public services and programs, the Chile Solidario system was based on three central
components:

1. a psychosocial family support program (Bridge program);

2. preferential access to social welfare programs;
3. guaranteed access to state subsidies.

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

Reininger et al. 5

The Bridge program (programa Puente) was perhaps the most celebrated and innovative aspect
of the Chile Solidario system in that it provided families with an individually tailored psychosocial
support program designed with the family and in coordination with a family support professional
(apoyo familiar). This component of Chile Solidario was designed under the supposition that pov-
erty was a multidimensional phenomenon that required a holistic family-based intervention (Ruz
and Palma, 2005). The Bridge program had a two-year duration in which families were expected
to complete 53 minimum conditions in seven distinct dimensions, which included identification
(i.e. having the necessary state documents), health (i.e. being enrolled in the local health clinic),
education (i.e. children enrolled in school), family dynamics (i.e. participating in family sessions),
housing (i.e. adequate housing), employment (i.e. being employed), and income (i.e. securing the
minimum income required). At the end of the 24 months, participating families were expected to
meet the 53 basic conditions of the program in order to successfully graduate.
Family support professionals played a key role in working with families in order to meet the 53
minimum requirements by establishing a family work contract at the beginning of the program as
well as monitoring their completion. Family support professionals were expected to work with
families in a participatory manner through home visits, developing family skills and empowerment,
as well as assistance in accessing state programs and subsidies. Family support professionals were
considered the ‘entryway’ into the social protection system (Larrañaga and Contreras, 2010; Ruz
and Palma, 2005).
While Chile Solidario was organized in the Ministry of Planning (Ministerio de Planificación),
the implementation of the Bridge program was the responsibility of the solidarity and investment
fund (Fondo de Solidaridad e Inversión Social (FOSIS)) and was put into practice locally in
coordination with municipalities throughout the country. Family support professionals were either
employed directly through FOSIS or employees of the local municipalities. Professionals employed
by FOSIS consisted primarily of professionals or para-professionals from the social sciences,
while in the case of municipalities, family support professionals were not required to comply with
the same professional profile and were often professionals who had been employed in the munici-
palities for many years (Raczynski, 2008).

The role of social work in Chile Solidario and the Bridge program
Social work played a key role in both the design and the implementation of the Bridge program
(Saracostti, 2008). In 2000, the Ministry of Planning, preoccupied with a stagnant indigent rate,
undertook the mission of assessing the situation of families living in situations of extreme poverty
in the country and designing a program in order to meet their needs. The assessment and design
of the new program were led by Veronica Silva, a social worker, head of the social department in
the Ministry of Planning. Several programs run by municipalities and non-governmental organi-
zations (NGOs) were examined in the development stage, and a number of elements were bor-
rowed from programs implemented by Fundación Rodelillo as well as the municipalities of La
Florida and Quillota.
These programs were unique due to their holistic and integral focus in which interventions were
targeted specifically to families living in poverty. Based on these previous experiences, the Bridge
program was designed utilizing social capital, social networks, and crisis intervention as concep-
tual frameworks (Ruz and Palma, 2005), theories, and models widely used in social work.
The role of social workers in the design of the Bridge program was also reflected in its ideologi-
cal values. The program, as well as the larger social protection policy, was devised under a human
rights framework seeking to guarantee families social, economic, and cultural rights. Specifically
the Bridge program, through its mission of informing families of their rights and guaranteeing their

