The sociological context of poverty

IBOLYA CZIBERE The sociological con ex o po e y „Po e y and exclusion can be no on any accoun ole a ed in a well-o con inen like Eu ope.”1 A sociological app oach o po e y: opposing pa adigms The sociological esea ch on po e y, he heo e ical and empi ical knowledge accumula ed con ibu es o iden i ying and in e p e ing po e y phenomena and - as a se e o social policy – i akes an ac i e ole in ac ions implemen ed o he mode a ion o des i u ion, also in he elabo a ion, in oduc ion o di e se social, social policy p ojec s, and impac s udies. In hese ields he science o sociology mos ly exploi s unc ionalis and con lic -pa adigms. He eunde , he ocus alls on hese pa adigms, he ele an heo y o „po e y cul u e” by Lewis, he ca ego y o unde class, he mechanisms o social seclusion and he model o li e cycle a e also men ioned. The s uc u al in e p e a ions o po e y – unc ionalisms and con lic s Among he unc ionalis heo ies he mos o en quo ed au ho s o he ield o sociological in e p e a ions o po e y a e Da is and Moo e (1997) who in hei heo y abou social s a i ica ion se he ocus on he ypes o social inequali ies and he ac o s de eloping hem. As hey e med, socie y is mechanism in unc ion which is en i led o dis ibu e i s membe s among social posi ions and o s imula e hem o ul ill asks associa ed wi h hei own unc ions. To supplemen hei idea hey no ed ha socie y needs o possess such „ ewa ds”2 ha can be applied as incen i es and such me hods ha allow he di e en ial alloca ion o ewa ds o dis inc posi ions. „In gene al, he posi ions ha call o h he bes ewa ds, ha is occupy he highes ank a) a e o he g ea es impo ance o socie y and b) equi e he highes le el o quali ica ions o alen ” (Da is-Moo e 1997: 13). 1 The no ion o he Eu opean Economic and Social Commi ee, a p oposal o dec ee made by he Eu opean Pa liamen and Council on he yea o s uggle agains po e y and social exclusion (2010). COM (2007) 797 inal – 2007/0278 (COD). 2 Acco ding o he au ho s ewa ds can be ca ego ized as ones ha (1) di ec ly con ibu e o subsis ence and undamen al well-being, (2) p omo e en e ainmen and ec ea ion, (3) os e sel -es eem and sel - ealiza ion. 152 METSZETEK 2014/1. szám Since socie ies a e impelled o di e en ia e hei membe s acco ding o p es ige and es eem, o some ex en hey mus ha e ins i u ionalized inequali y. Consequen ly, hose posi ions u n in o he sou ces o po e y (low income and p es ige) ha a e o ha dly any signi icance o he socie y i sel . As Spéde ema ked, „ hose end o become poo who do no own any speci ic abili ies and skills, and a e in cha ge o posi ions ha could be illed by anyone else” (Spéde 2002: 20). The less in luen ial and he easies pos s a e loca ed a he bo om o hie a chy and a e he leas ewa ded. Acco ding o he heo y, hose a e p one o li e in po e y who can only ill low posi ions demanding less knowledge, ime- and o he in es men s. So, when sea ching o he causes o po e y low p es ige and low ewa ds associa ed wi h low s a us ha e been de ec ed. La e in ela ion o he unc ionalis pa adigm, in he con ex o he un olding „unde class deba e” He be J. Gans ollowing he no ion o he undese ing poo answe s he ques ion „wha undese ing poo se e o ?” in his s udy wi h unc ional o ien a ion. As he explains, po e y can be s udied and in e p e ed in e ms o i s posi i e and nega i e unc ions in socie y, while he ejec s hose heo e ical ideas ha claim „ he oo s o po e y can be a ibu ed o he mo al and in ellec ual inadequacy o he poo ”. C iminal o ences commi ed by he poo a e men ioned among he nega i e unc ions o po e y, i.e. ypes o s ee o ences and beha io s con adic ing he no ms o he middle-class. „Le me men ion some examples: he e a e some who do no unde ake any wo k, bea child en as ju eniles ou side ma iage, li e on aids and become addic ed o d ugs o alcohol. I ega d hese pa e ns o beha io as ones esul ing om po e y, as (ei he now o in o me imes) hey ha e been closely a ached o po e y and can ha dly be de ec ed, i a all, in non-poo classes As i o say, hey a e clea mani es a ions o des i u ion.” (Gans 1992: 1.) In his s udy, Gans p esen s 15 unc ions o unc ion se s o posi i e impac s ha a e supposed o i he undese ed. When illus a ing hese unc ions3 he shows he 3 Gans men ions he ollowing unc ions: (1) The undese ed poo seem o be he ese e sou ce o labou o ce, which is impo an conside ing ha by hem unemploymen a es can be held a a high le el o keep wages low. (2) Since