A further implication of this perspective is the emphasis on safety net and subsidy approaches to poverty alleviation. This usually translates into a situation whereby the results are short lived and real poverty alleviation is not achieved but rather a temporary retardation of further degeneration into poverty. These inefficiencies handicap the possibility of internally driven poverty alleviation achieved via the individual’s initiative, behavioural and perceptual changes, largely towards an aversion to the state of poverty.
Recently, qualitative work on poverty has begun to make an impact on one’s understanding of the issue. Qualitative work also makes inter-personal comparisons of individual welfare. These comparisons tend to be based on how people perceive their own position in society, and the nature of their economic and social links with others. Instead of structured surveys, qualitative data are based on facilitator/participant reports. This approach attempts to reveal how “the poor actually think about themselves, their community and about others that impact their lives in one way or another.” Deosaran, 2000.
The data generated may take the form of either text; reporting what was said, or the researcher’s direct observations, or it may take the form of categorical data, such as wealth rankings, for example. Qualitative methods are diverse but they are generally subjective and context specific. Examples can be found in the Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPA’s) used in Kenya and the Participatory Urban Assessment used in Jamaica. It can be argued that from these methods, the definition, identification and measurement of poverty, give the most accurate reflection of the situation as it exists in reality; the day to day lives of those who are indeed poor.
Increased strength has been given to the qualitative approach to studying poverty, through the compelling conceptualisation of poverty by Amartya Sen (1987). Sen’s earlier works in the 1980s on famine, introduced the concepts of “entitlements and capabilities” which point not only to food requirements, and the importance of freedom from hunger, but proclaim the desire of most persons for “self-actualisation.” This can be translated to mean access to personal safety, primary health care, basic education and to the supply of information necessary to make informed choices and to participate in the running of the society.
More recent works by Sen has spoken of development as freedom (Sen 1999), specifically the freedom of the individual to live a life that he or she desires. Such conceptualisations of ‘the poor person’ broaden our understanding of poverty along two lines. Those identified as being poor are those whose personal and social circumstances limit the range of choices that they are free to make and secondly, those in need of tangible as well as intangible things that are outside of the individual’s control but yet are essential to the well being of the individual.
The strength of this conceptualisation is seen in its direct influence on the development of the UNDPs, Human Development Report (HDR) and its Human Development Index. The HDR defines development as the process of enlarging people’s choices. It has developed a poverty index that includes life expectancy and literacy. In addition this conceptualisation has also influenced the stance taken by the World Bank in defining poverty. In 1999 the World Bank described poverty as “multidimensional, extending from low levels of health and lack of education, to other non-material dimensions of well-being, including gender gaps insecurity, powerlessness and social exclusion".
Even more recent development in the field of poverty research has been the implementation of a psychonomic approach proposed by Professor Ramesh Deosaran in his book, “Psychonomics and Poverty, towards governance and a civil society”. Psychonomics as defined by Deosaran is,
“The application of social psychological principles to
understanding behaviour in the economic context.
It means enjoining more effectively the concepts
of physical capital with psychological capital,
especially in the area of poverty alleviation.
It seeks to provide a more dynamic approach
to the understanding and alleviation of poverty.”
Encompassed in this definition are three major implications of the application of this method to poverty alleviation which are crucial in justifying and explaining the stance taken.
It points firstly to an unwillingness to neglect the contribution of the traditional economic approach, but rather the development of a complimentary relationship between the two disciplines. That is to say, the psychonomic approach in applying social psychological concepts to understanding behaviour in economic contexts is an attempt to add greater depth to the sometimes criticized superficial explanations put forward by economic researchers. It intends to deal with the ‘anomalies’ or otherwise ‘irrational’ behaviour some persons may display in engaging in economic behaviour such as resource allocation, that the economic models and theories tend to ignore, as well as incorporate social psychological concepts such as motivation and aspirations which are crucial to long term poverty alleviation, often treated as static entities in economics.
Secondly, the focus on other capitals in conjunction with psychological capital, demonstrates the need for a multi-dimensional look into the factors which have the potential to effectively differentiate among the variations among the poor, improve and ensure specificity in targeting areas to be improved upon and subsequently determine the effectiveness of policies. These points generally to the reciprocal relationship among the four capitals as well as those which manifest mainly in positive correlations or in terms of their relationship to feelings of relative depravation. From this, stems the task of determining how those deemed as poor feel about their circumstances, through the use of this ‘dynamic approach’.
