Benefits and limitations of UCT schemes
| Benefits | Outcome | Country |
| Increase ability to pay for household amenities | South Africa22 27 86 87; Ethiopia88 | |
| Reduction in stress levels | Malawi89; Zambia90 91; Mozambique, Yemen, Palestine92 | |
| Increase access to a nutritionally complete diet | South Africa23 93; Malawi24 Ethiopia88 | |
| Improved health status | South Africa22 23; Zambia94 Malawi95 | |
| An improvement in self-worth and independence | Zambia92 94 South Africa96 Yemen97 | |
| Limitations | Reversal of health outcomes if UCTs are rescinded | South Africa22 23 93 98 |
| Long-term recipients find difficulties in securing employment UCTs are recinded | South Africa99 | |
| Funds insufficient in reducing vulnerability, including meeting both healthcare, nutrition and household needs | South Africa,22 23 27 86 100–102 Zambia94 China,103 104 Peru36 Malawi,105 Vietnam106 | |
| Inability to save a surplus income creates long term dependency on UCTs | South Africa86 96 99 102 107–110 Brazil77 111 112; Malawi51 | |
| Majority of schemes include pre-existing poverty in the eligibility criteria and do not protect those who are vulnerable to poverty | Multiple (see 113–115) | |
| Funding levels do not recognise the nuance of different illnesses and the range of their respective costs. | Palestine116 |
UCTs, unconditional cash transfers.