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

6 International Social Work 

preferential access to state services and resources, concretized a human rights approach (Ministerio
de Planificación Social, 2004). While such a human rights focus was an innovation for social poli-
cies and programs in Chile, human rights have been a central and foundational value of the social
work profession (Ife, 2008; International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), 2014). One could
suppose then that the participation of the social work profession in the design of the Bridge program
as well as the social protection system played a role in the adoption of a human rights framework.
Social work also played a key role in the implementation of the Bridge program (Saracostti,
2008). Family support professionals employed by FOSIS were mostly professionals or para-
professionals from the social sciences, with FOSIS openly preferring social workers to assume
this role. It was presumed that social workers had the necessary skills required to work closely
and intimately with families under a crisis intervention model, while using empowerment tech-
niques in order to increase families’ social capital and insertion in the state’s social protection
system (Larrañaga et al., 2014; Ruz and Palma, 2005).
The family support component and the professionals who implemented the program were the
highest evaluated features of the Bridge program (Larrañaga et al., 2014). Families consistently
identified the relationship forged with the family supports, as well as the information obtained from
family supports through home visits, as the aspects they most valued in the program. Participants
who had once qualified the State as distant and uninterested, highly valued the State’s initiative in
forging closer relationships through family support professionals. Personalized home visits not
only permitted tailoring interventions specific to each family’s context but also a space from which
to reflect on their goals and processes (Trucco and Nun, 2008).
Nevertheless, despite their central role in the implementation of the Bridge program, family
support professionals worked under precarious labor conditions. Family support professionals
were paid little and were hired on a part-time basis, thus excluding them from health and security
benefits. Family supports were often expected to attend a caseload of over 70 families without the
necessary infrastructure to do so, specifically lack of transport and technology. Due to the precari-
ous labor conditions, the Bridge program had a very high professional turnover, which restricted to
some degree the relationship that could be forged between participants and family support profes-
sionals (Raczynski, 2008). Other critiques of the program also abounded, centering on the lack of
success in supporting families out of poverty, critiques which ultimately led to the demise of the
program.

Transition and implementation of the Ethical Family Wage

program
The lack of evidence of the efficacy of the Bridge program in reducing extreme poverty (Carneiro
and Galasso, 2007; Galasso, 2006; Hoces et al., 2011; Martorano and Sanfilippo, 2012; Perticara,
2007; Trucco and Nun, 2008) was one of the main reasons for its demise. The election of the first
right wing presidency since the return to democracy was the second instigator of the program’s
decline. Adopting the ‘ethical family wage’ concept originally coined by Cardinal Goic in 2007, in
reference to the need to augment the minimum wage in Chile in order to provide families with a
living wage, Piñera’s right wing government began to promote its new Ethical Family Wage program
(Larrañaga et al., 2014).
The design of the Ethical Family Wage program was initiated during Piñera’s 2009 presidential
campaign. During his campaign, Piñera created a commission assigned the task of developing a
program to ‘end extreme poverty’ during his four-year mandate (2010–2014) (Kast, 2013). The
group assigned the mission was led by Rodrigo Vergara, an economist, and included other profession-
als with similar educational backgrounds (Henoch and Troncoso, 2013). Centered on the argument

