Implications of the activation paradigm on poverty and social exclusion in Germany: facts, hypotheses, uncertainties.
German Policy Studies › Vol. 6 Nbr. 1, March 2010
Linked as:
Extract
Implications of the activation paradigm on poverty and social exclusion in Germany: facts, hypotheses, uncertainties.
1 The discourse about poverty in Germany
For a long time, poverty was a matter of material resources. Of course, living in poverty means struggling to meet basic needs and is closely related to lack of money and an inability into guarantee basic subsistence. This remains unchanged. However, since the late 1990s the discourse about poverty in Germany, inspired by EU social policy thinking, goes beyond this monetary focus. Today, being poor represents more than having little money, because poor people are likely to withdraw from social, cultural and political participation. They face a high risk of social exclusion in non--monetary terms as well, which in turn is likely to diminish a society's capacity to ensure social cohesion in general (Silver 1994, Barnes et al 2002). Two main axes shape the German poverty debate. One emphasizes the risk that society might suffer from polarization as the gap between rich and poor people is widening. This is related to the debate of a rising underclass: About eight percent of the total population belongs to this group according to a study conducted by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Their main characteristics are long-term unemployment and lack of prospects, political inactivity or extremist orientation concentrating to a large extent in the Eastern part of Germany (Neugebauer 2007). The other position is dominated by the opinion that downward mobility is no longer a class related risk. Poverty is supposed to gradually increase, eventually becoming an every--day risk, and is supposed to become especially widespread among the middle class (Bude 2008, Castel and Dorre 2009). Policy debates throughout Europe make frequent reference to the term "social exclusion" even though there is little consensus on how to define its substance. Poverty, unemployment and the multidimensionality of social disadvantages are commonly understood as bases or even synonyms for social exclusion, taking it for granted that they impede social integration and that a decent standard of living decides who is "in" or "out" in society. The consequences of social disadvantages for individual participation chances as well as for overall social cohesion move to the forefront. This is reflected in theoretical developments which emphasize the capacity of individuals ...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