no being well-quali ied, hey a e hough o lack e en he habi s (eg. e hics o wo k) needed, so hey a e less o e ed wo k oppo uni ies, namely hey a e excluded om he wo k o ce ma ke . Due o his ac hey a e no p esen ed in unemploymen s a is ics, hus making indica o s mo e „showy”. Thei posi ions a e eplaced, o ins ance by immig an s who a e willing he unde ake jobs o lowe wages in wo se condi ions. (3) They help o sa is y needs o illegal esou ces o he be e - o , e.g. h ough d ug a icking. (4) They p o ide wo k oppo uni ies o employees om he middle- class, e.g. o social wo ke s, psychologiss s, aine s, police o ice s, judges, p ison gua ds, as Gans no ed, e en o social science esea che s who a e commi ed o ca y ou in es iga ions abou hem. (5) Thanks o hem he ins i u ional s a us quo can be main ained, ega ding ha some de elopmen s such as he imp o emen o he schools main ained o „ he un eachable child en o he poo ”, he social building p ojec s o he suppo sys em can be omi ed. The ailu e o hese sys ems has always been explained wi h he igno ance o he conce ned, e e ing o he ca eless main enance o hei la s, hei e usal o pu sue any wo king ac i i ies. (6) The undese ed p o ide a mo al e hos o he ca ego iza ion o classes, i hey a e s igma ized as undese ed, all he o he s abo e hem a e conside ed as dese ing. I is no hing mo e han he legi ima ion o class hie a chy. (7) Also in main aining he social no ms he undese ed Ibolya Czibe e – The sociological con ex o po e y 153 duali y o he phenomenon; pa ly po e y is an end-p oduc o he unc ional di e en ia ion, pa ly i g ea ly con ibu es o he ope a ion and legi ima ion o he exis ing socie y. As o ou heme, besides he unc ionalis concep ions con lic heo ies oo ed in he doc ines o Ma xis sociology ha e also been gi en a p ominen pa , which con a y o he p io pu an idea in o he limeligh . Acco ding o i , p ocesses ongoing in he wo ld can be desc ibed by opposing and con adic o y in e es s, he e o e, socie y is no supposed o be a ield o ha mony bu one o con lic s. The essen ial poin o W igh ’s heo y (1999) is ha social inequali ies a e de eloped and main ained on he basis o duali ies o exploi a ion and opp ession, consequen ly po e y is ega ded as a di ec esul o exploi a ion. In his sense, hose can become poo who do no possess any p ope ies o p oduc ion ha is hey ha e no in luence a all on he means o p oduc ion. As W igh concludes, po e y is a consequence o he opposi ion be ween hose in powe and ma ginal g oups o he socie y. The undamen al dis inc ion o he abo e wo heo ies can be ealized in he di e en in e p e a ions o causes o po e y. Acco ding o he unc ionalis heo y, he sou ces o po e y can be ma ked in he limi ed numbe o highly quali ied indi iduals and di e se signi icance o posi ions exis ing in socie ies. By con lic heo ies he eme gence o inequali ies and po e y can be de i ed om exploi a ion. As hei common segmen on he one hand bo h concep ions acknowledge po e y as a esul o s uc u al ela ions, on he o he hand hei app oaches a e based on posi ions o he wo k o ce ma ke and employmen ela ions, and none o hem pass he o mal sphe es o wo k and capi al (Spéde 2002). Acco ding o Pe e Townsend’s (1991) concep ion ega ding unc ionalism o jus i y heo y ope a ionaliza ion would be equi ed which is a he di icul , since „no only a e collec i e ba gaining and poli ical ac ions igno ed, bu he ac ha he powe o in e es g oups and classes o e sou ces p o es o be di e se” (Townsend 1991: 191). play impo an oles. Those who mee he gene al no ms can exploi hem o „s anding o hese no ms explici and igh o hei social ein o cemen ” so o keep he mo ali y o he middle-class emain alid.(8) The undese ed can be s igma ized as scapegoa s and become a ge s du ing con lic s o indi ec ly se e he in e es s o he poli ical eli e. (9) Fo media, mos ly o ele ision p og ammes he undese ed o e inexhaus ible sou ces o hemes, in „busy, ne e ending ele ision epo s” add essing mu de s and o he o ences he poo a e he „s a s”. (10) As clien s hey a e a ailable o suppo s p o ided by chu ches, eligious ins i u ions and poli ical pa ies which se up o a he o longing o u he bene i s. (11) The exis ence o he le -wing is s ongly de e mined by he oles o ep esen ing a ai s o he poo and s uggling agains hei s a us o being undese ed. (12) As he undese ed do no possess any poli ical powe , igh -wing pa ies ha e always been eady o exploi hem. (13) The undese ed can gi e a handle in c