Apart from putting a face on the issue of poverty achieved mainly in the methodology used for data collection, this approach humanizes subsequent research findings by illustrating more greatly the differences among this once believed to be homogeneous group of people. In the same vein, the psychonomic approach, if one combines the three areas discussed in the definition, has the potential to give further scope, validity and specificity in addressing the issue of poverty.
In addressing the issue of poverty, attempts tend to manifests on three levels, theory, research and policy. In terms of research formulation, the psychonomic approach demonstrates its strength in terms of applicability in a multitude of ways. Firstly, the approach can be evaluated based on the methodology employed. On one hand the quantitative approach contributes towards providing an objective, observable baseline point from which further study can spawn.
That is to say, it provides the first step in answering the question of where to look, not necessarily in terms of identifying a group to be labelled as poor, but rather provides a measurable standard of physical capital which illustrates a state that reflects only a meagre ability to maintain an acceptable standard of living or even below such a level. This psychonomic approach shows its departure from the traditional quantitative approach here in that such measures do not provide the be all and end all in terms of poverty identification and alleviation, but rather, are integrated into the larger picture brought to bear through qualitative research by addressing issues of perception and other core social psychological concepts. In addition it is a refreshing step away from the imposed understanding of poverty produced by the quantitative approach which seemed somewhat divorced from reality because of its perception of humans as mechanical.
Secondly, the psychonomic approach, through the incorporation of social psychological concepts, gives insight into the subjective states of the individuals under study. This answers the questions usually unanswered and ignored by the traditional economic approach, such as why would a person deemed as poor not see himself as poor as well as why would someone in such state resist assistance to move out of such a state, among other fundamental questions.
In addition, merging the qualitative and quantitative approaches to the study of poverty, on the one hand, provides for a ‘sharpened methodological tool’ , by factoring in the pertinent psychological qualities of an individual “more deliberately into the behavioural equation”, thus incorporating a focus on attributes such as initiative, personal motivation, civic commitment, attitudes of enterprise, psychological dependence, as well as other factors which direct personal choice and sacrifice which form the core of the interactionist model of poverty as well as plays a pivotal role in sustainable poverty alleviation in that it is internally driven.
Stemming from this is the issue of perception addressed in the psychonomic approach. On one level the issue of perception plays an important role in the identification of who should be classified as poor. The use of a quantitatively derived measure of poverty tends to ignore that some identified as poor may not perceive their state to be as such, thus resisting attempts at alleviation. In the same vein, some deemed as poor may be quite content with their status, perceiving it as a desirable alternative to the ‘rat race’ those outside of this classification may seem to be trapped within. Some not identified can also see themselves as poor.
With this established, the issue of theory formulation from the psychonomic approach is brought into focus, largely in terms of poverty assessment, yet lending itself readily to poverty alleviation. An evaluation of current theories shows an inclination towards viewing the poor as a homogeneous group on several levels. Firstly, traditional approaches tend to either ignore causal factors or attribute cause mainly choices made by the individual in what could be termed a ‘blame the individual’ approach.
Through the research methods used in the psychonomic approach, varying causal factors are identified which seem to validate Deosaran’s poignant statement, “some are born poor, some achieve poverty and some have poverty thrust upon them.” Interviews further illustrate the relevance of this statement by revealing the individual reasons people assign to their state such as loss of employment, broken marriages, substance abuse, lack of opportunities for employment which may stem from national economic conditions or lack of employable skills. Each causal factor assists in theory formulation by answering the question of why, along with shedding light of the reasons for exhibited behaviour and consistent attitudes, as well as the further implications for target specific alleviation methods to be expanded on later in the paper.
Also in terms of theory formulation, the qualitatively based social psychological approach, in looking at predicting behaviours by considering the relationship between stimulus intensity and the probability of displaying a particular behaviour, lends itself readily to increasing the validity of theories of poverty. As pointed to by Deosaran,
“…very intense physical stimuli will likely lead to quick, predictable behaviour. Less extreme situations will likely meet with variable behaviours, often mediated by certain inner psychological processes…Everyday living is not typically dominated by extreme situations and predictable outcomes, but by large grey areas of competing situations…”
The significance of this statement is that it serves to aptly illustrate that the ‘grey areas’ of the day to day human experience are given meaning by the social psychological methodological approach in looking at behaviour, resulting from middle or lower range stimulus intensity determined greatly by psychological processes such as cognitive dissonance, choice and the acceptance of risk.
