Relational Approaches to Poverty - Essay Example

Rational approaches to poverty affiliation Relational approaches to poverty Poverty can be described as a way in which aperson’s capabilities are limited. In this situation, limitation is influenced by the lack of resources. In an argument by Wright (2009) poverty is a social ill created by both individuals and the state. However, as much it is a personal responsibility to avoid poverty, the government should ensure people are provided with enough resources from which they can generate wealth. Many strategies have been created to eradicate poverty. However, the approaches have not been effective enough. Poverty rates are still high in third world countries. The failure of the methods is caused by the lack creativity in their creation and implementation. In an argument by Smith (2005) a relational approach refers to the consideration of the main problem without being distracted by the minor impacts of the problem. The author further points that relational approach refers to the ability to solve issues causing poverty through changing the government actions mainly on the distribution of wealth. In regards to poverty, a relational approach is an eradication strategy that tackles poverty by addressing issue in the government policies. The main objective of a relational approach to poverty is to minimize waste of funds on a timely basis by putting in place a long term solution to the problem Differences between residual approach and relational approach A residual approach is created fill gaps that are created by social and political organizations. In an argument by Firebaugh (2000) residual methods are only used to put in place mechanisms that would increase the responsibility of stakeholders. For instance, a relational approach may require the government to provide funds for community projects. Businesses and investors share the same requirement. However, the approach is not implemented until all stakeholders fail to deliver on their requirements. In an argument by Cammack (2002), a residual approach only bears importance at the failure of the original plan. In regards to poverty, a residual plan is not created to eradicate poverty as the main plan but as a plan aimed at rectifying mistakes made to eradicate poverty. On the other hand, relational approach refers to an approach that is more demanding and requires the full cooperation of involved bodies and organizations. Stewart, Laderchi and Saith (2007) point out that a relational approach addresses issues by demanding mandatory responsibility from involved parties. In addition, the approach requires the use of any available skill to address the problem. In poverty eradication, relational approaches are used to create mandatory requirements from the main stakeholder, the state. Through a relational approach, the state is required to provide policies, funds and strategies to eradicate poverty. In an argument by Cammack (2002), the approach is displayed as an activism act. This is because it requires the government to deliver on its duties. For instance, a relational approach calls for salary cuts for all heads in a strategy to increase funds provided to citizens. In addition, this may increase the wealth status of the common citizen. This is one effective strategy of poverty eradication. How useful is the relational approach to poverty One major use of this approach is the fact that it creates wealth for the poor in the long term basis. One major aspect of a relational approach to poverty is the fact that business practices are given the opportunity to create wealth. This is preferred to the method of providing monetary aid to the affected. By providing companies with required resources to create wealth, poverty may be eradicated through different ways. They include employment, economy growth and transforming resources to wealth. From this revelation, one may argue that this strategy is useful in benefiting both a country and an individual. In addition, relational approaches relieve the state of its responsibility of providing wealth to its citizens. In an argument by Whitehead (2006) the government putting in place relational framework, it becomes more effective for organizations to practice social corporate responsibility in an aim of eradicating poverty. World Bank further points out that, relational approaches enable states to share its responsibility from other society’s stakeholder such as investors (World Bank, 2000). It is also proven through relational approaches; poverty can be tackled in long term basis. Approaches other than relational, provide aid that last for a short period. Mosse (2010) points out that relational methods save money spend to cater for poverty stricken people. This also increases the responsibility of the government to reduce expenditure. This is also enabled because the state has a mandatory requirement of enhancing business investments. The economy is also developed through relational approaches. Relational approaches do not focus on only eradication but focuses on eradicating causes of poverty in a country. In an argument by Smith (2005) all causes of poverty are a great hindrance to the growth of the economy. Through relational approaches the effects of these causes are reversed. Poverty is able to be eradicated as well as economy growth is experienced in the long term. Stewart, Laderchi and Saith (2007) assert other approaches to poverty are limited to only function minimizing the effects of poverty. However, the solution presented by these approaches cannot address the issue of poverty itself. This is because poverty cannot be dealt with provision of monetary aid to persons experiencing poverty. Investment on poverty eradication strategies and increasing corporate social responsibilityis the most successful strategies to implement. Through relational approaches, these two objectives are able to be addresses appropriately. Is the relational approach is the best approach? Brady (2003) points out that government bodies and the government should be responsible in the creation of more relational ways. Relational approaches cannot be practiced at a personal level. This is because people have to survive and find a solution on a daily basis would be the only option. As much as people may demand short term aid from government, the fund spent on this requirement should be minimized. This is to allow cooperation on the creation of long term solutions. The government minimizing its short term expenditure to poverty eradication is a relational approach. However, to make this effective Brady (2003) points out that the government should minimize the effects of poverty at the short term. For instance, in finding long term solution to famine, the affected people should be provided with food and water. Another example of a relational approach to poverty is providing legislation to lessen state spending and increase service delivery. In an argument by Breman (1990) the state is placed in the best position to put on place relational approaches to minimize expenditure. In nations where poverty is a sensitive issue, the government has been accused of laxity and corruption among other financial frauds. These mistakes have been caused a high deficit in funds aimed at increasing the wage bill of citizens. With this debt rising in each year, poverty levels are on the increase. In this situation, a relational approach would be to reduce government spending. This should be done regardless of the measures to be put in place. In an argument Harriss (2007) commonly embraced poverty eradication methods involve providing of food and temporary financial aid. This only provides a solution to the affected people for a short period. In addition, poverty is caused by practices unknown to the affected people. For this reason, relational approaches aim at focusing on wealthy people and organization to realize the cause of poverty in society. By understanding of the causing factors, permanent solutions to the flow of funds and wealth to the poor will be realized (Chronic Poverty Research Centre, 2008). References Brady, D. 2003. "Rethinking the Sociological Measurement of Poverty" Social Forces, 81(3):715–751. Breman, J. 1990. “Even Dogs are Better Off”: The Ongoing Battle Between Capital and Labor in the Cane-Fields of Gujarat’.Journal of Peasant Studies, 17 (4): 546–608. Cammack, P. 2002.‘Attacking the Poor’.New Left Review, 13, 125-134. Chronic Poverty Research Centre. 2008.Chronic Poverty Report 2008-09: Escaping Poverty Traps. Manchester: CPRC. Harriss, J. 2007. ‘Bringing Politics Back into Poverty Analysis: Why Understanding Social Relations Matters more for Policy on Chronic Poverty than Measurement’. Manchester: CPRC. Mosse, D. 2010.‘A Relational Approach to Durable Poverty, Inequality and Power’.Journal of Development Studies, 46 (7):1156-1178. Stewart, F., Laderchi, R. and Saith, R. 2007. ‘Introduction: Four Approaches to Defining and Measuring Poverty’. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Firebaugh, G. 2000. "Empirics of World Income Inequality."American Journal of Sociology, 104: 1597–1630. Smith, C. 2005. Ending Global Poverty: a guide to what works, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Whitehead, A. 2006. ‘Persistent Poverty in North-East Ghana.’ Journal of Development Studies, 42 (2): 278-300.  World Bank. 2000.World Development Report, 2000: Attacking Poverty. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wright, E. 2009. ‘Understanding Class: Towards an Integrated Analytical Approach’. New Left Review, 60:101-116. Read More