i ical ac ions o s and up agains he wel a e s a e. (14) They can be ma ked as scapegoa s o he na ional con lic s, candida es o le -wing o libe al pa ies can be pe manen ly c i izised o suppo ing he undese ed hus ques ioning hei own sui abili y o poli ical engagemen . (15) The de elic li ing en i omen o he poo can be u ilized o se ling hose ins i u ions he e which a e no conside ed as sui able in he en i omen o he be e -o . These a e shel e s o he homeless, ehabili a ion cen es, dumpsi es, no o men ion police ha a e inclined o p o ide a „ al e” o d ug a icking in hese a eas. 154 METSZETEK 2014/1. szám Ano he highligh ed poin o his c i ique is based on he issue o mo i a ion. Acco ding o he heo y, o inspi e people o acqui e ce ain posi ions highe inancial ewa d and p es ige a e demanded. Howe e , as P. Townsend claims he heo y ails o emembe he ac ha mo i a ion is a dependan on he cul u al en i onmen as well, so he desi e o inancial ewa d is less likely o be equally s ong and impo an o e e yone. He conside s unc ionalism as a sociologically and poli ically „con enien ” concep ion, because „ ewa ds a e sui able o hiding in o ma ion ha e eal inequali ies, o he social eli e he exclusi e dissemina ion o o e -gene alized, ambi alen o highly selec i e in o ma ion is a means o con olling he po en ially dis up i e powe o inequali ies” (Townsend 1991: 191). All in all, he cons ella ions o po e y and weal h a e wo schemes o g ea signi icance ha help people in e p e and unde s and he unequal dis ibu ion o ad an ages and d awbacks in socie ies (Csepeli-Kolosi-Neményi-Ö kény 1992). In adi ional socie ies, he in e p e a ion o his duali y was ine i able, as Csepeli and his colleagues no ed, „i depended upon he schemes p esuming he e ec s o he social causes”. In a mode n socie y in which indi idual achie emen is highly emphasized pe sonal eedom and esponsibili y ha e become he ocuspoin s, hus indi idual ac o s ha e also played a pa in who, how and why could ob ain mo e ad an ageous o disad an ageous social posi ions. The cul u e o po e y, he unde class, social dep i a ion and he po e y o li e cycles The cul u e o po e y Acco ding o Townsend’s in e p e a ion, „ he e minology o he subcul u e o he poo we e dis illed om a sequence o e hnological, sociological and eugenical in es iga ions” (Townsend 1991: 186). In i s mode n o m i has been ep esen ed by Osca Lewis (1988); acco ding o Lewis he poo es s a a o socie y es ablish an isola ed and gene ally sel - ep oducing subsocie y o subcul u e. This cul u e is claimed o ha e an impo an unc ion by inco po a ing a li e s yle and pe pe ua ing i in o he ollowing gene a ions. Apa om he gene al sho age, he economic dep i a ion and he ino dina e condi ions cha ac e is ic o po e y i e eals a way o li e ha abso bs a speci ic meaning, unc ion, s uc u e and de ence sys em, all wi h he only aim o su i ing po e y. I claims ha he cul u e o po e y can eme ge in any his o ical si ua ion, howe e , i mos ly de elops and lou ishes in socie ies which mee he ollowing equi emen s. „1. money managemen , wage labo and p o i p oduc ion; 2. pe sis en ly high a es o unemploymen and low employmen a es o he unquali ied; 3. low wages; 4. lack o social, poli ical and economic o ganiza ions es ablished ei he unp omp ed o ini ia ed by he go e nmen among indi iduals wi h low income; 5. sp ead o bila e al a ini y sys ems ins ead o unila e al ones; 6. alue sys em o he dominan class ha a aches g ea imp o ance o inancial p ope ies, weal h, upwa d mobili y and economy, sees he oo s o he un a o able economic si ua ion in indi idual inadequacy and Ibolya Czibe e – The sociological con ex o po e y 155 in e io i y. The way o li e ha ing a isen in such ci cums ances among he poo is he cul u e o po e y.” (Lewis 1988: 95.) Mo eo e , acco ding o Lewis he cul u e o po e y is a kind o adap a ion and esponse o he ma ginal si ua ion o he poo . I helps hem cope wi h he eelings o despai and hopelessness when i becomes clea ha hey a e incapable o achie ing success acco ding o he alues and goals o he majo i y. The subcul u e can su i e o long o double easons. Pa ly, due o he p essu e posed on i s membe s by he majo i y and he s uc u e o he majo i y, pa ly he subcul u e is able o es ablish sel -in igo a ing mechanisms. As a main cause, a p ocess can be iden i ied which unde goes in he ideology, aspi a ions and pe sonali y o he child en aised in subcul u al ci cums ances. Because o all hese, Lewis