Myths Surrounding Poverty Issue - Essay Example

Author’s Name: Professor’s Name: Subject: Date: Poverty and Social Exclusion Introduction According to European Commission, Joint Report on social exclusion 2004, poverty is defined as persons, groups of people, and families whose resources be it social, cultural and material are limited so as to restrict them from the minimum acceptable way of living in the nation to which they belong. This means that poverty is not always about income but about the exclusion of individuals living in poverty from ordinary living customs, activities and patterns. Social exclusion means the inability to access things in life that the rest of the society takes for granted. Certain individuals are pushed to the edge of the community. They are prevented from full participation by virtue of poverty or because of discrimination. This results in being distanced from education, jobs and income as well as training opportunities. There is little access to decision-making bodies and power. They thus feel powerless and unable to make decisions or take control over them. This is despite the fact that the decisions affect their day-to-day lives. Social exclusion affects the quality of life as well as equity and cohesion of society for the individuals affected. There are several myths that surround the poverty issue. There is one that says that there is no poverty in the UK. The reason for this is that poor people are not visible in the aspirant high-class society. Another says that individuals cannot make a difference. What should be known here is that most individuals, businesses and groups are nowadays taking charge of their destiny in a bid to reduce poverty using their own knowledge, skills, ingenuity and own resources. A vital aspect to solving the issue of poverty is to have a meticulous understanding of it. A society that does not understand itself is vulnerable to forces that push to different and dangerous directions (Guy et al. 4). A suitable pattern is to find scapegoats and take necessary against the problems. Social construction The misunderstanding of poverty is widespread making it harder to address. Poverty has always been a concern for policy makers and social policy researchers. Policy-makers and academics disagree on the definition and measurement of poverty. Measurement and definition have had to be extended so as to include all the problems of social exclusion (Alcock 180). Social exclusion and poverty are complex multidimensional problems that grew long ago. Poverty and social exclusion have a subject of discussion as far as their relation is concerned. Poverty and exclusion have often been viewed as being separate phenomena. Increasing risks of social exclusion, poverty rates and deterioration of living conditions have been a major concern to researchers, politicians and authorities (Flotten 11). Researchers have built on previous poverty research in the sense that the issue of poverty is perceived a relative phenomenon. Some situations where individuals lack financial resources, the major measure utilized is an income poverty measure. Income poverty cannot serve as the only and a major indicator of social disadvantage. This is especially if the problem of exclusion in welfare societies is to be fully comprehended. The introduction of social exclusion concept is considered an eye-opener by many in order to fully understand modern poverty (Flotten 14). The concept is today being used frequently in sociological studies among the public as well as politicians. Exclusion has both social and economic dimensions. The economic dimension is exclusion from chances to access assets, to earn an income and the labor market. The social dimension is excluded from social services, decision-making, to community and family support. This then means that social exclusion refers to individuals being excluded to the rights of citizenship. It could also mean exclusion from relationships within communities and families (Adato, Carter and May 5). This provides a broader understanding of the importance of social relationships in resource usage and allocation. Social exclusion can then be said to have a link to the existence of such discriminatory forces as unenforced rights, racism and the outcome of market failures. Some would argue that exclusion is as a result of hierarchical power relations. This is where inequality overlaps and there are evident group distinctions. There is a tendency to perceive poverty as being more severe if linked to other failures or problems of individual welfare. Income poverty in transition economies is new and a remarkable phenomenon. This is because some countries there are social policies and institutions that promote full employment of its citizens. Laws were put in place that required all able-bodied people to work and a restriction was placed to prevent enterprises from dismissing workers (Council of Europe 17). In socialist economies, poverty where it existed was linked to low wages. There is no particular meaning that can be said to explain the meaning of poverty in full. The meaning has since moved away from those conceptions that were based on lack of physical necessities towards a more relative and social understanding. The topic is multi-faceted and combating it needs a multi-policy response. All societies strive to attain social cohesion, reinforcing those things that bind individuals together and fighting to eliminate the disruptive forces that drive them apart. A major factor in the division has been often the gap that subsists among the rich and the poor. Addressing poverty is therefore important because it not only enhances the lives of those who are poor, but also improves social cohesion in the society and contributes to a culture of human rights (Convention on the Rights of the Child 275). The issue can be addressed by ensuring that all social and public services are available for all. Governments and organizations can play a part by offering income-generating projects, providing employment opportunities, supporting