CCTs and country income status

CCTs have been used relatively more in lower-middle and low-income countries

The tendency of upper middle income countries to implement UCTs is due in part to some countries’ preference for rights-based social assistance, traditionally considered incompatible with the conditions in CCTs. The greater relative representation of CCTs in lower-middle income countries as compared to low-income countries partially reflects capacity constraints that limit the enforcement of conditions in the poorest countries. Finally, given their weak institutions and frequent emergency-focused CTs, fragile states have primarily implemented UCTs, which typically require less institutional coordination and state involvement than CCTs.
Notes: Number of programs for upper-middle income countries= 25; n for lower-middle income countries (excludes fragile) = 13; n for low-income countries (excludes fragile) = 43; n for fragile= 20. Total for low-income countries adds up to greater than 100 because two programs are both UCTs and CCTs.