belie es ha he imp o emen o economic condi ions does no necessa ily lead o he elimina ion o he cul u e o po e y. The e mina ion p ocess can be seen as ime consuming, jus one gene a ion does no p o e o be enough, so in e ms o i s concep „i is easie o pu an end o po e y han o he cul u e o po e y”. Lewis aims a p o ing ha he way o li e cha ac e is ic o he poo s a a ca ies alues ha a e no a all in e io only di e en om ha o he o he classes (Boko 1987). In he 1980s hese hough s eeme ged due o he so called deba e o he unde class, hough accen ua ing o he issues and bea ing mo e po en s uc u al embeddedness (Spéde 2002). Unde class – ano he s igma o he undese ed The e m unde class was c ea ed by My dal (Domanski 2001) o desc ibe o cha ac e ize hose indi iduals and amilies, which en e ed ex eme li ing condi ions and o al economic ma ginali y o we e pushed in o such ci cums ances. The e m has been used since he 1980s in he USA whe e he e m e e s o a o m o ghe o- po e y in u ban a eas, hough i has p o ed o be g ea ly dispu ed in he li e a u e o po e y. Au ho s in es iga ing he hemes o he unde class all ag ee on who a e conside ed o belong o his g oup: hose who ake he posi ion unde all o he classes o s a a, a e unde quali ied o unde educa ed, and a e poo in e ms o hei income. When quo ing Wilson Spéde axa i ely lis s he g oups o which membe s a e belie ed o o m he unde class: „… he poo pe manen ly o almos exclusi ely li ing on social allowances; he unemployed young who do no a end o a e excluded om school; s ill wo king-aged bu unemployed men who ha ing allen ou o each o unemploymen bene i s and gi en up hope do no sea ch o jobs; hose wi h incomes om illegal ac i i ies no possessing pe manen , legal jobs; mo he s o me ly no ha ing had jobs who aise hei child en alone wi hou a spouse o a pa ne ; he se iously addic ed ( o alcohol, d ugs); he agg essi e young o ming gangs; he c iminals, he homeless e c.” (Spéde 2002: 30.) They a e excluded om he adi ional sys em o s a i ica ion and ha e no ela ion a all (nei he economic, no social) wi h he majo i y belonging o he non-poo . They o m he s a um unde classes. 156 METSZETEK 2014/1. szám In he Ame ican li e a u e he e m is discussed acco ding o wo sepa a e app oaches. In Sil e ’s iew (1996) he eason o his is he ac ha igh -wing poli ical pa ies ha e u ned he e m o hei ad an age, he media ha e e e ed o i as he s igma izing p ac ice o he abo e hus con e ing he e m o unde class in o an ideologically mo alizing one. The libe als ha e app oached he e m om he pe spec i e o he social s uc u e. They p opose social allowances o hose pe manen ly ou o wo k o a oid he dange s o social-spa ial seg ega ion. The conse a i e app oach is beha io based claiming ha hose who belong o he laye o he unde class can be cha ac e ized by a di e se (de ian ) pa e n o beha io di e en om ha o he majo i y o he poo , which is he cul u e o po e y in i sel and also he o igin o hei des i u ion. Domanski (2001) when ci ing Cha les Mu ay emphasizes ha he poo can be ega ded as ic ims, ” hose who ha e been aised wi hou a a he and ha e been socialized in a coun e cul u e in which educa ion and wo k a e o low p es ige, a e basically p og ammed o a ailu e.” (Domanski 2001: 40). As wo u he easons o he de elopmen o hei po e y he social se ices a e men ioned, which by he means o p o iding inancial suppo ge he conce ned ou o he habi o wo king. „We ha e p ac ically al e ed he ules conce ning he poo . In a nu shell, we can s a e ha »I is no you aul ha you a e poo . I you do no s udy a school, i is so because he educa ional sys em is p ejudiced agains you. Should you commi a c ime, you a e o ced o do so by you un a ou able condi ions…« Finally, a e exemp ing e e yone om liabili y we claim ha »…you can li e wi hou being in ol ed in he a ai s o he social wo ld as you pa en s could«.” (Domanski ci ing Mu ay, 2001: 42.) Along wi h he pa icula way o hinking ypical o he cul u al heo ies, he cul u e o he po e y is p esumed o be a de ian cul u e and ha is he eason why indi iduals and amilies a e enclosed in des i u ion. As Mu ay no ed, hey a e supposed o be pa hological amilies, which owe hei exis ence o he help ul a i ude and goodwill o he socie y, and suppo s om he wel a e sys em a e seen as eliable o he ep oduc ion o he unde class. F om his pe spec i e, he decline o he ins i u ion o ma iage can be obse ed among he poo ; o women he unma ied men a e no seen as a ac i e pa ne s due