small ventures and providing remedial and skill-building training that are affordable to the poor. Poverty and social policy Poverty has often been a concern of social policy through the phases of its development. It has been at the center of social policy because it provides a bridge between policy actions and academic debate. The definition and measurement of poverty are bound up with a policy response to it (Alcock 181). Researchers have come up with ways to measure the broad concept of social exclusion, considering the different dimensions involved. What should be recognized is that there are simple measures of poverty and social exclusion. Politicians and researchers often employ the measures since they provide important evidence of how the problem is scaling. Proportions of average income measure can be used in tracking the changing extent of social exclusion and poverty. There are several gains to confidence, self-esteem, well-being, and an improvement in social networks from engaging in work. In the cases where individuals do not pay employments, volunteering and training can be offered that will have an impact on their confidence, esteem and well-being. This will definitely eliminate the issue of social exclusion. The people involved are specified a voice in addition to a choice especially where their lives are concerned. Empowering people involves supporting them to think and then make the best possible decision about the results they want to attain and how the available resources can help achieve the outcomes. Empowering does not mean allowing people to believe that they do not have choices. It does not involve making people make and come up with poorly informed choices without adequate knowledge of the potential consequences. Methodology A lot of research has been conducted on poverty and social exclusion. The main concern is usually to conduct comparative analysis of the two issues and how they affect each other. The need to gain a richer understanding of poverty has led to the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods of research. Qualitative methods are mainly suited to provide an understanding of the subjective meanings of poverty, the political and socio-cultural factors determining it, perceived barriers to escaping it, and the household dynamics and dimensions. The utilization of qualitative and quantitative methods under an integrated framework is helpful in the identification of premonitory signs of poverty. This means better evaluation of programs will be possible as well as recognition of serious poverty and exclusion risk factors present (Gacitua-Mario and Wodon 7). The result will be early design and provision of better and adequate social safety nets. The combination of qualitative and quantitative methods of research is important because qualitative methods provide in-depth analysis of selected issues, events, or cases and can allow provision of critical insights into certain perspectives. It provides a better understanding of stakeholder priorities and perceptions (Gacitua-Mario and Wodon 12). Qualitative methods will serve an essential function in helping to design appropriate survey questionnaires, assessing validity of the survey results and evaluating how much policy response should consider the heterogeneity of local conditions. It also serves to gather the necessary information that cannot be captured by household surveys. The social exclusion framework is an appropriate device that will be helpful in understanding the interactions and linkages between different risk factors that generate inequality and poverty (Gacitua-Mario and Wodon 13). The social exclusion framework is people and institutions-centered. It contains both subjective and objective dimensions to the degree that it puts a consideration on both the objective conditions of people’s perceptions and lives. The perceptions will be those of being connected or disconnected from wider aspects of cultural, social and political life. The importance of social exclusion framework is that it recognizes the essential dimensions of poverty. This will include such things as the inability to generate stable and sufficient income and to have access to some social services in an attempt to be capable of meeting basic needs. The difference between poverty as a social condition and social exclusion as a process provides a means to find instruments and ways to fight risk factors before processes of social exclusion can lead to extreme poverty. Quantitative methods provide a basis through which selection of areas to conduct qualitative study is done. It also provides a basis for identification of specific groups that are of interest. Qualitative research with certain population groups also shows the extent to which need perceptions depend on the circumstances and the composition of households. Social change is also important in determining the preferences of participants regarding activities and items required to avoid poverty (Fahmy, Pemberton and Sutton 15). The integration of the two methods of research relates to the potential of utilizing actor-oriented contexts in poverty research. The actor-oriented perspective means recognizing diverse social practices and multiple realities and working out methodologically on how compatible social worlds are. In the research, key actors do not necessarily include the poor, but also professionals and firms that are concerned with the reduction of poverty in government and civil society levels. There are however, criticisms on the subjectivity of qualitative information derived from focus groups and interviews. The concern of the criticism is legitimate and it underscores the need to implement rigorous qualitative research methods, with results being supported by conducting a further quantitative analysis. Policy-oriented social analysis is however concerned with agency and change (Gacitua-Mario and Wodon 15). This includes how social workers in the field, how program beneficiaries and how policy makers can act against or outside the system making