Introduction

All societies distinguish between the rich and the poor. Both of these are relative terms. One is considered poor compared to the rich in one’s society. A rich person in a poor society may be regarded as poor when compared with the members of another society, which may be richer.

Sociologically, it is significant to make a distinction between poverty of an area and poverty of the families. It is possible that a significant number of families belonging to a particular caste, or a tribe, of a given area suffer from poverty. But there could be other families of other castes who may also suffer from indigence because of the underdevelopment of the habitat. However, families can move out of poverty or move into poverty. Such movements are facilitated by several factors such as education, change of occupation, migration to other areas or urban centres, or even by charity.

The strategies needed to eliminate poverty of the region differ from the strategies needed to remove poverty of the individual families. Improvement of the area influences the lives of all those who reside there, although such benefits do not distribute equally. The rich and the powerful within the community usurp the facilities to their advantage and reinforce inequalities.

The family as a unit shares the resources available to it, and therefore can be classified on the poverty scale. It is possible that a nuclear unit in the extended kingroup may improve its situation, but it may not share its income with others in the so-called joint family. In such cases, that particular nuclear unit becomes a separate family, despite its claims of being part of the larger kingroup.

Poverty of a single individual signifies his or her status as a non-familial unit—such as a widow/widower, or a bachelor living separately.

The concept of relative poverty should be distinguished from absolute poverty. The destitute—the indigent—is one who is absolutely poor. Families can suffer from destitution; this occurs when the basic minimum required for survival is not available. In stratification terms, the poor—of all shades—are identified at the level of the family units in a given society.

It is necessary, likewise, to distinguish between poverty of individual families and poverty of societies as a whole. Societies are also classed as rich or poor, or ‘developed’ and ‘underdeveloped’—with an intermediate category of ‘Developing’—in comparative terms. But within each of them, there are pockets of affluence and of poverty. Not everyone in a poor society is poor, in terms of local standards; and, by the same token, not everyone in a rich society is rich. Similarly, a rich family of a given society may be considered poor when compared to even a middle-class family of another society. What is true of a nation or a society is also true of the geographical regions within a country. Thus, even in a poor region, there may be families that are relatively rich; similarly, poor families are found in a rich region. It is therefore necessary to approach the question of poverty in realistic terms and evolve strategies for the eradication of poverty of different types.

The World Summit for Social Development, held in 1995 in Copenhagen, Denmark, under the auspices of the United Nations, acknowledged the existence of poverty in all its member-states. While acknowledging the worldwide prevalence of poverty, it was also noted that the nature of poverty, and the factors causing it, differed from society to society. The newer strategies of development suggested by the Summit therefore emphasized ‘area-specific’ programmes.

As part of development, programmes are launched to deal with poverty. In this regard, it is important to distinguish between country-based indices of poverty and the indices of poverty at the level of individuals and families.

In India, poverty eradication programmes have taken caste or tribe as a unit and listed the poor groups in one of three categories, namely Scheduled Tribes (ST), Scheduled Castes (SC) and Other Backward Classes¹ (OBCs). In addition, various regions of the country are also classified as rich and poor in terms of their natural endowment. For long, India was described as a ‘rich country inhabited by poor people’. This statement implied that the country is resource-rich, but the resources have not been properly tapped to remove the poverty of the people.

The Government of India has also developed special packages for the poor regions of the country. However, it must be said that all people living in a poor region may not be poor, despite the fact that the region may suffer from a ‘development deficit’. But certainly poverty in such areas is widespread, and affects all who reside there. In such severely undeveloped areas developmental assistance is needed for all the residents and not only for designated groups.

Poverty, be that of an individual family or the country, is a multidimensional phenomenon, and is caused by a variety of factors. There are people who are born in poverty and die in poverty; there are other categories of the poor who are victims of circumstances—a war, an earthquake or tsunami, loss in business, or loss of property due to loot or dacoity. It is not birth alone that is responsible for poverty. The rich can be rendered poor, and the poor can become rich.

Manifestations of poverty also differ from context to context. There is no linear chain of causes and effects. An interrelated web of economic, social, psychological, cultural, and political factors influence both the occurrence and persistence of poverty. Real poverty may not be apparent, and apparent poverty may not be real.

Since there are different forms of poverty and different factors that cause it, there cannot be a single strategy to eradicate it. The solutions for the eradication of poverty will have to be situation and society-specific.