o he lack o hei discipline, ha is hey would no be able o suppo he amily because o hei unemployed s a us. While Mu ay (and o he ollowe s o he cul u al heo ies) sees he causes o dep i a ion in he a i udes and beha io pa e ns o he poo , by he ollowe s o he s uc u alis app oach po e y is seen as a se e e o ganiza ional-ope a ional mal unc ion o capi alism. They ega d he class o he poo o be so he e ogeneous and o ha e a changing ca ego y o classi ica ion ha i does no and canno ha e i s own independen cul u e and iden i y. The Hunga ian usage o he e m can be cha ac e ized by ex ao dina y cau iousness and ein e p e a i e endencies. Righ a e he change in he poli ical sys em Zsuzsa Fe ge in he wo k en i led „The socie y o ansi ion” (1995) asked he ques ion i a „dange ous and h ea ening” social g oup li ing in po e y and dep i a ion could o m in Hunga y, one simila o he s ongly ali e in he USA. Acco ding o he only „unce ain and cau ious p esupposi ions” can be aken ega ding he ac ha he Ibolya Czibe e – The sociological con ex o po e y 157 oo s o he Ame ican unde class show subs an ial di e ences om he Eu opean ea u es. As she w o e, a backwa d endency, a ype o seclusion om he socie y could be de ec ed in Hunga y as ea ly as he 1980s, which esul ed in he es ablishmen o new o ms o disad an ages such as unemploymen , open homelessness, a ise in he numbe o people wi h low income and a sudden inc ease in he p opo ion o indi iduals li ing on social allowances. To all o hese ac o s unce ain ies o li e and unp edic able u u e we e added. The social dis ance be ween he poo and o he laye s o socie y s a ed o inc ease ha is a p og ess o allback eme ged, hough a ha ime i could no be o eseen i he unde class o he class unde exis ence as Zsuzsa Fe ge called i would come in o being. In he iew i depends on „how pe sis en unemploymen would be; how much p o ec ion he employed would ha e; wha aining o m would eplace he mass seconda y educa ion p e iously ep esen ed by oca ional aining; o wha ex en he educa ional sys em would expand and imp o e o na ow and de e io a e; how b oad he scope o he social allowances would be; wha condi ions would be se o he allowances; how he poo o he impo e ishing amilies could main ain hei ela i ely accep able homes; o o wha ex en dual sys ems could gain g ound in heal h ca e sys em, educa ion o in o he ields meaning a good-quali y se ice o he be e -o and one o low quali y o he es ” (Fe ge 1995:13). Besides all hese, he new ideology eme ging a e he change in he poli ical sys em and he leade s wi h economic and poli ical powe ul illing hei own in e es s all ein o ced he es ablishmen o he unde class s ongly in ensi ied by he Roma issue. The e we e conce ns ha he endencies o disad an age would wo sen, and as Fe ge no ed „ he dis inc isola ion o he unde class needs ime, hough i migh as well acce ela e in his si ua ion” (Fe ge 1995: 14). Spéde (2002) when quo ing Smi h adds ha he e m became hema ized in he Eu opean sociology by he 1990s, along wi h he concep ion o „exclusion” which had been a majo conce n in F ance e e ing o he mul iply disad an aged g oups o he poo excluded om he li ing condi ions o he majo i y. In a ew yea s he e m de eloped no only in o a esea ch issue bu a poli ical p og am in he Eu opean Union, and also su aced in common alk displacing (and impeding) unde class, he e m wi h highly a guable alues. Social exclusion and „ he medley o hose li ing in ma ginali y”4 F om he end o he 1970s he e m „exclusion” was d awing inc easing a en ion and was gaining g ound in F ance, hen in England5, and was used o de ining a new, mode n o m o po e y (Ha asi 2002). La e he con ex o he e m was g ea ly modi ied and b oadened, and i became well-known h oughou Eu ope when in 1985 4 The exp ession is used by Robe Cas el in one o his s udies: De l’indigence a l’exclusion, la désa ilia ion, p éca i é du a ail e ulne abili é ela ionnelle. In Jacques Donzelo (ed): Face á l’exclusion. Le model ançais Edi ion espi i , 1991 5 Ama ya Sen adds ha he e used o be a e m which had e e ed o dep i a ion be o e he appea ance o he e m „social exclusion”. Dep i a ion is conside ed as a pionee e m o i s kind; he e m was c ea ed by Adam Smi h (1776) un olding „ he inabili y o appea be o e o he s”, so i e e s o a di icul y ha can be expe ienced by someone dep i ed when joning communi y li e. (Sen 2003b). 