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

Reininger et al. 7

that all should have the right to escape poverty through employment and entrepreneurship, the pro-
gram proposal centered its focus on increasing employment options for the poor (Kast, 2013). The
original proposal developed by the commission recommended an extension of the youth employ-
ment subsidy to all those living in poverty, as well as increasing the amount of the monetary family
subsidy. The receipt of the subsidy was, however, conditioned on school attendance and child health
checkups as well as employment training initiatives, borrowing heavily from traditional CCT pro-
gram methodologies (Huneeus and Repetto, 2013).
Taking into consideration the elements proposed by the commission, as well as the positive
evaluations of the psychosocial accompaniment of the Bridge program, the new program expanded
on its bases and included a socio-employment accompaniment component (Hernando, 2013). The
socio-employment component consisted of an individually tailored accompaniment by a profes-
sional in the area of employment-seeking. This professional was to aid the family in accessing
training, employment opportunities, and the development of business entrepreneurships. Socio-
employment professionals and family support professionals were to work in collaboration with
one another, but interventions were to be separate and undertaken by different professionals.
Furthermore, the title used to refer to the roles of family supports was changed to ‘family advisors’,
due to what was considered a transition from a welfare dependency model to one of empowerment
(Kast, 2013). The shift in ideologies between the Bridge program and the Ethical Family Wage
program is perhaps best visualized in this addition of an employment accompaniment component.
Unlike the Bridge program in which the empowerment of families was sought through the psycho-
social accompaniment of the family and incorporation into the public welfare system, in the Ethical
Family Wage program, empowerment was theorized as being a product of inclusion in the market
through formal employment and/or entrepreneurship ventures.
The emphasis on the protagonism of the market with regard to the Ethical Family Wage pro-
gram was also evidenced in the name of the program (including ‘Wage’ in the title versus Bridge
as the previous program name) as well as the increased attention to the cash transfer component
of the program. While the Bridge program also included a cash transfer component, it was mini-
mal in value and not considered a central element to the program. The Ethical Family Wage
program in comparison introduced three separate but complementary categories, or ‘pillars’, of
cash transfers.
The first cash transfer pillar of the Ethical Family Wage program consists of a ‘dignity cash
transfer’ which consists of two separate transfers, the first of which is a ‘base transfer’ per family
and the second, a ‘protection transfer’ calculated per person. The base transfer translates into
approximately US$27 and the per person transfer approximately US$13 per person. The second
pillar, called the ‘duties transfer’, consists of CCTs for healthy child checkups as well as 90 percent
school attendance for elementary and middle school children and 85 percent school attendance for
high school students. The amount for the CCTs translates into approximately US$17 monthly.
Finally, the third pillar of the family wage program constitutes the ‘achievement transfers’, consist-
ing of cash transfers for female employment, school achievement, and high school graduation. The
female employment transfer is a monthly transfer and is calculated based on the wage received by
each woman. The school achievement transfer is a yearly transfer and applies for those children
who are at the top 30 percent (approximately US$63) and top 15 percent (approximately US$104)
of their class. The high school graduation transfer is a single transfer of approximately US$125
(Cecchini et al., 2012).
The Ethical Family Wage program was partially implemented in 2011, under the name of the
Family Allocation program, and in May of 2012 was signed into law as the Ethical Family
Wage program (Hernando, 2013). Critiques and commentaries of the program were quick to
appear. Some argued that it differed little from the Bridge program, since on paper the Bridge

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

8 International Social Work 

program also included CCTs through the family subsidy but those conditions were never
enforced (Hernando, 2013). Others pointed out that the main difference lay in the socio-
employment accompaniment component (Irarrázaval et al., 2012; Larrañaga et al., 2014); how-
ever, concerns were raised on implementing the socio-employment component separately from
the psychosocial accompaniment component due to the fragmentation of services. Concerns
were also raised with regard to the low wages and lack of benefits workers implementing the
psychosocial component faced, an issue that failed to be addressed by the new design of the
program (Irarrázaval et al., 2012). Others critiqued the transfers for school achievement, argu-
ing that it pitted children living in poverty against each other since they were competing against
each other in order to achieve a place in the top 15 and 30 percent of their class (Henoch and
Troncoso, 2013; Irarrázaval et al., 2012). It was also pointed out that in Chile, school attend-
ance was above 85 percent and the coverage of healthy child checkups was relatively high even
before the implementation of the Ethical Family Wage program, thus calling into question the
effectiveness and efficiency of the conditional transfers (Henoch and Troncoso, 2013).

The role of social work in the Ethical Family Wage program

As previously mentioned, the largest differences between the two programs lay in the ideologies
and language used in their designs. While the Bridge program’s underlying premise for overcom-
ing extreme poverty lay in developing social capital and addressing exclusion through the access
to welfare services and psychosocial support, the Ethical Family Wage program was based on the
premise that employment was the only solution to extreme poverty (Kast, 2013). In its initial
design and implementation, proponents of the Family Wage program argued that families living in
extreme poverty should have the ‘liberty’ of choosing their life, that families should overcome
poverty through ‘responsibility’ and individual effort and that the State’s responsibility rested pri-
marily in providing individuals with the tools necessary to make those decisions (Arellano, 2013).
The language used in the program design can be attributed to the economic and business back-
grounds of the majority of the program’s designers, which is a stark difference from the social
sciences background of the Bridge program developers.
A further notorious difference between the Bridge program and its successor was the lack
of a human rights framework. While human rights was a dominant discourse in the Bridge
program, such a focus was notoriously absent from the ethical family wage vocabulary. The
absence of a human rights framework further demonstrates the lack of incidence of social
work in the program’s design.
Social work was not only limited in its role in the design of the Ethical Family Wage program,
but was also delegated and restricted to the sole implementation of the psychosocial component
(family advisors) with some social workers also assuming the new role of the socio-employment
component (employment advisors). Such was the limitation of frontline professionals that the
needs assessments of families, previously undertaken by family support professionals in the
Bridge program, was reassigned to professionals at the Ministry of Social Development (Kast,
2013).
Family interventions were thus pre-established at a central level and delegated for implemen-
tation by frontline municipal professionals. Little if any flexibility was allowed with regard to
Ministry-level established guidelines for interventions. Both family advisor and employment advi-
sor interventions were described in great detail in program manuals, indicating pre-established
family sessions with clear objectives, activities, and expected outcomes (Ministerio de Desarrollo
Social, 2013). Social workers thus became mere implementers of the government’s Ethical Family
Wage Program.

