You are on page 1of 25

Title

RE-CONCEPTUALISING POVERTY FOR OPTIMISING POVERTY REDUCTION: THE BASIC MEANS APPROACH

Author: Institution:

Address:

Adjei, Prince Osei-Wusu (1); Kyei, Peter Ohene (2); Segbefia, Alex Yao (3) 1: Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Ghana; 2: Pentecost University College, Ghana; 3: Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Ghana Department of Geography and Rural Development, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana princeosei2@hotmail.com +233-243126093

E-mail: Telephone:

RE-CONCEPTUALISING POVERTY FOR OPTIMISING POVERTY REDUCTION: THE BASIC MEANS APPROACH Abstract: Poverty is not a day old subject. Historically, it has been part of humanity from adam. However, what has become a problem is that poverty has become a global scourge and a social canker. Like a disease with multi-dimensional symptoms, poverty poses a major developmental challenge not only for developing countries but for the world as a whole. Every year over eight million people die around the world because they are too poor to stay alive; and the world continues to be so divided between the rich and the poor like never before in the history of the world. Why community and national poverty reduction strategies fail and how best policy makers could optimise poverty reduction have become critical developmental issues that raise important research questions. This paper unveils some of the reasons why the incidence of poverty continues to increase even though individuals and countries continue to make efforts to eradicate the condition. It raises arguments to support the proposition that, the failure of modern poverty reduction strategies in combating extreme poverty and its multiple manifestations towards achieving the millennium development goals (MDGs) in some African and Middle Income Countries is as a result of the perception of poverty as a multi-dimensional concept and the application of the basic needs approach in most cases for its reduction. Through a case study design with the application of descriptive tools such as in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, vignettes, triangulations, poverty mapping, percentages and frequencies among poor households in rural Ghana and supported with a critical review of relevant literature, the paper concludes that wrong conceptualization of poverty underpins the failure of modern poverty reduction strategies in deprived communities. The paper thus recommends a re-conceptualisation of poverty if countries trailing behind the poverty-related targets of the MDGs could get on track for sustainable poverty reduction and community development. It proposes a dual-dimensional conceptualisation requiring the basic means approach as an alternative approach to the basic needs concept of poverty reduction to inform the definition, measurement and strategy design in poverty discourse for optimising its eradication. Keywords: poverty, rural, basic means, income, education

INTRODUCTION Poverty has emerged as one of the most challenging global disease with rippling effects on the socio-economic status of most countries and individuals within these countries. Evidenced by the World Health Organization (WHO), over one billion of the worlds people continued to be cut off from the benefits of economic development and the advances in health that took place during the twentieth century. The challenges were that about 20 per cent of the worlds population, still lived in absolute poverty with income below US$1 per day, and almost one-half of the worlds population survived on less than US$2 per day (Sachs, 2005; WHO, 1999). The implication is that about one-sixth of humanity particularly the young people, women, the aged and children still struggle for daily survival in a life and death battle against extreme poverty, diseases, hunger, and environmental catastrophe. In his book the end of poverty, how we can make it happen in our lifetime, Sachs (2005) points out that every year over eight million people die around the world because they are too poor to stay alive. The world of our time is getting so divided between the rich and the poor as never before in human history. Thus, at the United Nations Millennium Summit in September 2000 to conclude on the millennium development goals (MDGs), extreme poverty and hunger eradication was the number one preoccupation of world leaders in their quest to improve global peace and eradicate spatial inequalities. The incidence and severity of poverty is exceptionally high in Africa in general and sub-Saharan African in particular. Sub-Saharan African countries

continue to grapple with widespread poverty in spite of efforts made to attack the menace it poses. It is estimated that almost 50 percent of the population lives in absolute poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa (Avery, 2007; Rowson, 2001; WHO, 1999); and the estimate of poverty incidence in the sub-region would increase if poverty was seen beyond income poverty (Sahn and Stifel, 2002). Since 1990, income poverty has fallen all over the world except in sub-Saharan Africa where the situation continues to worsen in both incidence and absolute terms. Out of thirty-one countries known to have low human development, twenty-eight are in sub-Saharan Africa (UNDP, 2006).

The problem of faltering social progress is especially acute in Africa in contrast with other regions that have witnessed more sustained improvement in living standards (World

Bank, 2001; UNICEF, 2000; UNO, 2000). Though several attempts have been made over the years by researchers, policy makers, governments and non-governmental organisations to find sustainable cure to the poverty menace pervading countries, poverty wounds continue to deepen particularly in rural Africa in spite of the efforts being made. The impact strategies designed to reduce poverty make on the socio-economic status of the poor are almost always insignificant. Why community and national level poverty reduction strategies fail and how best policy makers could optimize poverty reduction have become critical development issues that raise important research questions. This paper unveils some of the reasons why the incidence of poverty continues to increase even though individuals and countries continue to make efforts to eradicate the condition. More significantly, it presents an alternative approach to the basic needs concept of poverty reduction that has informed the definition, measurement and strategy design in poverty reduction issues globally for optimizing poverty reduction towards achieving the MDGs by 2015.

