Demetra Kogidou
Associate Professor of Psychology, Dept of Primary Education, AristotleUniversity of Thessaloniki, Greece.
Childhood poverty and social exclusion - Incorporating children’s perspectives
The challenge of childhood poverty
There are 374.823 children under the age of 15 living in poverty in Greece.[1] It is estimated that the likelihood of spending part of their childhood in poverty has become a reality for many children.Throughout last 20-years period, the issue of extraordinary increase in child poverty remained largely unacknowledged in either political discourse or public policy (Bradshaw, 1990; Oppenheim and Harker, 1996; Walker and Walker, 1997). Anti poverty measures directed towards children and their families have always been constrained by tensions between the interests of the state and the rights and responsibilities of the parent; in this arena the needs and rights of the child can come a poor third (Ridge, 2002).
Given their socially vulnerable positions in society, children are often disproportionately affected by poverty and social exclusion. Most of us that talk about this issueare neither powerless nor poor. We have the power to influence thinking, policy and practice and to some degree - denied to the poor - we are free to make choices and changes. So, we can make poor children our primary focus and incorporate the perspectives of those others who are significant in their everyday worlds.
Our major aim is to facilitate the visibility of child poverty and try to deepen our awareness and understanding of poverty as a lived experience in childhood proposing the use of child-centered qualitative research. Findings from child-centred research qualitative research give voice to poor children and inform policy-making about the need to account for their needs and perspectives - not simply from the vantage point of adults. This can raise critical issues in childhood poverty - policy and practice.
Childhood poverty: a priority issue?
The rising number of children in poverty throughout EU and the increased likelihood that these children experience many different forms of social exclusion in their daily lives brings in focus the need to address the issue as an urgent one in our efforts to eradicate poverty and social exclusion. Tackling child poverty must be a cornerstone of building a progressive, modern society, both decent and successful. The importance of eradicating child poverty should not be in doubt.[2] The debate should be over policy and performance[3]
Poverty is a complex, multifaceted problem. So too are its solutions. Long-term, sustained intervention is required to ensure true equality of opportunity for all children. Although many policies have the potential to impact on child poverty, there are key reforms, each of which would bring us much closer to eradicating child poverty.
Childhood poverty:What do we know?
Much of the research work so far has focused on understanding the disadvantaged trajectories of these children. Though that is an important task, our efforts should also be directed towards incorporating children’s own understandings and points of view in the production of knowledge. This is necessary to ensure that these children and their particular needs are addressed in an inclusive and sensitive manner which is informed by their own lived experiences, their stated needs and preferences, and ultimately their interests.
Most of the quantitative study - not available in Greece - provides a valuable insight on the impact of childhood poverty on the future adult. As Ridge (2002, p. 2) says:
‘this echoes traditional concerns about children that focus less on the lived experience of childhood and more on the child as investment for the future and this in turn leads to policies taking a particular form….. Without an informed awareness of the economic and social pressures that disadvantaged children experience in the immediacy of their everyday lives, policies directed towards alleviation of child poverty and social exclusion run the risk of failing to respond adequately to those children’s needs’.
Prioritising children and their rights: povertyis also human rights concern
International debate is starting to recognise the human rights approach to poverty reduction.[4] This means that policies and institutions directed towards poverty reduction should be based explicitly on the norms and values set out in the international law of human rights. This context provides poverty reduction strategies, the potential to empower the poor, rather than simply direct development efforts towards poor people. As empowerment is a long road, one key aspect to human rights approach to poverty reduction includes the principle of participatory decision-making processes.
Reducing child poverty[5] calls for development policies and interventions that direct targeted support to children in particular – that is, child-orientated policies that focus on improving the livelihoods, capabilities and future social and economic opportunities of poor and vulnerable children, and ensuring their rights.Placing children at the heart of poverty reduction policies requires child-focused policies.[6] In doing so we have to choose strategies that prioritise children’s rights and target child poverty reduction[7]. We must also have in mind that effective prioritisation is a key element of reforms that support child poverty reduction and implementation experiences suggest that prioritisation depends a lot on participatory processes.
Childhood poverty:Children’s needs
Much of the research carried out on poverty has focused on the problems and challenges faced by families but the voices of the children who belong to these families have largely remained silent. Children’s interests and needs are usually subsumed and hidden within family interests and needs (Ridge and Millar, 2000; Ruston, 2001).
We know that growing up in poverty has severely adverse outcomes for many children (Bradshaw, 1990; Kumar, 1993, Gregg et al, 1999; Bradshaw, 2001). But child poverty reduction and child rights enhancementdepends critically onlocation of children and child poverty within the demographic and poverty profiles and on priority towards child-focused social service and support programmes that support the right to development of all children – without discrimination[8].