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

Reininger et al. 9

Discussion: Challenges for social work

It is evident that even though the Ethical Family Wage Program shares some similar methodologi-
cal characteristics to the Bridge program, poverty is conceptualized from a different ideological
framework, thus proposing a new strategy for its intervention through the market. Greater empha-
sis is now placed on the cash transfer component of the program as is visible from the program
creation of three distinct types of transfers (dignity, duties, and achievement).
However, this article reveals some of the shortcomings and controversies of CCT programs
in Latin America, specifically in Chile. In the latter, the difficulty posed by ideological differences
in the conceptualization of poverty, and thus the design of interventions, reveals shortcomings in
the country’s developmental model. Chile’s tumultuous political history has led to a paradoxical
democratic process in which socialist governments put into practice neoliberal policies that have
improved macro-economic indicators without eradicating poverty and extreme poverty and have
failed to address the country’s rampant inequality (French-Davis and Stallings, 2001; Raczynski
and Serrano, 2005).
Furthermore, difficulties arise due to the changes in government coalitions and the changes in
the ideologies behind the design of poverty eradication programs. Over a period of 15 years, Chile
has transitioned from socialist regimes (Lagos, 2000–2006 and Bachelet, 2006–2010) to a more
conservative right wing coalition (Piñera, 2010–2014) and back to a socialist-led government
(Bachelet, 2014–2020). Each government has imposed changes to poverty eradication programs,
thus leading to their discontinuity. These ideological shifts and program changes pose problems for
the implementation of durable long-term poverty eradication initiatives.
A second challenge to poverty eradication in Chile is neoliberalism, which took hold of the
country after the military coup of 1973 and continues to colonize social policy, limiting the chances
of implementing changes since the protection of the market comes first and privatization continues
to be considered more efficient.
Argentina poses an interesting comparison to Chile with regard to CCT due to its neighborhood
status as well as its similar military dictatorship history. In comparison with Chile, Argentina has
attempted to overcome the limitations of neoliberalism transforming into a postneoliberalism state
(Aquín, 2014) in which the state is defined as benefactor (Fraser, 1997). The current ideology in
Argentina aims to generate progressive redistributive policies that attempt to restructure the wealth
of the country (Aquín, 2014). In comparison, Chile, through the Ethical Family Wage program,
continues to demonstrate an approach in which the market is protagonist and in which ‘beneficiar-
ies’ can only escape poverty through entrepreneurship and employment (Irarrázaval et al., 2012).
This logic privileges the market, suggesting improving the quality of life of individuals and fami-
lies lies in their role as consumers rather than citizens with guaranteed access to rights and social
benefits (Carballeda, 2006, 2014). In comparison, in Argentina, the CCT program takes a different
stance, considering the return of social rights a priority over the insertion into the market (Aquín,
2014). Furthermore, the program does not include an employment component as in Chile’s Ethical
Family Wage program.
Chile confronts the challenge of rethinking both the structure of the state and its ideological
foundation in order to design and implement social policies with a human rights focus. Such a
change will allow for transformation in the social structure, which will lead to an effective change
with regard to poor families’ well-being. If this is not undertaken, the State will fail to complete
its role as benefactor, delegating responsibility to families and failing to address the structural
roots of poverty.
Closely related to this broader context of discussion are the role and challenges for social work
in the implementation and design of the Ethical Family Wage program. As we know, social work’s