Applied more directly to addressing the issue of theory formulation by using this psychonomic approach, the pertinent question of why someone in poverty may not opt to get out of that state can be addressed on two levels, each crucial to theory formulation. Firstly, by looking at psychological processes the question of ‘rational behaviour’ is considered in terms of what stream of thoughts and perceptions would be present to inhibit the individual’s willingness to seek or accept assistance, or strive to elevate oneself through initiative and sacrifice. On the other hand, since all poverty is not extreme, as alluded to earlier in terms of the many classifications, the question of the individual’s perception not only of the extremity of his state but also his perceived options for either internally driven or externally assisted poverty alleviation is addressed.
Probably the widest area of application of the psychonomic approach to poverty is the area of policy formulation. Firstly, this approach lends itself readily to the formulation of policies which can almost ensure full sustainability of an existence outside of a state of poverty as opposed to the traditional purely economic approach which offered only safety net and subsidiary policies which failed in terms of enduring policies resulting from the psychonomic approach can uncover and utilise the individual’s potential for empowerment and economic sustenance, which achieves longevity via the restoration of dignity in a non-threatening or imposing stance but rather, one that is valid and informed.
Secondly, because the psychonomic approach advocates a people centred stance towards poverty assessment and alleviation, largely concerned with the issue of perception, the long term impact of policies which result can be achieved through the manipulation of such perceptions on a variety of levels. Firstly, and most importantly, manipulation towards the development of an aversion to being poor is crucial in motivating people to either accept assistance or strive towards elevation through individual effort and initiative. In addition, this manipulation towards and aversion to poverty assures a further willingness to strive towards maintaining a standard of living above a state of poverty. That is to say, develop attitudes and behaviours that focus on quality existence and growth, rather than degeneration.
With that established, the wider picture of poverty alleviation through the use of the psychonomic approach is still to be illustrated. Probably the most poignant contribution of psychonomics is the concept of psychological capital, which brings out these wider and more crucial aspects of poverty alleviation. However, deeper analysis of this concept in terms of its exact nature as well as its contribution to research and theory formulation must be considered, to provide a comprehensive framework from which an understanding of its applicability to poverty alleviation can be achieved.
Psychological capital, as conceptualised by Deosaran, includes matters of personal motivation, civic commitment, attitudes of enterprise, achievement motive, empowerment potential, self efficacy and relative depravation among other psychological and social psychological concepts. Also important for consideration is the genesis of this concept. Within the framework of psychonomics, the assumption is that skills capital; training, occupation, knowledge and employability, leads directly to physical capital; income, living conditions, access to basic amenities, technology and other related resources. Psychological capital comes into the equation as that element which sustains both physical capital and skills capital, with social capital; community integration, community friendliness and safety, solidarity, governance and cooperative ventures, as an arbitrating variable.
Psychological capital is thus a key motivational condition which will help determine the extent to which effort, sacrifice and goal directed behaviours need to be appreciated within the attempts at poverty alleviation. The somewhat reciprocal relationship among the four capitals is crucial in considering that in reality, in-spite of its poignancy, the concept of psychological capital cannot exist in isolation in the focus on poverty alleviation. For instance, the one directly observable contribution of the traditional economic approach to poverty alleviation has been the deliberate increase in physical capital. It is irrefutable that although the psychonomic approach also considers an internally driven route towards poverty alleviation, little is really gained if the living conditions and environment are not altered.
In the same vein, motivation towards maintaining and improving upon available skills capital is achieved through manipulation of psychological capital. In relation to social capital, attributes which surround civic attitudes, buttress the above mentioned concepts incorporated in social capital on one hand, while social capital arbitrates in striking a functional balance between psychological capital and skills capital.
Where the concept of psychological capital stands out from other capital is its direct contributions to the areas of research and theory in addressing poverty alleviation. A preliminary step in poverty alleviation and assessment is the issue of identification. By looking into the subjective states of persons, a ‘human face’ can now almost be identified to assist in terms of validity rather than the traditional mechanically imposed identification of the poor.
This goes further when considering its implications in terms of furthering our understanding of the ‘irrational’ behaviours exhibited by some labelled as poor, such as resisting assistance, or displaying a level of comfort in such a state. The contribution of psychological capital here is that researchers are able to identify certain causal factors which can then be applied to theory formulation and directing the methods used in research, largely in terms of generating key questions and focus areas. This shows a departure from the traditional approach which treated assumed causal factors in a somewhat matter-of-fact way, rather than seeing them as unique to the individual and the result of subjective states.
