Conceptions of Poverty

By Vedika Inamdar.

The way we conceptualise poverty determines the theories we develop to address it. Theories and concepts shape each other. Theory enables us to make connections between the various laws that govern poverty eradication measures. Drawing on Barbara Stark’s paper on Theories of Poverty, this blogpost examines the three conceptions of poverty through the lenses of three different legal instruments on poverty.

In 1950, on the second anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, students at the UN International Nursery School in New York viewed a poster of the historic document. (Source: The United Nations)

The way we conceptualise poverty determines the theories we develop to address it. Theories and concepts shape each other. Theory enables us to make connections between the various laws that govern poverty eradication measures.

Politicians around the world who shaped post-cold war approaches to poverty drew on liberal theory and three basic liberal conceptions of poverty: as a matter of morality, as a matter of justice, and as a matter of utility. Drawing on Barbara Stark’s paper on Theories of Poverty, this blogpost examines the three conceptions of poverty through the lenses of three different legal instruments on poverty.

After the end of the Second World War there was a commitment to guarantee human rights for all. Hence, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was drafted in 1948. It lists civil and political rights such as freedom of expression and the right to vote. Along with social, economic, and political rights such as the right to work and the right to an adequate standard of living. 

After the end of the Second World War there was a commitment to guarantee human rights for all. Hence, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was drafted in 1948.

Before the UDHR could be upgraded to a legal status, the Cold War broke out between the US and the former USSR. Accordingly, instead of a single legal binding document, two covenants were drafted: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ‘the Civil Covenant’ that assures familiar civil and political rights, which was ratified by President Bush in 1992.

The other is the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the ‘Economic Covenant’ which the US has not ratified. This requires the state to assure its people an adequate standard of living, including food, shelter, health care, education, and social security.

The Economic Covenant, which is the first major instrument in our discussion, was ratified by 157 states including all the other industrialised nations. The second major instrument is the South African constitution which provides support for economic rights, drafted after the dismantling of the apartheid. No state has a clearer constitutional level commitment to economic rights. The third instrument are the Millenium Development Goals (MDG). These goals are a commitment to eradicating poverty and extreme hunger by 2015. These three instruments for poverty eradication are worth focusing on because they are grounded in three transformative historical junctures: the end of colonialism, the end of apartheid, and the fall of the USSR. 

Moral Duty to the Poor

The first conception views poverty as giving rise/evoking a sense of moral compassion. It does not focus on the causes of poverty, nor does it look at poverty as a problem that needs to be solved. It assumes that poverty is inevitable and requires ongoing remediation, compassion, and charity. 

The moral duties to the poor as seen in Immanuel Kant’s writings were grounded in reason: everyone who can help the poor must do so, in the hope that others would do the same for them. This gives rise to the notion that moral duty to the poor is an obligation of one individual to another, rather than an obligation of the state to an individual, and the obligation is voluntary (given societal pressure). The state does not have an obligation towards helping the poor in this framework but can assume such a role. 

Moral arguments are appealing to the would-be benefactor because they are not binding. They place the benefactor in a superior position and the recipients at their mercy. By sharing his wealth, the benefactor becomes virtuous (such as the philanthropic work of Bill Gates). 

The moral duty to the poor is the underlying assumption of the MDG: as there were no legal sanctions against non-implementation. As is the moral case in the South African constitution- the struggle against the apartheid as one of the moral victories of our time. 

The Rights of the Poor

The second conception understands poverty as an injustice. A result of some unfairness caused either by law or politics. Poverty becomes a question of rights, of claims against the responsible state. As Thomas Paine argues, the legal system of poverty gave the propertied elite the exclusive right to benefit from the ownership of land, effectively depriving others who were entitled to compensation for their loss. Jean-Jacques Rousseau championed the notion of poverty as injustice which influenced the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, equipping the poor with legal claims against the state for their means of existence. 

Poverty as a matter of justice lends agency to the poor as ‘right bearers’ rather than putting them at the mercy of those more fortunate than them. Those who are not poor are seen as profiteers, who benefit from the labour of underpaid workers. They should be taxed by the state for the benefit of all. Furthermore, they too have an interest in holding the state accountable, for they may become poor themselves one day.

Poverty as a matter of justice lends agency to the poor as ‘right bearers’ rather than putting them at the mercy of those more fortunate than them.

The rights in the South African constitution are grounded in justice claims. The Economic Covenant is similarly grounded in justice claims. It has been traced to Latin American constitutions and Franklin Roosevelt’s ‘freedom from want’. The European states have already enacted some form of universal health care (such as the NHS) and social security (such as in France). 

Poverty and Utility

The third conception looks at poverty as a result of the failure to organise institutions in a sensible way. Here poverty is a question of utility to be analysed and solved. The argument here is that poverty should be addressed by the state because it is painful, not only for the poor, but for the larger society of which they are a part. 

For Jeremy Bentham, rights were a distraction. The focus should be on poverty rather than an intangible concept of ‘justice’. Thus, the poor should be studied and poverty alleviation programs designed enabling them to become productive members of society. The utilitarian conception of poverty addresses the state: relieve poverty or at least manage it, because insecurity is destabilising. Utilitarianism was the impetus for the creation of the Bretton Woods institutions established after the Second World War to finance the reconstruction of Europe. The MDG may be thought of as the latest in a long line of development initiatives based in this school of thought. 

The MDG may be understood as utilitarian efforts to relieve the ill effects of globalisation or to extend the benefits of globalisation to the poor. Jeffrey Sachs- an early proponent of the Washington Consensus- advised governments in Latin America and Eastern Europe that free markets would save their troubled economies. Sachs’ conclusion that African economies’ struggles to take off due to the high incidences in Malaria and AIDS, led to development initiatives focussing on creating more productive workforces.

The Economic Covenant is also grounded in utility: the notion that poverty can be tackled by measures and technical assistance. As in the case of the South African constitution the state is best equipped to deal with matters concerning reconciliations after the dismantling of the apartheid. 

The second part of the series will look at how the liberal conceptions of poverty add up and how they fall short. 

---

By Vedika Inamdar

Vedika is from India, where she completed an undergraduate degree in sociology. She worked at an academic research organisation between finishing her undergraduate degree and starting her Masters in Poverty and Development at IDS. She is interested in the anthropological and sociological sides of development and the application of social theory in the field of development.