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

10 International Social Work 

core principles are social justice and human rights. Social workers are ascribed the social and
political responsibility of influencing and contributing to the design and implementation of such
programs and policies. Here lies the central role of our discipline.
Social work can specifically contribute to the design of social policies aimed at decreasing
poverty both in identifying the particularities of each territory and in the recognition of poverty’s
complexity and multidimensionality. The importance of identifying the particularities of each
territorial context is key to meeting the specific needs of the individuals living in that particular
area (Oneto, 2000). Social workers, through their direct insertion in specific contexts, acquire
knowledge that is crucial to translating local needs to central-level social policy design (Oneto,
1996, 2003). Furthermore, social work can play a central role in fomenting local participation in
the design and development of poverty programs through participatory action mechanisms. Such
actions would allow for the design of flexible programs that recognize territorial differences.
According to Norma Fóscolo (2006), the epochal ethos tends toward the valorization of certain
epistemological and practical worldviews, and social work today must fight against the trend
toward the mere technical and non-critical implementation of social programs and policies (Muñoz
and Vargas, 2013). As highlighted by Saül Karsz (2007), the relevance of social work lies in its
capacity to navigate complex contexts in which economic, political, legal, educational, moral, and
sexual dimensions intertwine. It is in this complex scenario that social work must co-construct
policies and programs that prioritize human rights, personal and family autonomy, and empower-
ment in order to overcome situations of poverty.
On a larger scale, it is necessary and urgent that social work expands opportunities for reflect-
ing on its practice as well as the foundations, design, and implementation of social programs. The
contribution of social work lies in its practice (Muñoz and Vargas, 2013); however, it is chal-
lenged to overcome a ‘tecnified’ practice that lacks clear epistemological and theoretical roots
(Matus, 2004). It is through this reflection that social change and transformation can come about.
It is necessary for social work to argue for a holistic multidimensional understanding of poverty
that allows for the design of integrated social programs that aim to successfully intervene in com-
plex social realities, taking into account multiple dimensions. Furthermore, social work can also
enrich policies and programs with a citizenship approach as well as a human rights and social
justice framework, through the recognition of difference (Muñoz, 2008). This challenge is no
small feat for social work.
To add a further challenge, while CCT programs may serve redistributive purposes, further
awareness must be raised with regard to the role of recognition (Fraser and Honneth, 2006). The
focus of social justice over the last 150 years has primarily centered on the redistribution of
resources and wealth with some recent but minimal linkage to the recognition of differences (Fraser
and Honneth, 2006).
According to Fraser and Honneth (2006), however, social justice must address not only eco-
nomic inequality, but also the recognition of difference. Under this framework, addressing structural
injustices will not be achieved through cash transfer programs since they do not recognize cultural
and structural inequalities and their impact on poverty. This calls for not only a change in program
methodologies, but also the promotion of cultural changes aimed at the construction of greater
equality and justice in community relationships. These are interesting challenges for social work.
As previously discussed, social work can play a relevant role in adding this component to CCT
programs. There is a need and a challenge to build a ‘culture of recognition’. This allows for the
de-stigmatization of the programs’ beneficiaries as well as generating a change in the structural
reproductions of poverty, highlighting the importance of human rights, autonomy, and empower-
ment (Aquín, 2014; Muñoz, 2008). This allows for dialog between the economic and cultural
dimensions of the program.

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

Reininger et al. 11

With regard to the concept of recognition, social work ethics play a central role. Our profession
and academic discipline identifies as its first imperative the recognition of an ‘other’ through its
values of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility and respect for diversities (IFSW,
2014). Chile’s current ethical code of conduct also identifies recognition as a key element of social
work (Colegio de Trabajadores Sociales de Chile, 2015), further strengthening social work’s ethi-
cal responsibility in reducing poverty in the country.
In this final section, we have addressed challenges to the profession with regard to CCT pro-
grams as well as broader social policies. Furthermore, the specific challenges for social workers in
Chile with regard to the Ethical Family Wage program lie in recapturing a protagonist position in
the design, implementation, and evaluation of the program, as was the case during the previous
Bridge program. In order to effectively address poverty in the country, social policies in Chile must
favor an empowerment approach in which human rights and diversities are recognized.