the poor disadvantaged and vulnerable. Some governments have continued labor programs by bringing reforms in social security. The reforms are recent and hence their impacts have not yet started showing in the poverty data. The government seeks to look at the needs of individuals on a personal level rather than as a whole. The cuts in expenses will include allowances of the disabled. The allowances are designed to meet the actual expense of living with disabled people or with the disability. The benefits are likely to favor the disabled since most of them are likely to be unemployed. The anti-poverty policies revolve around providing reforms in the welfare system (Aldridge et al. 6). The change in the benefits system may however not provide solutions such as rising health inequalities, increasing underemployment and in-work poverty. Different and competing theories of poverty There are different theories of poverty that are uniformly acknowledged by literature. All the theories try to provide a distinct explanation on the root of the cause of poverty. Theories lay the cause of poverty on the broader social phenomenon (Bradshaw 6). The different theories are divergent and the result of each is a different type of intervention strategy geared at community development. Theories of poverty have to be related to social policies so that they can be better understood. The theories do not lack problems with some having a requirement that different factors be invoked to explain different aspects of distributing income and a consistent set of concepts not presented (PIUK 75). Minority group theory came into being in the early studies of poverty. It is coined to represent attempts in the studies to identify the attributes of certain groups of people especially the poor. A cycle of poverty was identified where young married couples with children, old people and children running a higher risk of descending into poverty. Social scientists as well as policy makers dealing with the issue of poverty have desired that their efforts be articulated into theories of poverty. The articulation will be both as a motivation for action and intellectual problem. The theories are often designed to provide an explanation of poverty in terms of fundamental mechanisms that are not affected by racial, national, ethnic, cultural and other types of social differences. The cultural theory finds the explanation for poverty as emanating from the traits of the poor. It asserts that it is the behavioral, valuation and attitudinal patterns of the poor people that prevent them from being socially mobile. Structural theories provide the explanation of poverty in terms of conditions within which the poor live. The conditions include poor health, unemployment, poor education and underemployment. Both theories have a belief that poverty is cyclic. This means that successive generations of similar families remain poor. It is believed that the status of poverty is passed on to the next generation of families (Elesh 4). The problem according to these theories therefore lies with the family and the attributes of the people comprising it. The cultural and structural theories have an agreement to some extent in terms of some traits. The traits include little class-consciousness, a mother-centered family organization, a strong present-time orientation, including excitement desire, general feelings of fatalism, dependency, helplessness and inferiority, emphasis on masculinity, little historical knowledge, early initiation into sex, middle-class aspirations and values not translated into behavior and alienation from political institutions (Elesh 4). Some theories are large and multifaceted explanations that have a focus on the individual as being responsible for poverty situation they find themselves. Culture of poverty has been found to perpetuate itself once it has been established. Poverty and social exclusion are interrelated where the existence of one results in the other. Works cited A Euro desk Publication. “Poverty and social exclusion.” European Union Programmes Agency Malta NA (2004): 1-60. Web. 27 April 2013. Adato, Michelle, Carter Michael, and May Julian. “Exploring poverty traps and social exclusion in South Africa using qualitative and quantitative data.” MacArthur Foundation (2004): 1-31. Web. 28 April 2013. Alcock, Pete. Poverty and Social Exclusion. New York: John Willey, 2012. Print. Aldridge, Hannah, Kenway Peter, Maclnnes Tom, and Parekh Anushree. “Monitoring poverty and social exclusion 2012.” Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2012): 1-159. Web. 27 April 2013. Bradshaw, Ted. Theories of poverty and anti-poverty programs in community development. Rural Poverty Research Center 06-05 (2006): 1-22. Web. 28 April 2013. Convention on the rights of the child. “Poverty and social exclusion.” Article 27.1 (2000): 275- 279. Print. Council of Europe, 2002. “Using social benefits to combat poverty and social exclusion: Opportunities and problems from a comparative perspective.” European Synthesis Report 71 (2002). Web. 28 April 2013 Flotten, Tone. “Poverty and social exclusion- Two sides of the same coin? A Comparative Study of Norway and Estonia.” Fafo (2006): 1-334. Web. 28 April 2013. Elesh, David. 1970. “Poverty theories and income maintenance: validity and policy relevance.” Institute for Research on Poverty University of Wisconsin (1970): 1-36. Web. 28 April 2013. Guy, Christian, Henderson Kate, Garnham Alison and Hargreaves Deborah. “Busting the poverty myths.” New Statesman (2013). Web. 27 April, 2013. Gacitua-Mario Estanislao and Wodon Quentin. “Measurement and Meaning: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods for the analysis of poverty and social exclusion in Latin America.” World Bank Technical Paper 518 (2001): 1-100. Web. 27 April 2013. PIUK. Chapter 2: Theories of poverty. Kansas City: Townsend, WA. Print. Fahmy, Eldin, Pemberton Simon and Sutton Eileen. Poverty and social exclusion in the UK. Economic & Social Research Council 3 (2012): 1-102. Web. 27 April 2013. Read More