158 METSZETEK 2014/1. szám i was in oduced by expe s and specialis commi ees ep esen ing he Eu opean Union. Se e al esea ches s a ed wi h a ocus on social exclusion. In cla i ying he e m, A kinson played a majo ole who while in es iga ing he sociological e ms used in di e en coun ies wi h his colleagues dis inguished h ee cons an o ecu en ca ego ies which se ed as de ini ions o exclusion, hough hey did no ecognize any concep ual o e laps. The h ee ca ego ies come as ollows: ela i i y, ac i i y and dynamics (A kinson 1998). Rela i i y means ha he in es iga ed si ua ion bes e lec s he pa icula s o he socie y, he ime and he en i onmen , ha is he excluded indi iduals a e o be co ela ed o he ci cums ances in which hey li e. Mo eo e , A kinson ends o belie e ha exclusion is a he an a ibu e o a social g oup han ha o an indi idual. Ac i i y as ano he cha ac e is ic ea u e o exclusion e eals he ac ha exclusion always de i es om se ies o ac i i ies. In his case he doe and his ac ions a e ega ded as he mos impo an , and as A kinson adds, „in case o in eg a ion diso de s no only he ci cums ances o he conce ned a e o be aken in o conside a ion bu also he ex en o hei eliabili y” (A kinson 1998: 8). The hi d ac o , dynamics ep esen s he co espondence ha indi iduals can be excluded om socie y because o being ou o wo k o being childless and also owing o losing hei ai h in hei own o hei child en’s u u e, hus in eg a ion di icul ies may as well span in o he ollowing gene a ions. Ama ya Sen’s (2003b) in e p e a ion shows di e ences, he app oaches social exclusion om he u ili y o he concep ion, so he aims a e ealing whe he he no ion has b ough on any hing new i compa ed o he o me ones, whe he i has had any inc emen s, i any, o some signi icance. He means o ind ou i he e a e any elemen s o he concep ion which could con ibu e o he be e unde s anding o he na u e o po e y. Acco ding o Sen (in acco dance wi h he oldes in e p e a ion), po e y equals lack o income which seems o be ele an in he opic because income makes a emendous impac on he li es o indi iduals. He iden i ies he cause o „impo e ished li e” wi h insu icien income, hus low income p o es o be a undamen al sou ce o po e y. Tha is why po e y needs o be in es iga ed om he ea u es o mise able li e, no om he pe spec i e o low income. He ap ly no es ha ”impo e ished li e calls o a en ion no only emp y walle s” (Sen 2003:5), o income is one o he majo means o balanced li e de oid o dep i a ion. Ama ya Sen’s heo e ical app oach e alua es po e y as a condi ion dep i ed om oppo uni ies and p o es o be a mul i-dimensional, by his own admission an „A is o elian” concep ion. The essen ial message o he A is o elian pe spec i e (basically conceded by Sen) claims ha „impo e ished li e lacks he eedom o ake pa in in insic ac i i ies ha a e o be chosen o good easons” (Sen 2003:5). He accep s he necessi y app oach o Adam Smi h pu po ing o de ine he equisi es in luencing indi idual eedom and p o iding des i u ion- ee li e. In he co e o he Smi hian idea o „being eady o appea be o e o he s” dep i a ion can be ecognized which absolu ely plunges people in o po e y. Acco ding o Sen „Smi h ocused on he ideas o in eg a ion and exclusion while analysing po e y, and when de ined he na u e o »necessi ies« indispensable o a decen li e: »By necessi ies I no only mean hose ma e ial needs which a e supposed o be means o sus enance, bu he sho age o hose esou ces ha a e conside ed o be unaccep able by Ibolya Czibe e – The sociological con ex o po e y 159 he cus oms o he coun y e en o he lowes anking ones wo hy o espec […] Lea he shoes a e seen as essen ials o li e acco ding o he cus oms o England. E en he poo es emale o men could no a oid he shame when appea ing in public wi hou hem«”. (Sen 2003: 8). Sen applies he Smi hian app oach o dep i a ion o model how exclusion om social in e ac ions – i.e. dep i a ion om communi y li e – is connec ed o social exclusion. In he Hunga ian li e a y sou ces Zsuzsa Fe ge (2000) inds he bene i s o he e m in i s compe ence o demons a e no only he eali y o ma e ial dep i a ion and po e y, bu he complexi y o he p oblem in ol ing he ac o being excluded om a ious sou ces, ac i i ies, oppo uni ies and igh s. Al hough po e y is seen as a passi e almos sel -exis en ca ego y o which exis ence is said o be nobody’s aul , he e is ano he especially use ul aspec o he mechanism o exclusion, o i mani es s ha ce ain social g oups o p ocesses mo e o less, bu consciously unc ion in a way which leads o he exclusion o indi iduals