Funding
This research was funded by the Jorge Millas Grant, Universidad Andres Bello.

References
Adato, M. and M. Hoddinott (2007) Conditional Cash Transfer Programs: A ‘Magic Bullet’ for Reducing
Poverty? – 2020 Focus Brief on the World’s Poor and Hungry People. Washington, DC: IFPRI.
Aquín, N. (2014) Asignación Universal por Hijo. Titulares o tutelados? Buenos Aires, Argentina: Espacio
Editorial.
Arellano, M.S. (2013) ‘El Ingreso Ético Familiar: Sobre su diseño y sus componentes’, in J. Fantuzzi (ed.)
Ingreso Ético Familiar: Innovando en la lucha contra la pobreza, pp. 157–73. Santiago de Chile, Chile:
L y D Ediciones.
Bastagli, F. (2010) Poverty, Inequality and Public Cash Transfers: Lessons from Latin America (Background
Paper for the European Report on Development on Social Protection for Inclusive Development).
Florence: European University Institute.
Carballeda, A. (2006) El trabajo social desde una mirada histórica centrada en la intervención. Del orden de
los cuerpos al estallido de la sociedad. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Espacio Editorial.
Carballeda, A. (2014) ‘La intervención social en los escenarios actuales: una mirada al contexto y el lazo
social’, Intervención 3: 57–60.
Carneiro, P. and E. Galasso (2007) Lessons from the Evaluation of Chile Solidario. Washington, DC: World
Bank.
Cecchini, S. and A. Madariaga (2011) Programas de transferencias condicionadas: Balance de la
experiencia reciente en America Latino y el Caribe. Santiago de Chile, Chile: Cuadernos de la
CEPAL 95.
Cecchini, S., C. Robles and L.H. Vargas (2012) ‘The Expansion of Cash Transfers and Its Challenges: Ethical
Family Income’, International Policy Center for Inclusive Growth brief report, no. 26, August. Available
online at: http://www.ipc-undp.org/pub/IPCPolicyResearchBrief26.pdf
Colegio de Trabajadores Sociales de Chile (2015) Código de Ética del Colegio de Asistentes Sociales.
Available online at: http://www.trabajadoressociales.cl/provinstgo/historia.php (accessed 12 November
2015).
Denis, A., F. Gallegos and C. Sanhueza (2010) ‘Pobreza Multidimensional en Chile: 1990–2009’, Reporte,
Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Santiago de Chile, Chile, Diciembre 10.
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (CEPAL) (2010) La hora de la igualdad.
Brechas por cerrar, caminos por abrir. Brasil: Trigésimo tercer período de sesiones de la CEPAL.
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (CEPAL) (2014) Panorama Social para América
Latina 2014. Santiago de Chile, Chile: Naciones Unidas.
Fernández, M.I. (2015) Pobreza y protección social: La voz de las mujeres beneficiarias del Ingreso Etico
Familiar. Santiago de Chile, Chile: Catalonia.