POVERTY

CONCEPTUALISATION

AND

REDUCTION:

REVIEW

OF

RELATED LITERATURE Several streams of ideas have emerged to inform and shape the new literature on poverty discourse across the globe. While these streams have many ideas in common, they do not add to a single coherent conceptual framework for defining poverty. A major common theme underlying these streams of ideas is the diversity of ways in which people perceive and experience poverty, diversity of how poverty is measured and how poor people strive either to escape poverty or to cope with it, and diversity of policy interventions emerging for combating poverty (Osmani, 2003). In his study on the relationship between poverty and health, Rowson (2001) highlights poverty as the number one killer in the world today, outranking smoking as the leading cause of death. His article Poverty and Health briefly surveys several areas including definitions of poverty and the number of people who are poor. He identified two main dimensions of poverty from which it could be defined; the income dimension and the non- income dimension. From the income dimension, Rowson makes reference to the World Banks poverty line of US$1 expenditure level for every person a day; a figure

representing the minimal amount on which a person can fulfill his physical needs. Thus from the income perspective, a person is considered to be living in extreme poverty if his income fell below US$1 a day (World Bank, 2000). The basic idea underpinning the World Bank and Rowsons analyses of poverty is that, the definition of poverty should take into consideration some social standards and income; however, poverty will always depend on what people in a particular society at a particular point in time perceive as poor. According to May (1998), poverty is defined as the inability to command sufficient resources to satisfy a socially acceptable minimum standard of living (May, 1998). From their conceptualisation of poverty, Rowson and May both agree on income which May terms resources as the main instrument for procuring the basic social needs. Thus, the definitions of poverty given by Rowson (2001) and May (1998) are based on the means to acquire the basic needs of life. Other researchers into poverty such as Nayaran (2000) and Appiah (2000) perceive poverty based on the needs and wants of the poor. Nayaran (2000) describes poverty as pain, characterised by continuous ill health, arduous and often hazardous work for low income, no power to influence change and high levels of anxiety and stress (Nayaran, 2000). The implication is that the adverse effect of lacking access to basic socio- economic needs is a perpetual pain to the poor. To be poor therefore implies a form of disempowerment (Friedman, 1999). In his investigation Appiah (2000) points out that poverty is a condition that prevents people from realising their potential. This condition manifests in terms of material deprivation, lack of assets, isolation and vulnerability, lack of decision making power and freedom of choice. Appiahs viewpoint is as a result of the perception that the poor are commonly seen as having very few possessions which is reflected in their lack of clothing, housing and consumer durables. Poverty is also associated with food insecurity with resultant poor nutritional, health and educational status (Appiah, 2000).

The various definitions of poverty reveal that poverty as a concept refers to different forms of deprivation which can be expressed in a variety of terms including income, access to basic needs and human capabilities to participate fully in society. Stewart et. al. (2007) identify four basic approaches by which poverty is defined including monetary,

capability, social exclusion and participatory approaches. George (1988) however argued that the definitions of poverty used in the advanced industrialised societies are not sensitive enough to cope with the breadth and depth of deprivation in the Third World countries (George, cited in Donkor, 1997).

Summary on the definitions given by the earlier researchers reveal the notion that poverty means having no or inadequate income to meet the basic needs of life. It is also lack of access to basic facilities which include education, health care, water and participation in the management and control of the socio-economic milieu of life. The implication is that poverty is a relative concept which defies a single definition. Hence, when defining poverty one needs to take into consideration the needs and wants of the people and the geographical setting within which the concept is being defined. Against this conceptual debate in poverty discourse, a number of poverty studies examine it from a multidimensional perspective with multiple approaches to inform poverty reduction strategy design. However, even though there seem to be no single generally acceptable definition of poverty, a common indicator in most perceptions of poverty remains the idea of lack or scarcity of. But the diversity in the definitions, measurements and strategies lies in the issue of what? lack of what? Today, poverty conceptualisation and reduction have become even much complex as absolute and relative poverty concepts are gradually giving way to complex and subjective participatory approaches due to the very complex attributes of man with insatiability of wants.

RURAL COMMUNITIES PERCEPTIONS OF POVERTY: FIELD EXPERIENCE FROM FIVE DISTRICTS OF GHANA Fieldwork Procedures and Methods The study was conducted in five predominantly rural districts of Ghana including the Amansie West, Bosomtwe and Sekyere East Districts in the Ashanti Region of Ghana as well as Wa West and Nadowli Districts of Upper West Region of Ghana to examine the rural dwellers perceptions of poverty and why poverty remains endemic in rural 6

communities. Primary data supported with review of relevant literature were used for this study. Data collection tools included questionnaires, interview guides for selected staff of the district administration and heads of decentralized departments of the study areas together with focus group discussions, vignettes and participant observation in the selected rural communities using random and purposive sampling process for accuracy and representativeness. In all a sample size of six hundred and eighty-five (685) was

used for primary data collection with heads of household as the units of inquiry for the rural communities. Manifestations and Rural Peoples Perceptions of Poverty Table One: Perceptions and manifestations of poverty among rural households: Gender groups What Poor (Needs/ Manifestations Poverty) Why Poor (Means/ Remarks on poverty incidence and severity

of Causes of Poverty)