o o he g oups. Fe ge adds ha „ he e has been a s ong need o he e m o social exclusion o se e al easons. I has been sui able o in oducing he phenomenon o po e y as a complex and dynamic one wi h an accumula ion o disad an ages, no as a si ua ion o (pe manen o empo a y) inancial sho age. I has slowly become a comp ehensi e e m ha includes he ac o s jeopa dizing social cohesion, he ma ginaliza ion, and he p ocesses gene a ing exclusion. On he con a y, he e m o inclusion communica es social inco po a ion, namely cohesion.” (Fe ge 2007: 8.) The e m can be a iously in e p e ed, as on he one hand in Fe ge’s eading i is „absence o pa icipa ion in main ields o social li e” (Fe ge quo ing Bu sha d , Fe ge 2007: 8), on he o he hand as a cumula ed o m o dep i a ion i di ec s a en ion o li e chances, blames he sho age o low s anda d o he a ailable esou ces and capi al, on he hi d hand i appea s as a con as o a socie y o „high quali y” (i.e. adequa ely in eg a ed). As she says h ough „ he many aced social agmen a ion” ghe oisa ion and seg ega ion de elop in incible dis ances and obs acles be ween he excluded and he o he s. Since he desc ip ion and measu emen o he objec i e ela i e dep i a ion e m o Pe e Townsend, he in es iga ion o he aspec has gained g ea signi icance which claims ha po e y is no simply a lack o income, i a he says ha indi iduals o amilies may be excluded om ac i i ies socially conside ed impo an due o he sho age o esou ces. Zsuzsa Fe ge (2002) summa izing Mille ’s concep ions makes ob ious ha „ hose shocked by po e y all know ha he poo su e no jus because money is igh . Financial sho age b ings on mise y, humilia ion, social ejec ion. So he e exis s an in e p e a ion o po e y equi alen o exclusion, no ma e wha he la e means” (Fe ge 2002: n.p.) To he ques ion whe he po e y in a b oad sense di e s in meaning om exclusion, Zsuzsa Fe ge answe s he ollowing: „basically i is all abou he same social phenomena, ha dship, dep i a ion, he o ced cons ic ion o he ho izon, desi es and choices no olun a ily es ained” (Fe ge 2002: n.p.). In he iew, he easons o he widesp ead use o he e m exclusion a e less academic han poli ical in which he mo e cu en hemes o „e hnici y-mino i y-mig a ion” a e included. In addi ion he social psychological impac s o exclusion canno be igno ed, as i e lec s a s a e ou o socie y ha is no „pu e” ela i e po e y, bu a condi ion in 166 METSZETEK 2014/1. szám A e all, he ques ion a ises: how o de ine he ca ego ies o pe sis ence and ansi ion, and whe e o d aw he bounda y be ween he wo. S a ing om Zsol Spéde ’s esea ches (2002) i seems o be ob ious ha he answe s o hese ques ions a e no easy a all, as he w i es pa ly because he a e o he popula ion in each ca ego y depends on he leng h o he obse a ion pe iod. In he in e na ional li e a u e, he e a e se e al app oaches o he de e mina ion o he leng h o he obse a ion pe iod applied o measu ing pe sis en po e y. Spéde e e s o wo p ac ices, pa ly hose ha e been ound o be pe sis en ly poo by esea che s who li e eigh yea s ou o he obse ed en in po e y. Acco ding o he o he app oaches, i has been concluded in he cou se o he in es iga ion o he likelihood o eme gence ha he chances o hose ha ing li ed in po e y o mo e han h ee yea s s a o dec ease adically. Zsol Spéde lis s hose among he pe sis en poo who lowe unde po e y h eshold a leas ou imes in six yea s’ ime. When making dis inc ion be ween ansi ional and pe sis en po e y Júlia Szalai (2002) inds i essen ial o dis inguish income-subsis ence po e y om he condi ion wi h mul iple handicaps (she calls hem people in deep po e y, lagging poo o he excluded). In he iew in he backg ound o subsis ence po e y „simple” p oblems o dis ibu ion can be e ealed. In hese cases, he incomes ea ned in di e en ields o employmen pe sis en ly lag behind he p ice le el o daily consump ion o incomes om social insu ance lose hei alues. These dep i ed g oups ha e been s ill seen as segmen s o he majo i y, since he mo e hei income imp o es, he mo e s able hei li e condi ions will be, which enables hem o e u n o he sphe es o socie y domina ed by he majo i y and o social scenes o he edge o which hey ha e been pushed. The si ua ion seems o be di e en o he ac ual ic ims o exclusion, who ei he ha e no had any ela ions o help hem ein eg a e o , i any, hey ha e los hem. A common ea u e o he li e o he excluded is ha hey a e likely o ha e a long p ehis o y o hei po e y, o en decades, and he