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

12 International Social Work 

Ferreira, F. and M. Walton (2004) La desigualdad en América Latina. Rompiendo con la historia? Washington,
DC: Serie Desarrollo para Todos, Banco Mundial.
Fiszbein, A. and N. Schady (2009) Conditional Cash Transfers: Reducing Present and Future Poverty (Policy
Research Report). Washington, DC: World Bank.
Fóscolo, N. (2006) Desafíos del Trabajo Social latinoamericano: Paradigmas, necesidades, valores y dere-
chos. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Espacio Editorial.
Fraser, N. (1997) Iustitia Interrupta. Reflexiones críticas desde la posición ‘postsocialista’. Bogotá: Siglo del
Hombre Editores.
Fraser, N. and A. Honneth (2006) Redistribución o reconocimiento? Madrid: Ediciones Morata.
French-Davis, R. and B. Stallings (2001) Reformas, crecimiento y políticas sociales en Chile desde 1973.
Santiago de Chile, Chile: CEPAL/Ed. Lom.
Galasso, E. (2006) With Their Effort and One Opportunity. Alleviating Extreme Poverty in Chile. Washington,
DC: Development Research Group, World Bank.
Henoch, P. and R. Troncoso (2013) ‘Transferencias condicionadas en Chile: Una evaluación al programa
Ingreso ético familiar’, in J. Fantuzzi (ed.) Ingreso Ético Familiar: Innovando en la lucha contra la
pobreza, pp.197–217. Santiago de Chile, Chile: L y D Ediciones.
Hernando, A. (2013) ‘Desafíos del diseño del Ingreso Ético Familiar’, in J. Fantuzzi (ed.) Ingreso Ético
Familiar: Innovando en la lucha contra la pobreza, pp.175–94. Santiago de Chile, Chile: L y D Ediciones.
Hoces, F., A. Hojman and O. Larrañaga (2011) ‘Evaluating the Chile Solidario Program: Results Using the
Chile Solidario Panel and the Administrative Databases’, Estudios de Economía 38(1): 129–68.
Huber, E., N. François, J. Pribble and J.D. Stephens (2006) ‘Politics and Inequality in Latin America and the
Caribbean’, American Sociological Review 71: 943–63.
Huneeus, C. and L. Repetto (2013) ‘Los desafios pendientes del Ingreso ético Familiar’, in J. Fantuzzi (ed.)
Ingreso Ético Familiar: Innovando en la lucha contra la pobreza, pp. 219–51. Santiago de Chile, Chile:
L y D Ediciones.
Ife, J. (2008) Human Rights and Social Work: Towards Rights-based Practice, 2nd edn. Melbourne, VIC,
Australia: Cambridge University Press.
International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW) (2014) ‘Global Definition of Social Work’. Available
online at: http://ifsw.org/get-involved/global-definition-of-social-work/ (accessed 15 November 2015).
Irarrázaval, I., J. López de Lérida, L. Maldonado, P. Margotta, T. Matus, S. Ortúzar and A. Torche (2012)
Ingreso Ético Familiar: reflexiones en torno a la nueva política social para población en situación de
extrema pobreza. Santiago de Chile, Chile: Centro de Políticas Publicas PUC.
Karsz, S. (2007) Problematizar el Trabajo Social. Definición, figuras, clínica. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Kast, F. (2013) ‘Las claves del ingreso ético familiar’, in J. Fantuzzi (ed.) Ingreso Ético Familiar: Innovando
en la lucha contra la pobreza, pp.19–29. Santiago de Chile, Chile: L y D Ediciones.
Larrañaga, O. (2010) ‘Las nuevas políticas de protección social en perspectiva histórica’, Documento de
trabajo, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo, Área de Reducción de la Pobreza y la
Desigualdad, Santiago de Chile, Chile, Abril.
Larrañaga, O. and D. Contreras (2010) ‘Chile Solidario y Combate a la Pobreza’, Documento de trabajo,
Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo, Área de Reducción de la Pobreza y la Desigualdad,
Santiago de Chile, Chile, Enero.
Larrañaga, O., D. Contreras and G. Cabezas (2014) ‘Políticas contra la pobreza: de Chile Solidario al Ingreso
Etico Familiar’, Documento de trabajo, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo, Área de
Reducción de la Pobreza y la Desigualdad, Santiago de Chile, Chile, Diciembre.
Martorano, B. and M. Sanfilippo (2012) ‘Innovative Features in Poverty Reduction Programmes: An Impact
Evaluation of Chile Solidario on Households with Children’, Journal of International Development 24:
1030–41.
Matus, T. (2004) Propuestas contemporáneas en Trabajo Social. Hacia una intervención polifónica. Buenos
Aires, Argentina: Ed. Espacio.
Ministerio de Desarrollo Social (2013) Manual de Trabajo: Apoyo Social: Ingreso Etico Familiar. Santiago
de Chile, Chile: Ministerio de Desarrollo Social.