The issue of causal factors is equally crucial in answering the questions which stem from the observation that while some in a state of poverty choose to remain in such a state, others are able to overcome. The significance of this lies in the differing levels of psychological capital each person may possess and is brought out quite aptly in considering the application of psychological capital to policy development aimed at poverty alleviation.
Already established is the fact that the poor are not a homogeneous group. One factor which supports this statement is that among the poor, individuals may seem to display varying levels of psychological capital. This is crucial in terms of poverty alleviation in order to attain target specificity on one hand and in terms of deciding what type of approach is to be used to achieve maximum, long term results.
Firstly, the operationalisation of contributing social psychological concepts assists in identifying the individual levels of psychological capital.
With this established, what follows is the formulation of policies which increase existing levels of psychological capital on the one hand, or external assistance by means of providing avenues for increasing existing levels of other capitals. That is to say, where levels of psychological capital are low, policies geared toward increasing such levels should be employed as a first step towards sustainable poverty alleviation. Alternatively, where such levels are found to be sufficient, social, physical and skills capital should be increased to ensure long term poverty alleviation, depending on their individual existing levels.
What is illustrated here is that unlike traditional approaches which sought to merely identify and treat one group of persons regardless of the differences among them either observable or rooted in psychological dispositions, so that some are assisted and some are neglected, the inclusion of psychological capital allows for the development of different schemes to treat with different individuals, thus improving significantly target specificity and scope.
In addition, the identification and manipulation of subjective states of individuals, achieved mainly through a focus on the concept of psychological capital, assists in terms of assuring real behavioural and attitudinal changes crucial to enduring poverty alleviation. Traditional approaches tended to focus more on external manipulation in poverty alleviation. Evaluations of this method reveal general failure and limited scope for continuance and reformulation. Here it becomes obvious that “money has relative value while perception has real behavioural consequences” Deosaran, 2000.
In focusing on psychological capital what results is positive behavioural and attitudinal change which may manifest in either an aversion to poverty, increased desire for growth and development, improved levels of self efficacy and empowerment, among other key areas needed for lasting poverty alleviation on the individual level and poverty eradication on national and international levels. Similarly, its is now obvious that the inclusion of psychological capital also serves in terms of widening the scope from which policies can stem; from mainly one of ‘alleviation by invitation’ through external assistance, but also the incorporation of ‘alleviation by initiation’ largely via the individual’s own desire and effort.
Finally, countries most riddled by poverty tend also to have limited physical capital. On the other hand, all responsible governments are faced almost daily with decisions about the allocation of their available resources between competing uses. The inclusion of psychological capital towards poverty alleviation is seen as crucial on the national and international levels when one considers that a departure from the traditional approach of providing government assistance, towards more internally driven methods of poverty alleviation not only puts less strain on national resources, but also allows for an increased number of persons to be assisted through the combined use of internal and external manipulation states of the poor individual. This signals a recognition of the empowerment potential within some individuals which can be tapped into and utilized towards mobilizing people out of poverty in combination with government assistance.
The approach advocated in this paper, illustrate that poverty is not a matter for economics alone. The multidimensional approach of psychonomics, in fusing qualitative and quantitative research methods along with the incorporation of social psychological concepts to economic analysis and models, further illustrate that poverty is more a challenge for the social sciences. The area of psychonomics and psychological capital, like all other attempts at addressing social problems, has its limitations related mostly to issues of time and the operationalizing of social psychological concepts. These are by no means novel, but rather were first associated with qualitative research methods and the very nature of poverty as it manifests in day to day living.
However, the pertinence of these concepts overshadows these limitations. In the same vein, these concepts contribute more to poverty assessment and alleviation than all other existing approaches combined, largely in terms of their scope and the potential for enduring effects. Also crucial to note is the wider implications of these concepts in looking at other social problems. For instance, the application of a focus on psychological capital in looking at the continuing irresponsible attitudes of some individuals in spite of the wealth of information available about the spread of HIV and AIDS. In addition, the approach can be used in the re-evaluation of certain economic theories which ignore a wide spectrum of ‘irrational’ human behaviours in an economic context.
In looking at the individual areas of theory, research and policy geared towards poverty alleviation, the significance of the concepts of psychonomics and psychological capital are addressed in this paper. Also brought to bear is the potential for application on the individual national and international levels, signally hope for not only poverty alleviation but rather poverty eradication.
