The Politics of Poverty: Shifting the Policy Discourse

Discourses are powerful narratives that influence attitudes and actions towards important societal issues and those that are affected by these issues. They explain and justify social phenomena such as growing poverty in Canada and other developed economies. Dominant discourses on poverty in some nations neglect the structural causes of poverty and blame poor people for their situations. These discourses may even justify increasing poverty as necessary in order to achieve economic growth that benefits most citizens. This article examines the discourses on poverty in various forms of the welfare state and how they shape public policy towards the poor. It will argue for shifting policy discourse to an emphasis on broader structural issues that involve reducing poverty by redistributing economic and social resources through public policy action.IntroductionD iscourses are powerful narratives that influence attitudes and actions towards important societal issues and the populations that are affected by these issues. These discourses express ideas, attitudes, and beliefs about the origins of a problem and the courses of action by which the problem can be addressed (Lessa 2005; Foucault 1972, 1980). Discourses can go beyond explaining a phenomenon and provide either criticism or justification for phenomena such as poverty. Examining discourses towards poverty is important as the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) reports that while Canada has one of the fastest growing poverty rates among rich countries, poverty is increasing in most other OECD nations as well (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development 2008; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2011a). There is a need to consider the underlying societal arrangements and the accompanying discourses that perpetuate such conditions.As systems of ideas, discourses embody power relations that serve to maintain power for some in society and disempower others. For example, some discourses on poverty denigrate people who live in poverty. This in turn contributes to their further exclusion from participating in activities normally expected of citizens in modern society such as employment and voting in elections. This serves not only to justify the presence of poverty, but also contributes to its perpetuation.This article examines the dominant discourses on poverty and argues for shifting the policy discourse to an emphasis on broader structural issues such as how public policy distributes economic and social resources across the population. It does so by linking poverty discourses to welfare state regimes in Esping-Andersen's typology of welfare state (Esping-Andersen 1990). In the Nordic countries of Finland and Norway the dominant discourse focuses on redistribution and reducing social inequalities to promote the wellbeing of populations. As a result, these countries have lower poverty rates and lower social inequalities than most other developed nations. In Anglo-Saxon nations, poverty is usually seen as resulting from individual failings. Here, higher poverty rates are combined with a discourse that blames people living in poverty for their situations. Conservative nations represent a middle ground between these two differing regimes.Incidence of Poverty in Developed Political EconomiesPoverty has increased in most wealthy nations and this is especially the case in Anglo-Saxon nations such as Canada (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2011b). Yet governments in these countries have been slow to take action to reduce poverty. In contrast, the Nordic countries have lower poverty rates and lower income-related inequalities. In 2009, the most recent year for which data are available, the average poverty rate in the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden) was 8% compared to 13.1% for the Anglo-Saxon countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK, and USA) (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2011b). …