Low employment rate; Inadequate housing; MALE Inadequate feeding; DISCUSSION GROUPS Inability to cater for child education; No security in times of risk; Lack of strength and skills to work (e.g. old age and sickness); Low level of education and training to work and participate in community decisions Present living conditions compared to three years ago has not improved Inadequate income to meet basic needs;

Inability clothing;

to

afford

Lack of farm inputs; Inadequate access to social services; etc. Not able to get enough food for household; FEMALE DISCUSSION GROUPS Inability to send children to school Having no job to earn a living; Having bad condition; health Living in dilapidating house; Low level of education and training to work and participate in community Present living decisions conditions compared to three years ago has not Inadequate improved income to meet needs; basic

Being defenceless; Having no support from a husband etc.

Source: (Field Data, 2008-2010) It was found from this study that, there exist multiple needs among rural households of the selected districts. Significantly too, in terms of gender and even individual priorities of needs, differences were found to exist for the various gender groups selected for discussions (See Table One). This gives an indication that poverty manifest differently in the lives of different categories of people. Again, the needs and wants of people are insatiable hence the possibility of different faces of poverty to emerge as individuals and groups develop taste for goods and services which may add up to their needs and wants. However, from the study, it was found that, for the different sex groups, their inability to meet their multiple needs, hence, remaining in poverty was as a result of low income to meet those needs and low levels of education and training to work to increase income

levels and also participate actively in community decisions which affect them. Thus, what makes the rural households poor are inadequate income and education (lack of the basic means); whereas the multiple manifestations including poor housing, inability to take children to school, poor health, inability to get enough food for the households etc. are the effects of low households income and education. In the Amansie West District of Ghana for example, it was observed that over 85 percent of heads of rural households selected for study, was unable to meet their basic needs due to inadequate income levels in the study communities. Whereas the low income levels of heads of household were attributed to their low levels of education to engage in viable income generating and livelihood development activity (see Table 2 and Figure 1). Thus, this study results confirmed with related studies, underpin the assumptions of the basic means approach as an alternative for defining and reducing poverty to achieve the MDGs by 2015. Table 2: Influence of Income on Basic Needs: Rural Dwellers Perceptions Strongly Agree Disagree Income is Agree responsible for Poor nutrition F 186 120 0 P 60.8 39.2 0 Poor housing F 171 134 1 P 55.9 43.8 .3 Overcrowding F 204 98 4 P 66.7 32.0 1.3 Poor health F 168 135 3 P 54.9 44.1 1.0 Poor education F 159 147 0 P 52.0 48.0 0 Poor hygiene F 97 175 32 P 31.7 57.2 10.2 Powerlessness F 141 136 28 P 46.1 44.4 9.2 Poor access to F 157 148 0 healthcare P 51.3 48.4 0 Source: Field Survey-Amansie West District, 2008 Key: F Frequencies of respondents P Strongly Disagree 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 .7 0 0 1 .3 Dont Know 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 .3 0 0 Total frequencies 306 100 306 100 306 306 306 100 306 100 306 100 306 100 306 100

Percentages of respondents

tertiary never schooled 38.6% 1.1% secondary 5.1%

basic 55.1%

Figure 1: Educational status of respondents WHY MODERN POVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGIES FAIL Several poverty reduction strategies have been applied to attack the alarming rate of poverty incidence in many modern societies. However, the gap between the rich and the poor continues to widen and the poor keeps becoming poorer as the years go by. Most poverty reduction strategies have been unsuccessful in achieving their goals and objectives. Data available on income poverty shows an increase in extreme poverty in most developing countries. Peoples vulnerability continues to deepen as new faces of poverty emerge. United Nations sources show that poverty in Africa has worsened, as low rates of economic growth were accompanied by high rates of population increase. Aggregate GDP in the region increased by 29%, but on per capita basis, there was virtually no change and the number of people living in extreme poverty increased by 74 million. Currently more than 300 million people in sub-Saharan Africa live on less than US$1 a day (Sachs, 2005). Awumbila (2004) provides a list of strategies which have been employed over the years to reduce poverty in Ghana. Such strategies as Programme of Action to Mitigate the

