Abstract
AbstractPoverty analysis is in the midst of a multidimensional “turn” due, in part, to the growing awareness of the limitations of relative income measures of poverty. In this paper, we argue that the conceptualisation of poverty remains a neglected aspect of this multidimensional turn to date, and demonstrate that the counter-intuitive results which flow from relative income analyses are not problems of measurement, but are entirely consistent with the conceptualisation of poverty under Peter Townsend’s dominantPoverty as Relative Deprivationframework. In response to these problems we articulate an alternative framework,Poverty as Capability Deprivation, drawing on Amartya Sen’s capability approach, and argue that this provides more persuasive explanations as to why some nations have greater poverty than others and why poverty remains a problem even in the richest nations.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Sociology and Political Science
Reference75 articles.
1. Poverty or preference: what do ‘consensual deprivation indicators’ really mean?
2. Material Poverty and Multiple Deprivation: The Distinctiveness of Multidimensional Assessment;Hick;Journal of Public Policy,forthcoming a
3. The Case for an EU-wide Measure of Poverty
Cited by
24 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献