The perspectives of adults, such as parents, teachers and other professionals, are definitely important in understanding the life situations of these children But, it is crucial to also include children’s perspectives. As Ridge (2002) points, what we know far less about is how the experience of poverty and social exclusion impacts on children’s own perception of their lives, how they interpret their experiences of poverty and how those experiences may be mediated through their differences and embedded in a diversity of social and structural environments.
Scientists who are involved in social exclusion should make attempts to answer these questions by placing children at the centre of inquiry by using child -centered process of research and analysis.Through this knowledge we can build on it and add a new dimension that will complement our understanding of poor children.
In recent years, this challenge of taking children’s perspectives into account has been taken seriously by scholars and practitioners who wish to see the development of more socially cohesive societies where children are fully integrated and their views, opinions, and feelings are taken into account when formulating policy and taking decisions which affect them (see James and Prout 1990; Pryor and Rodgers 2001; Smart, Neale, and Wade 2001; Neale 2002; Moxnes 2003, Smith, Taylor and Tapp 2003; Dunn and Deater-Deckard 2001). Children in these studies are seen as social actors, rather than passive victims of their circumstances, who act upon their worlds, have views and opinions on their lives and therefore have a right to express them (see Hetherington 2003).
A voice for children within demographic and poverty profiles
Locating children and child poverty within demographic and poverty profiles are critical to their prioritisation in policies and interventions because, ideally, these data should provide the critical information in a country that is necessary to guide the appropriate policy choices and interventions. It can also offer some recognition and support for particularly vulnerable groups of children.
In fact, a common feature of our data is the absence of gender or child-focused demographic and poverty information and analysis[9]. There is lack of statistical data that places children at the centre of analysis (Jensen and Saporiti, 1992) and children have tended to be ignored or excluded from social and statistical accounting, though, there is a better appreciation of the need to change (Ovortrup, 1997). Sometimes they appear as an adjunct to adult data. Large -scale surveys tend to exclude respondents below the age of 16.
As far as the collection of childhood-directed statistics[10] is concerned, Ovortrup (1997) argues that no change has taken place in most nations’ statistical offices, but, on the other hand, we can see that specific statistical reports about children have been published in a few countries and in other countries special sections about children have been inserted into current statistical series.Interest in children’s lives per se is still relatively rare (Scott et all, 1995).
Where are children’s needs? – The ‘need’ for child-centered qualitative research.
However, increasing acknowledgement that children are not passive members of households, increased research with children and young people (see Middleton et al, 1994). Unfortunately, most of this research entails adult perceptions of children’s needs. Re-evaluation of children’s status extends into research too. As Woodhead(1997, p.81) says: ‘‘the passivity implied in treating children as ‘subjects’ of research is being reconstructed by increased reference to children as ‘participants’’.
In order to develop an understanding of child poverty,[11] we have to place children at the centre of our analysis, using in-depth interviews to explore the lives and experiences of children from low-income families.
Although much remains to be done, a significant change has occurred in social sciences. As James and Prout (1997) say, children should be seen as already social actors not being in the process of becoming such. There is now a widespread acceptance of ‘best interests of the child’ as the base-line for social and political action. Boyden(1997) asks who defines those interests and remains cautious as to how, in practice, these rights are being interpreted and asks in whose interests are ‘the best interests’ of the child being addressed.
In sum, child-centered qualitative research and analysis mean research with children and for children, requires an informed and considered approach at every stage of research. This means a shift from ‘object” to ‘subject’.
Children’s experiences of poverty and social exclusion
As Ridge (2002) says, children experience the realities of poverty and social exclusion in the immediacy of childhood, not only in relation to their future status as adults. Therefore, a concern for the quality of life and the experiences of children in childhood is essential if childhood poverty and social exclusion is to be addressed.
The challenge of power: Whose voice counts?
Poor people lack voice and power. They do exercise agency but in very limited spheres of influence.
Let’s give an example In describing their situation, poor lone mothers often express powerlessness vis-à-vis employers and the state. They express inability to take a stand against abuse, to access market opportunities. Differences in power between women and men and between the poor and the non poor affect opportunities and outcomes. Organizations of lone mothers can’t influence seriously the implementation of policy, at least in Greece.[12] To make a difference, lone mothers must be able to make their voices heard in decisionmaking. This implies changes in power relations.[13]
Perspectives of the poor in poverty research
‘Poverty is like the air; you can not see it; you can only breathe it and feel it; to know poverty you have to go through it.’
As we said above, the impact of childhood poverty in childhood itself may be obtained through qualitative research. In this area there is a gap in our knowledge. Indeed, it is only recently that adults in poverty have had any voice in poverty research, an area traditionally dominated by ‘experts’ (Bradshaw and Holmes, 1989; Cohen et al, 1992). Voices of the poor - the true poverty experts –are rarely heard.