10

Social Cost of Adjustment (PAMSCAD); National Action Programme for Poverty Reduction; Extended Poverty Study 1988-1992 and 1995; Free Compulsory Universal Basic Education (FCUBE); Medium Term Health Strategy (MTHS); Revised National Population Policy (1994) and Population Action Plan; Ghana Vision 2020 Policy Statement Pertaining to Poverty Reduction; Poverty Reduction Strategy Documents Under the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) have been employed. Since the beginning of the 21st century, pro-poor interventions such as the Ghana Poverty Reduction Strategy one and two, Livelihood Empowerment against Poverty, the National Health Insurance Scheme and the National Youth Employment Programme in line with the Millennium Development Goals have been initiated (Awumbila, 2004; GPRS, 2006). These and other community based strategies for poverty reduction have been adopted to reduce poverty and vulnerability in Ghana. Ghana Statistical Service sources (GSS, 2006) based on conventional income poverty line approach indicate that poverty has reduced from almost 52 percent in 1992 to 28.5 percent in 2006. However, perceptions of the poor using participatory approaches in rural communities have revealed that poverty situation in rural Ghana is not shrinking and that poverty reduction strategies have not improved the living conditions of the poor (see Table 1). The failure of most of these strategies is evidenced by the insignificant impact they have made on reducing poverty. Poverty continues to strike hard on majority of the people in rural communities where more than 80% of the extremely poor population in Ghana resides (GSS, 2000). Like Ghana, many African countries have adopted numerous poverty reduction strategies in their policy making over the years to combat poverty, yet poverty continues to be a social canker in many rural communities. In a study on poverty in selected rural communities of five districts of Ghana from 2006 to 2010 employing both primary and secondary sources supported with critical review of existing perspectives on poverty shared by authors and reviewers on poverty studies, a number of factors including lack of common philosophical base in defining poverty, perception of poverty as a multidimensional concept, inadequate targeting of the truly poor with prescribed interventions and the application of the end-focused basic needs approaches have emerged to explain why modern poverty reduction strategies have been unsuccessful.

11

Lack of Common Philosophical Base for Defining Poverty Poverty is one major universal problem today which has been accepted as defying a standard definition. The aggression and the concerted efforts by countries and individuals within countries, NGOs, Community Based Organisations, National and Multinational Agencies to arrest poverty and its adverse effects on education, housing, health, human capability development etc. have resulted in divergent views on what poverty really is. These varying conceptions have rendered most poverty reduction strategies ineffective. How the poor perceive poverty makes little or no sense to most policy makers who have their own perception of poverty as a concept and condition. The definition of poverty according to Gordon (1998) is highly contested. Clusters of different overlapping meanings depending on the kind of lack one has or problem in focus continue to emerge. It is the inability to identify a philosophical base for defining poverty which has resulted in the complexity of determining whether poverty is decreasing or increasing. Interestingly no two researchers into poverty studies have ever agreed on the estimated number of the poor or absolutely poor population across the globe. In 1999, the WHO reported of some 1300 million absolutely poor population worldwide; however Rowson observed in 2001 that about 1.2 billion people are absolutely poor in developing and transitional economies alone (Rowson, 2001; WHO, 1999). In 2002, the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) in a survey on assessing poverty in Eastern and Southern Africa reported of a global poor population of 1.2 billion (IFAD, 2002). These variations in the statistical data about the poor population have been as a result of different perceptions people have about poverty and the diversity in the methods of measurement. Poverty means different conditions to different countries and different people within the same country have different perceptions when describing poverty. George (1988) argues that the definitions of poverty used in the advanced industrialised societies are not sensitive enough to cope with the breadth and depth of deprivation in the third world countries (George cited in Donkor, 1997). There are as many definitions of poverty as there are researchers into poverty studies and policy makers. Some poverty analysts perceive poverty from social dimension and define poverty based on levels of social exclusion (Smeeding, 2000); others see it from economic standpoint using income, consumption and expenditure levels (GSS, 1999;

12

Rowson, 2001). While some other researchers see poverty as lack of political right and inability to participate in decision making (Appiah, 2000, Gyan-Baffour, 2004). The diversity in the definitions and perceptions of poverty between and within countries does not yield a cogent and integrated approach to combat poverty. It has always been series of varying disintegrated approaches focusing on the effects of poverty whereas the poverty menace continues to dwell in its soils. Osmani (2003) emphasises that, though the lines of thinking of researchers into poverty studies have many ideas in common, they do not add to a single coherent conceptual framework for defining poverty. Hence, a major common theme underlying all these streams of ideas as diversity-diversity of ways in which people perceive and experience poverty, diversity of how poverty is measured and how poor people strive either to escape poverty or cope with it, and diversity of policy interventions needed for combating poverty.

Multidimensionality of Poverty In his key note address on the Ghana governments poverty alleviation programme-issues and strategies of implementation, Gyan-Baffour, the former Director General, National Development Planning Commission (NDPC) emphasised, poverty is a multidimensional phenomenon, it is not merely defined by low income but includes the absence of medical care, poor sanitation, the absence of good drinking water, illiteracy and in fact the inability to participate in decision making that affects an individuals life directly (Gyan-Baffour, 2004). Many researchers into poverty continue to highlight the multi-dimensional nature of poverty; however, their views expressed in any poverty discourse on the multidimensional concept reveal a contradiction. A review and analysis of the multi-dimensional concept of poverty reveal some form of consistency with the views of Chambers and Rowson (2001) who saw poverty beyond the economists standpoint. The claim of this school of thought is that poverty transcends income poverty. Inasmuch as the recognition that poverty is more than income poverty has been proven through empirical poverty discourse, proponents of the multidimensional concept fail to recognise that income is the basic means for procuring many of the needs identified as different dimensions of poverty. The conception of poverty as multidimensional highlights low income as one dimension on the one hand and absence of medical care,

