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 to live a decent life and draw attention to the political circumstances, institutional structures and welfare state arrangements that enable people to live respectable, affluent and secure lives (Sen 1993, 1999). Due to this change in perspective, EU social policy thinking focused more and more combating unemployment to diminish poverty risks. Access to the labor market is regarded as most important for enabling participation chances, because employment not only significantly increases a household's income but also its social integration. Germany, like other European countries, experienced growing unemployment rates and demographical changes during the recession period, which resulted in a need to diminish social security expenditures and to raise employment rates. Therefore, the activation policy which has been launched during the last decade is surely inspired by the European social policy discourse to ensure social cohesion, but primarily reflects governmental needs to decrease unemployment and social security expenditures. Moreover, the change in perspective on poverty as such (from distribution to integration) was accompanied by a change in attitude with regard to the question of individual responsibility for the experience of and escape from poverty. The key phrase "Fordern und Fordern" (rights and duties) paraphrases the general approach that institutional as well as individual efforts have to be strengthened in order to improve the labor market situation and diminish poverty rates. On the one hand, labor market agencies have been reformed and supportive measures have been extended. On the other hand, access to unemployment benefits and the level of social assistance have been restricted with regard to the period of entitlement and its eligibility in order to increase effort to return to the labor market as soon as possible and accept work for lower pay. …