Rowden (2010) argued that the meaning of development has morphed from structural issues to palliative issues. This is very evident in Conditional Cash Transfers Programmes (CCTPs) and similar social protection initiatives, which though they may relieve poverty, have been criticized for failing to be transformative in their conception.
Ordinarily, conditional cash transfers (CCTs) are palliative and therefore anti-transformative in that they dislodge the conditions for promoting structural
change by creating dependency. In recent years, the World Bank and social protection scholars have acknowledged this and proceeded to argue for transformational changes to be introduced into the design of programmes(World Bank, 2004; Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler, 2004; Harland, 2014). Transformative Social Protection System is now an emerging sub-field that acknowledges the need to be innovative beyond the basic safety net approach and include broader societal issues like economic growth and accountability: for example developing beneficiaries’ skills and increasing employability for poor recipients of cash transfers, in order to increase their social participation, is now a condition in selected Latin America countries where human development conditionalities (co-responsibilities) that required children to attend school and health checks have yielded good results (Molyneux et. al 2016).