13

poor sanitation, the absence of good drinking water and illiteracy as other dimensions of poverty on the other hand. This in actual fact does not make poverty a multi-dimensional concept. It is as a result of the low income (means) at national, community and individual levels that most of the other needs are not met (see Table 1 and 2). Hence the argument is that, such perception of poverty reveals only a single dimension of poverty, lack of income whereas the absence of medical care, poor sanitation, the absence of good drinking water and illiteracy represent the effects of poverty. Most researchers who describe poverty as a multidimensional concept often gloss over the difference between poverty as a concept and the effects of poverty. It is in this light that defining and measuring poverty have been so complex that solution seems almost impossible even with concerted global efforts to reverse the escalating global and community-based poverty rates. Poverty is a condition with ripple effects. It is important to note that the effects of poverty are rather multidimensional like one disease with many symptoms. To view inadequate income as one dimension of poverty and others such as absence of medical care, poor nutrition and education, poor sanitation, absence of good drinking water, gender as different dimensions of poverty could be erroneous. The question is, what is the purpose of the income? What is the income whether national or individuals used for? By what means are the medical care, food and education, good sanitation, and good drinking water attained? It is obvious that if a person lacks income or suffers income inadequacies or if a country lacks adequate revenue, he shall have no or little access to the basic needs of life and other social services, hence poor. This is because income is one major resource (means) for attaining the requisite needs of individuals and countries as a whole. It is significant to note that poverty includes but more than income poor. However computing poverty with low income on the one hand and some basic needs on the other hand does not bring out a clear understanding of the dimensions of poverty which ultimately affect poverty reduction strategies designed. Adoption of Ends-Focused Poverty Reduction Strategies: When relating poverty as a social canker to an endemic tropical disease with many symptoms such as malaria, it would be easier to contend that poverty reduction strategies

14

fail because over the years, policy makers and practitioners have been focusing on tackling the symptoms and not the disease. The disease is the lack of the means (resources) and the symptoms, the needs and wants (ends). The review of literature on the definitions of poverty indicate that, existing definitions given by modern researchers into poverty studies emphasise lack of the wants (needs) as poverty which is often considered as a condition of life so characterised by malnutrition, illiteracy, powerlessness and disease as to be beneath any reasonable definition of human decency (World Bank, 1993; Gyan-Baffour, 2004). This definition does not emphasise lack of income as a characteristic of poverty; it rather highlights what it means to be in a state of poverty-to have inadequate food, to be uneducated and to lack access to basic health care. The perception of poverty as lack of needs and wants of life has resulted in the assumption that poverty is multidimensional requiring multiplicity of definitions with diverse methods of measurements and strategies for poverty reduction. The implication is that once human wants are insatiable and different people, communities and countries have different scales of preference, an integrated approach to combat poverty is almost impossible. Thus the basic needs approach employed by many African countries to reduce poverty often fails because of differences in basic needs of communities and individuals within them. Different countries and individuals within countries define their poverty based on their specific want(s) they lack rather than the means (resources) needed to satisfy those insatiable wants they lack (see Table 1). The insatiability of human wants and the differences of individuals scales of preference have been the cause of the diversity of definitions of poverty. Most poverty alleviation strategies are geared towards the provision of the poor with their needs and wants (ends) rather than empowering them with the means (resources) needed as routes out of their persistent poverty. Most governments in developing countries become so much committed to the basic needs approach by providing schools, public toilet facilities, health care facilities, pipe borne water and electricity facilities especially in the rural areas where the majority of the poor population reside as their poverty reduction strategy without realising that, what the poor rather lack in most cases are not the wants but rather the means (resources) to access the wants (refer to Tables 1 and 2). Failure of governments, policy makers and planners in realising this has led to huge

15

expenditure on the provision of certain basic facilities in highly deprived regions where the extremely poor are found but those facilities have rather suffered poor utilisation due to lack of the means to utilise them. The adoption of the ends focused poverty reduction strategies is as a result of the perceptions and definitions of poverty as lack of certain needs or wants of life. It could be argued that when the poor are equipped with the requisite means, they would not lack the needs and wants of life because they can provide for themselves their requisite needs, access and utilise them (see Table 2).

Failure of interventions to reach the truly poor The use of participatory poverty assessment has made it possible for the views of the poor to be included in the definitions, measurements and policy formulation for poverty reduction. However identifying the truly poor to benefit from such interventions remains a major cause of the failure of such interventions and strategies to reduce poverty. Poverty reduction packages often fail to reach the truly poor in most countries when efforts are made to eradicate poverty. Poor supervision and monitoring of poverty reduction strategies and sometimes inability of the truly poor to satisfy conditions attached to poverty reduction interventions make them incapable of accessing facilities that can release them from certain poor conditions. Thus, poverty continues to deepen in countries where there is poor monitoring of poverty trends and strategies for poverty reduction and where strict conditions are attached to access and utilisation of interventions even when government agencies and non-governmental organisations undertake projects and programmes to ensure poverty eradication. Evidence from Ghana reveals that, the country has made attempts to identify the geographical and occupational location of the relatively poorer population in the country. Geographically, it has been observed that majority of the poor are located in the rural areas, and the incidence as well as the severity of poverty is very high in the three northern regions of the country. Food crop farmers have also been identified as the occupational group that bears much of the burden of poverty than any other occupational group in the country (GSS, 2000; 2006). IFAD (2001) has also observed that about 75% of the poor in developing countries are located in rural communities. In spite of efforts