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016

Reininger et al. 13

Ministerio de Planificación Social (2004) ‘Conceptos fundamentales del sistema de proteccion social Chile
Solidario’. Available online at: http://www.ministeriodesarrollosocial.gob.cl/admin/docdescargas/
centrodoc/centrodoc_170.pdf (accessed 13 November 2015).
Muñoz, G. (2008) ‘Intervenciones sociales en pobreza que potencien ciudadanía intercultural. Propuestas
para un modelo operativo en Trabajo Social’, Escenarios 13: 61–70.
Muñoz, N. and P. Vargas (2013) ‘A propósito de las tendencias epistemológicas de Trabajo Social en el con-
texto latinoamericano’, Katálysis 16(1): 122–30.
Oneto, L. (1996) ‘Políticas Sociales en Chile: una tarea inconclusa’, Revista de Trabajo Social 68: 17–25.
Oneto, L. (2000) Viejos nuevos referentes argumentativos en políticas sociales: hacia un modelo de análisis
de sus sedimentaciones. Valparaíso, Chile: Universidad Católica de Valparaíso.
Oneto, L. (2003) ‘Los discursos sobre la pobreza en Chile. Análisis de sus paradigmas’, Revista Proposiciones
34: 1–12.
Perticara, M. (2007) Análisis cuantitativo de impacto del Sistema Chile Solidario. Santiago de Chile, Chile:
Ministerio de Desarrollo y Planificación (MIDEPLAN).
Raczynski, D. (2008) Sistema Chile Solidario y la política de protección social en Chile: Lecciones del
pasado y agenda para el futuro. Santiago de Chile, Chile: CIEPLAN.
Raczynski, D. and C. Serrano (2005) ‘Las políticas y estrategias de desarrollo social: aportes de los años 90
y desafíos futuros’, in P. Meller and O. Landerretche (eds) La paradoja aparente. Equidad y eficiencia:
resolviendo el dilema, pp. 225–83. Santiago de Chile, Chile.
Ruz, M. and J. Palma (2005) Análisis del proceso de elaboración e implementación del Sistema Chile
Solidario. Santiago de Chile, Chile: Instituto de Asuntos Públicos, Departamento de Políticas Públicas,
Universidad de Chile.
Saracostti, M. (2008) ‘The Chile Solidario System: The Role of Social Work’, International Social Work
51(4): 566–72.
Smith, M., S. Koikkalalainen and L. Casanueva (2013) ‘The Oligarchic Diffusion of Public Policy: Developing
the Mexican ‘Magic Bullet’ to Combat Poverty in New York’, Urban Affairs Review 50(1): 3–33.
Trucco, D. and E. Nun (2008) ‘Informe de sistematización de evaluaciones cualitativas del programa Puente y
el Sistema de proteccion social chile solidario’, Documento de trabajo, Programa de las Naciones Unidas
para el Desarrollo, Área de Reducción de la Pobreza y la Desigualdad, Santiago de Chile, Chile, Agosto.

Author biographies
Taly Reininger, PhD. professor and researcher at the School of Social Work, Universidad Andres Bello, Chile.
Her research interests include social work and education, poverty and social policy.
Dr. Borja Castro-Serrano, professor and researcher at the School of Social Work, Universidad Andres Bello,
Chile. His research interests include ethical and political philosophy, mental health and poverty.
Marcela Flotts, doctoral candidate in Social Science and director of the School of Social Work, Universidad
Andres Bello, Chile. Her research interests include inequality, poverty and social policy.
Monica Vergara, professor and researcher at the School of Social Work, Universidad Andres Bello, Chile. Her
research interests include migrantion, social work and family studies.
Ana Fuentealba, professor and researcher at the School of Social Work, Universidad Andres Bello, Chile. Her
research interests include forensic social work, family violence, and family studies.

Downloaded from isw.sagepub.com at University of Sussex Library on June 4, 2016