One of the exceptions is a policy document on poverty strategies for the 21st century which is based on the experiences, priorities, reflections and recommendations of poor people, women, men and children. The purpose of ‘Voices of the Poor’, [14] also known as ‘Consultations with the Poor’, enabled a wide range of poor people in diverse countries and conditions to share their views in such a way that they informed and contributed to the concepts and content of the World Development Report 2000/01 (WDR) on the theme of poverty and development.The Voices of the Poor project is different from all other large-scale poverty studies. Using participatory and qualitative research methods, the study presents very directly, through poor people’s own voices, the realities of their lives. [15](seeNarayan et al, 2000). The global Consultations with the Poor is unique in two respects. It is the first large scale comparative research effort using participatory methods to focus on the voices of the poor. It is also the first time that the World Development Report is drawing on participatory research in a systematic fashion
A voice for children in poverty researchandin policy debates: the right to be heard
‘Can anyone hear us?’
A 10 years old poor child from Western Thessaloniki asked me 15 years ago. That was one of the greatest challenges that poor children made to me.
The voices of children are rarely if ever included in poverty research and in policy debates. It is important, then, to focus on the lived experiences of children. This process establishes the importance of voice and power in poor people's definitions of poverty. We – experts of poverty! - need to expand our conceptions of poverty to include measures of voice and empowerment. This may facilitate the development of specific innovative social policies at the national level to combat the poverty experienced by poor children. As Kloprogge (1998) claims, innovative social policies which take into account children’s perspectives and preferencescan greatly enhance the level and effectiveness of efforts to address poverty and social exclusion.
The concept of social exclusion at childhood -Developing a child-centered understanding of social exclusion.
Exclusion is a complex and multi-dimensional social phenomenon. As we argued above, developing a more child-centered approach will entail a radical rethink about the concept of social exclusion at childhood itself. Not only it produces new empirical data – quantitative as well as qualitative- but it tackles serious theoretical and methodological questions.
Much of our analysis of childhood poverty has been framed within an adult discourse, so we have to discuss it.
Poverty has long been a contested notion. Traditionally, the intellectual understanding of poverty has focused upon distributional issues: the lack of resources at the disposal of an individual or household -primary the lack of income. So, the term ‘social exclusion’ referred initially to those who were excluded from state provision of one sort or another (Room, 1995). Absolute definitions of poverty were criticised a lot. This ledto a more general consensus about the nature of poverty. Poverty is not simply about income, but about lack of resources that impedes participation in society. It has been defined as a relative, multidimensional and dynamic phenomenon (Deleeck et al, 1992) Poverty dynamics is defined in terms of both crossing the poverty line and moving a significant distance in the income distribution. We see that gradually the concept has broadened to encompass exclusion from "the social, economic, politicaland cultural systems which determine the integration of a person in society" (Walker, 1997) and hasbecome bound up with arguments about the rights of citizenship.
The definition of social exclusion remains a contested term and one which is phrased in different ways (see, for example, Room 1995, 1999; Levitas, 1998). So far, we have implicitly referred to social exclusion as an outcome. Many argue that it is essentially a process. As Giddens (1998) describes it, “Exclusion is not about graduations of inequality, but about mechanisms that act to detach groups of people from the social mainstream”. But those who emphasise process rather than outcome concentrate on limited access to health and education, and on the increased risks of exclusion that result from poor health and low human capital. Both types of indicator are clearly useful for different purposes[16]. As Millar and Middleton (2002) say, all these definitions have in common an approach that defines social exclusion not only in terms of income poverty and the lack of material resources, but also in terms of the processes by which some individuals and groups become marginalized in society.[17] They are excluded not simply from the goods and standards of living available to the majority but also from their opportunities, choices.
Room (1999) provides a theoretical framework of social exclusion that incorporates process and outcomes and the inextricable links between them. His recent analysis traces how an individual's ‘initial endowment’ (their income, savings, social capital etc.) goes on to influence their living conditions, a process interrupted by 'shocks' (such as the loss of a job) or 'opportunities' (such as the acquisition of a job).[18] According to Room (1999), social exclusion is multidimensional and interactive, is a dynamic condition, implicated perhaps with intergenerational transfer, it refers to a lack of resources not only at an individual or household level but also to a community or area-based deficit as well, is concerned not only with an absence of basic, concrete resources -such as income, food and housing - but also with a relative absence of more abstract phenomena - such as social engagement and social integration. Social exclusion is not only found towards the end of a continuum of inequality, but is sometimes used to refer to a catastrophic rupture or discontinuity in relationships with the rest of society and its effects may be apparent at both an individual and a community level.