16

made to identify the poor, facilities targeted on reducing poverty including microcredit, provision of farm inputs; technical training and empowerment packages often fail to reach those who truly suffer chronic poverty. A survey conducted by the postgraduate students of the Department of Geography and Rural Development, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Ghana in the Ejura-Sekyedumase, Amansie West and Ahafo Ano North districts of Ghana from 2005-2009 revealed that, the most deprived rural communities such as Babaso, Kyekyenkura, Muawano, Nkuntin among others either did not know of the existing micro credit facility and other poverty reduction interventions in the districts or could not meet the basic requirements needed for one to benefit from such facilities. In the Amansie West district of Ghana, it was found out that most of the deprived rural communities were unaware of poverty reduction interventions from which they were to benefit. The implication is that the poor who are to benefit from strategies for poverty reduction have little or no control of the interventions, hence are unable to derive the benefits meant for them. As a result people who become aware of the availability of such interventions and who could meet the basic requirements and conditions attached to the access and use of such interventions take advantage of such facilities even when they are relatively nonpoor. Thus, irrespective of the efforts made by governments and other organisations to actively participate in the fight against poverty in countries and within communities, poverty continues to be endemic amongst the vulnerable groups who have little or no control of the interventions targeted on their plight.

RE-CONCEPTUALISING POVERTY: THE BASIC MEANS APPROACH The premise of the basic means approach in defining and measuring poverty as well as designing a poverty reduction strategy is that, there are some basic resources which every person, community or a country requires to be able to procure all other raw materials and basic needs and wants of life. Without those basic means (resources), the other needs and wants of life would not be satisfied or met, hence result in high level deprivation and vulnerability of such a person, community or country. The basic means as a result defines an individual and communal poverty and its dimensions. Thus by identifying the basic resources, a person, community or country could objectively measure its poverty, monitor

17

progress of poverty issues and design means-focused strategy for poverty reduction in an individual's life, a community or a country. Poverty is thus lack of the basic means for procuring the needs and want of life. The implication is that, the lack or inadequacies of the needs and wants of life are the effects of poverty. Poverty in this sense is not merely saying one is poor, but having something (the effects) to show for one's poverty.

The basic means approach asks 'why' questions to identify the reasons why individuals, communities, and countries are unable to provide certain basic social services required to ensure the realization of human dignity within any social set-up (see Tables 1 and 2). In other words, this approach for poverty studies is used to ascertain the root cause of the conditions of the poor. The use of the 'why' questions guides researchers to identify the basic means that people lack as a result of which they are found living in the conditions characterized by malnutrition, illiteracy, poor access to health care, isolation, exclusion from decision making among others. Basic means approach work on the following assumptions: that all people both poor and non-poor are rational beings who would satisfy their needs given the requisite basic means. that poverty is reducible; therefore a person is deemed poor when that person lacks the basic means to satisfy her needs and wants of life. Thus, if an individual or community acquires the requisite basic means (resources) but refuses to satisfy their needs and wants, such an individual or community is deemed non-poor even if their conditions are deplorable.

Sustaining Poverty Reduction: The Basic Means Approach The basic means approach identifies two main dimensions of poverty which could serve as a guide for defining, measuring and combating poverty within any social-set up. The income dimension on the one hand and the non-income dimension (education and training) on the other hand. The concept identifies inadequate income and knowledge as the root cause of individuals and group of individuals deprived conditions. In a survey on poverty and health in selected rural communities of Ghana using participatory poverty assessment approaches, it was unveiled that inadequate income and skills undergird the 18

multi-faceted effects of poverty among the poor; and it is as a result of inadequate funds and technical know-how that a number of district assemblies responsible for community development have been rendered almost incapable of pursuing their poverty reduction initiatives (see Table 1 and 2). It implies that the poor nutrition, poor drinking water, poor access to health care facilities, social exclusion, vulnerability, food insecurity among other needs and wants of life are the consequences of low income and knowledge (education). As individuals, communities and countries are equipped with these basic means, they would be able to move out of their deplorable conditions. Scholars including May and Rowson in their poverty studies raise the need for resources to be the basis upon which poverty is defined and measured (May, 1998; Rowson, 2001). Once the resources influence the conditions of peoples lives, it is the lack of the basic resources that makes people poor and not necessarily lack of the basic needs and wants. Income thus represents one basic means for obtaining the basic needs and wants of life whether social, economic or political. Once a person, community, a country suffers income inadequacies, acquisition and access to certain socio-economic and political needs of life for the realization of human dignity would be unattainable. Hence poverty on the one hand is inadequate income with adverse effects on social, economic and political life of individuals, communities and countries.