ex en o hei des i u ion is ex eme, o en deep o he le el o des i u ion (Szalai 2002). Li e ela ions can be illus a ed by common peculia i ies: „… hei social ela ions basically in ol e hose in simila ci cums ances, hei child en a end he same class as o he ill- a ed child en, hei amilies dwell oge he wi h o he amilies in dis ess in a aged housing es a es, in abandoned a mhouses o in a bi a ily occupied backya d hu s, hei ill pa en s a e si ing wi h o he mise ables su e ing om handicaps o illnesses in empo a y dilapi a ed medical cen es a he end o illages o hou s o ge access o »gene al medical p esc ip ions«; hey queue up in he human ade ma ke o illegal employmen wi h o he de enceless ellows ne e ob aining a »decen « job…” (Szalai 2002: 42.) Consequen ly, hei psychic and physical esou ces a e exploi ed o he ex en ha hey ge unable o a ange hei li es unaided e en i hey we e o e ed secu e and pe manen employmen , because wi hou p ope means hei exis en ial come-down and ma ginaliza ion canno be hal ed. In addi ion, as a ypical ea u e o ansi ional po e y, bu no o pe sis en exclusion he mise able li e ci cums ances a e passed on h ough gene a ions which hen come o s ay o he younge gene a ions on he long un. Ibolya Czibe e – The sociological con ex o po e y 167 Re e ences A kinson, Tony (1998): Tá sadalmi ki ekesz ődés, szegénység és munkanélküliség. Esély, 1998/4. Beck, Ul ich (2003): A kockáza - á sadalom. Ú egy másik mode ni ásba. Század ég Kiadó, Budapes Boko , Ágnes (1985): Dep i áció és szegénység. Tá sadalom udományi In éze , Budapes Boko , Ágnes (1987): Szegénység a mai Magya o szágon. Mag e ő Kiadó, Budapes Csepeli, Gyö gy - Kolosi, Tamás - Neményi, Má ia - Ö kény, An al (1992): A gazdagság és a szegénység okai a ado magya áza ok ej e no ma í szempon jai Magya o szágon. In: Szociológiai Szemle 1992/3. Da is, Kingsley-Moo e Wilbe E. (1997): A é egződés néhány el e – In: Angelusz Róbe (ed.): A á sadalmi é egződés komponensei – Új Mandá um, Budapes Domanski, Hen yk (2001): A szegénység á sadalmi megha á ozói a posz kommunis a á sadalmakban. In: Szociológiai Szemle 2001/4. Fe ge, Zsuzsa (1985): Tá sadalmi s uk ú a, á sadalmi há ány. In: Szociálpoli ikai É esí ő, Budapes , 1985., 4-5/I-II. Fe ge, Zsuzsa (1995): Az á mene á sadalma. Esély, 1995/4. Fe ge, Zsuzsa (2000): A á sadalom pe eme és az embe i mél óság. In: Esély, 2000/1. Fe ge, Zsuzsa (2002): Ké sebességű Magya o szág. – Magya Nemze i Szeminá ium a Tá sadalmi össze a ozás ól, 2002. július 18. Fe ge, Zsuzsa (2007): Mi ö énik a szegénységgel? Csalóka „posz mode ni ás”. Esély, 2007/4. Gans, He be (1992): Mi e szolgálnak az é dem elen szegények – In: Esély 1992/3.– Tá sadalom- és szociálpoli ikai olyói a , Hilsche Rezső Alapí ány, Budapes Ha asi, É a (2002): Szegénység és á sadalmi ki ekesz e ség a mai Magya o szágon. In: Szociológiai Szemle, 2002/4. Ha asi, É a (2005): Jö edelmi helyze – minimális jö edelemmel endelkezés. TÁRKI, Fejlesz éspoli ikai Helyze é ékelő Tanulmányok, Budapes Lewis, Osca (1988): A szegénység kul ú ája. Kul ú a és Közösség 1988. IV. Medgyesi, Má on – Szí ós, Pé e – Tó h, Is án Gyö gy (2000): Szegénység és egyenlő lenségek: gene ációs el olódások. In: Kolosi, Tamás – Tó h, Is án Gyö gy – Vuko ich, Gyö gy (ed.): Tá sadalmi ipo 2000. TÁRKI, Budapes Polányi, Ká oly (1976): Az a chaikus á sadalom és a gazdasági szemléle . Tanulmányok. Gondola Kiadó, Budapes Sen, Ama ya (2003): A ejlődés min szabadság. Eu ópa Köny kiadó, Budapes Sen, Ama ya (2003b): Ki ekesz és: Fogalom, alkalmazás és izsgála I. Esély, 2003/6. Sil e , Hila y (1996): Cul u e, Poli ics and Na ional Discou se o he New U ban Poo . In: Mingione, Enzo (sze k.) (1996): U ban Po e y and he Unde class. Blackwell Publishe s Somlai, Pé e (2000): Megha á ozások, a agy mi ől szól a család álsága? In: Spéde , Zsol – Tó h, Pál Pé e (ed.): Embe i iszonyok. Cseh-Szomba hy László isz ele é e. Század ég Kiadó, Budapes 168 METSZETEK 2014/1. szám Spéde , Zsol (2002): A szegénység ál ozó a cai. Tények és é elmezések. Század ég Kiadó, Budapes Szalai, Júlia (2002): A á sadalmi ki ekesz ődés egyes ké dései az ez ed o duló Magya o szágán. Szociológiai Szemle 2002/4. Townsend, Pe e (1991): Szegénység-elméle ek. In: Fe ge Zsuzsa-Lé ai Ka alin (ed.): A jólé i állam. T-Twins Kiadó, Budapes W igh , E ik Olin (1999): Ál alános ke e endsze az osz álys uk ú a elemzéséhez. In: Angelusz Róbe (ed.): A á sadalmi é egződés komponensei, Új Mandá um Köny kiadó, Budapes