Generational Poverty Through Three Sociological Lenses

Introduction

Poverty is one of the most pressing social problems, and its generational nature remains one of the primary reasons it is so difficult to eradicate. While several theories attempt to explain why poverty is transmitted from generation to generation — and theorists sometimes strongly disagree on those reasons — there is near-universal acceptance of the idea that poverty does pass from one generation to the next. A significant body of research has been directed at chronic poverty in both developed and developing countries. This research suggests that while poverty may be simplistically defined as a lack of money, the problem of poverty actually addresses the "absence of transfer of different forms of capital: human, social-cultural, social-political, financial/material, and environmental/natural" (Moore, 2001).

This more complex definition of poverty helps explain why simply providing financial resources to a family does not generally fix the problem of generational poverty, and may, in some circumstances, actually exacerbate the underlying issues that contribute to it. In order to understand this position, it is important to examine some of the theoretical models most frequently used to describe and explain generational poverty.

Theoretical Models Overview

When examining poverty, it is important to keep in mind that poverty has a fluid definition, and what is considered impoverished in one location and time period may not be considered impoverished in another. This is a critical factor because scholarly and practical approaches to solving the problem of poverty have often treated the issue as if a single definition applies universally. For example, "one frequently employed perspective can be designated as a minimum needs or subsistence approach to the concept of poverty" (Retzlaff, 1978). Under this approach, only those people who lack the resources to meet their own basic subsistence needs are considered impoverished. The problem with this definition is that it incorporates assumptions about resource allocation that actually underpin some of the sociological theories defining poverty — suggesting that some people should only be entitled to enough resources to sustain them, rather than having a right to a fair division of resources.

Examining the transmission of poverty from generation to generation, one can see how versions of this idea — that some people should consider themselves fortunate simply to survive — help drive poverty in communities and families. This paper examines the concept of generational poverty from three sociological perspectives: conflict theory, social learning theory, and feminist theory. It focuses on the common issues these theories highlight as causes or contributors to generational poverty, and on their differences, in order to determine whether there may be multiple causes of poverty across different generations, and to consider whether interventions proposed by advocates of one perspective might be seen as counterproductive by advocates of another.

Conflict theory is one of the most compelling frameworks for explaining poverty because it centers on the idea that resources are limited and that access to resources is at the heart of many intergroup conflicts. Social learning theory posits that people learn from their social contexts, and that much of social behavior is acquired through observation and practiced through modeling. Feminist theory is considered an alternative sociological theory because it presents a non-mainstream view of social conditions, examining the role of gender and the systemic exercise of male power over women as a driver of poverty.