With the introduction of money (income) as a medium of exchange and standard unit of measurement, people needed income to be able to satisfy their basic needs and wants. Lack of the basic needs and wants of a person or group of people was a reflection of their lack of adequate income. Income levels thus offer an objective and generally acceptable determinant of a person's and group of people's socio-economic status which serves as an instrument for measuring poverty (see Table Two). Income is thus one basic means for attaining the needs and wants of life. However, the use of only income levels to define and measure the depth and incidence of poverty has been criticized and reviewed by some modern researchers into poverty studies. The varying poverty definitions by Rowson, Nayaran, Gyan-Baffour and Appiah reinforce the view that poverty transcends income poverty to include other social indicators (Gyan- Baffour 2004; Nayaran, 2000; Appiah, 2000). The argument 19

demonstrated in their definitions support the notion that, there are certain social needs which cannot be met by merely having adequate income. This implies that income alone is inadequate as a measure of a person or group of people's socio-economic status. Against this background, Rowson later explained that any broader definition of poverty which he called 'the human poverty' as opposed to income poverty requires different sets of indicators to be used to describe it (Rowson, 2001). He argued that such indicators might include access to health care services, clean water and sanitation, life expectancy, infant, child and maternal mortality rates, literacy levels among others. What the critics of the income approach as the only determinant of poverty status failed to do was to identify the basic means by which the social needs could be adequately satisfied. Rather, those social needs were identified as separate dimensions of poverty requiring different approaches for their measurement and control. However; researchers into social and economic issues have

shown that most social problems that individuals or group of individuals face are the result of not merely low income but rather lack of education and training (see Table 1). Inadequate knowledge in the forms of education and training as well as the provision of technical know-how is re-emerging as the root cause (basic means) of people's vulnerability and deprivation. Education is a means of overcoming poverty, increasing income, improving nutrition and health, reducing family size and not the least important, raising people's self-confidence and enriching the quality of their lives (Ostergaard 1999). This further explains that lack of knowledge is a contributing factor of persistent poverty, poor health, inferiority, exclusion from decision making and poor quality of life. The implication is that poverty on the other hand is lack of knowledge (technical knowhow). A survey by Anane (2002) on resource development and utilization revealed that the low soci-economic status of the developing countries as compared to the developed countries was not lack of natural resources but rather lack of skilled personnel. He emphasized that no country with poor human resource but adequate natural resource has been able to develop; whereas all countries that are developed, have highly skilled human resource. The implication is that adequate knowledge and skills offers a route out of poverty. In

20

other words lack of knowledge (education and training) is a major cause of individuals, communities or countries' low socio- economic status and vulnerability. Thus aside low income, low level of education at individual, community and national levels remains the basic cause of their development challenges (see Table 1; Figure 1). Thus individuals and group of individuals require education and training on challenging development issues that bring success when applied and leave failures when they are not. Thus education and training constitute the non- income poverty dimension based on the basic means concept of poverty. The approach places emphasis on social and human empowerment based on the general conception that society can only develop with the effective mobilization of its own people, a process which does not alienate a person from his society and culture but rather develop his self-confidence and identify him with those of his society-thereby strengthening his capacity and desire for self-reliance and fulfillment. Thus, poverty is lack of the basic means for attaining the social, environmental, cultural, economic and political needs and wants of life. Poverty based on the basic means is bi-dimensional; the income dimension on the one hand and the knowledge dimension on the other hand; whereas the effects of poverty are rather multi-dimensional including social exclusion, poor nutrition, poor health, lack of potable water, lack of decision making powers etc. Income becomes an important complement to knowledge in modern societies in determining the socio- economic status of people. Poverty by the basic means approach may thus be expressed mathematically as:

[P = I +K]
Where P= Poverty; I = Inadequate income and K= Inadequate Knowledge.

With adequate skilled human resource development and national income, a country or community would be able to satisfy its basic needs and wants such as good governance, provision of schools, health care facilities, roads, electricity, payment of workers, and provision of job opportunities for its citizenry. Again with adequate income and

21

education and training, the poor will be able to acquire all or most of their basic needs of which they are denied (see Tables 1 and 2; Figure 1). Thus the basic means concept recommends the definition and measurement of poverty based on the bi-dimension of income and knowledge (levels of education and training/ capability) which could be formally or informally acquired. Hence, efforts to reduce poverty at all levels need to focus on providing adequate knowledge and income to the poor. It is only through the provision of the basic means that the poor could get out of persistent deplorable living conditions in which they find themselves that the MDGs could be realized by all and for all by 2015.

CONCLUSION: For several decades, the rural poor have looked up to governments and some NGOs for the provision of their basic needs as a result of low levels of education and capacity to increase income levels. Defining poverty based on the needs and wants of people has produced varying disintegrated approaches due to the insatiability of needs and wants associated with concomitant variations in scales of preference of individuals and groups of individuals. An alternative approach towards defining poverty from the basic means dimensions would lead to empowerment of the poor and vulnerable, human capital development and transformative participation that will enable the poor to take their destiny into their own hands and collaborate in building an integrated and formidable force to attack poverty and achieve the MDGs by 2015.

22

REFERENCES Anane, F. and A.A Adjei, Comprehensive notes on Social Studies (Ghana: Bayoya Graphics Ltd., 2002) pp. 15-17 Appiah K.O.A., Poverty Reduction in Ghana and Options for the Preparation of an Agenda and Strategy (Paper Prepared for the Technical Committee on Poverty, NDPC, 2000) pp. 1-3 Awumbila, M., : Gender and Poverty Reduction Strategies in Ghana: Poverty, Health and Gender; Proceedings of the NUFU Workshop (Accra: Media Design LTD, 2004) pp. 1011 Avery, K. (2007): The Least Developing Countries: Closing the Technological Gap, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (www.untad.org/template/wedflayer) C.I.H.I., (2003): Poverty and Health: Links to Action Proceeding Report CPHISPS) (Canada:

Donkor, K., :Structural Adjustment and Mass Poverty in Ghana (England: Ashgate Publishing LTD, 1997) pp. 206-213 Friedmann, J. (1999): Rethinking Poverty: Empowerment and Citizens Rights. International Social Science Journal Vol. 148 (1): 161-164. Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) Report (1999) Ghana Living Standards Four Report, pp. 12-20 Ghana Statistical Service Report (2000); Poverty Trends In Ghana in The 1990 's, pp. 1520 Gordon, D., Eradicating Poverty in the 21st Century: When Will Social Justice Be Done (Inaugural Lecture by Prof. Dave Gordon, Bristol University 18th October, 2004) Gyan- Bafour, G., Gender and Poverty Reduction Strategies in Ghana: Poverty, Health and Gender; Proceedings of the NUFU Workshop (Accra: Media Design LTD, 2004) pp; 1-2 I.D.S Participatory Group (2000): PPAs, The Voices of the Poor and PRSPs (Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex) IFAD., (2002): Assessment Of Rural Poverty: Eastern And Southern Africa Palombi Press) pp. 9-54 (Italy:

23

IFAD, (2001): Rural Poverty Report (New York: Oxford University Press) p.5 Jollife, D., (2006): Poverty, Prices and Places: How Sensitive Is the Spatial Distribution of Poverty to Cost Of Living Adjustments. Economic Inquiry, Vol. 44 (2): 296-310 Kyei, P.O. (2004): Understanding Poverty and Decentralization. (Lecture Series on Poverty at the Department of Geography and Rural Development, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana) May, J et. al. (1998) Poverty and Inequality in South Africa; (Report Prepared for the Office of the Executive Deputy President and the Inter Ministerial Committee, South Africa) Murgai, R. and S. Zaidi (2005): Poverty Trends in Bangladesh during The 1990s. Journal Of Developing Societies Vol. 21(1):7-32 Nayaran, D. et. al.; Voices of the Poor Can Any One Hear Us (USA: Oxford University Press, 2000) pp.1-7 Noble, M. et al. (2004): Conceptualizing, Defining And Measuring Poverty In South Africa: An Argument For A Conceptual Approach (England: CASAP, 2004) pp. 2-8. Osberg (2000): Presidential Address, Poverty in Canada and the United States: Measuring Trends and Implication Canadian Journal of Economics, Vol. 33(4): 847-877 Ostergaard V. (1999): Gender, Health and Development. Letters on World Development Vol. 18: 14 -29. Osmani, S. R., (2003): Evolving Views on Poverty Concept, Assessment and Strategy (Asia: Asian Development Bank Document) pp. 1-9 Ravallion, M. and B. Bidani (1994). How Robust Is a Poverty Profile. World Bank Economic Review Vol. 8 (1): 75-102 Robb, C. (1999): Can The Poor Influence Poverty? Participatory Poverty Assessment in the Developing Countries (Washington: D.C World Bank Document) Rowson M., (2001): Poverty and Health. Student British Medical Journal, Vol. 9: 1-3 Ruggles, P., (2000): Drawing the Line: Alternative Poverty Measures and their Implication for Public Policy (Washington: The Urban Institute Press) pp. 33-38 Sachs, J. D., (2005): The end of poverty: how we can make it happen in our time (USA: Penguin Press, 2005) pp. 20-25 Sahn, E. D and D. C. Stifel (2002): Progress towards the Millennium Development Goals in Africa (United Kingdom: Cornell university, 2002) p. 26

24

Sen, P., (2005): Poverty-Under nutrition Linkages. Bulletin of Nutrition Foundation of India, January 2005 Edition. Smeeding, T. M. (2000) Sociology of Poverty: Luxembourg Income Study Working Paper No. 315 (New York: Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University,) Stewart, F., R. Saith and B. Harriss-White: Defining Poverty in the Developing World (New York: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN, 2007) pp. 7-35 UNICEF (2000): State Of The Worlds Children, 2000 Report, pp. 20-29 UNO (2000): Millennium Summit Goals. (NEW YORK: UNO) W.H.O., (1999): Poverty and Health (Director General,s Report Executive Board 105th Session, 1999) World Bank (2000): Attacking Poverty: World Development Report, 2000 World Bank (1993): Investigating In Health: World Development Report (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.) World Bank (1995): Ghana Poverty, Past, Present and Future (Ghana: Ghana Statistical Service, 1995) pp. 3-12 World Bank (2001): 2001 African Development Indicators. Washington D.C World Bank

25

You might also like