The Persistence of Insular Poverty

Academic economist Kenneth Galbraith coined the term "insular poverty" in1969 as a means of distinguishing poverty of groups from individual poverty, which he termed case poverty (97; 325-327). According to Galbraith, case poverty refers to individuals who are poor because of "some quality peculiar" to them (97). Insular poverty, on the other hand refers to groups of people who are poor because the circumstances of their lives trap them in "social islands in which nearly everyone [is] poor, usually in a rural or urban environment that 'perpetuates its handicaps through poor schools, evil neighborhood influences, and bad preparation for life'" (Horowitz 104). The metaphor of the island is apt for describing insular poverty because those suffering from the conditions of insular poverty live in isolation from the rest of society, which enjoys relative affluence by contrast (Lowe & Reid 20). Considering that Galbraith's conceptualization of insular poverty assumes that these poor are not responsible for their socioeconomic conditions, it is important to understand what the causes of insular poverty are, and what measures can be applied by governmental entities and non-governmental organizations in order to reduce this form of structural poverty.

One of the biggest challenges of identifying the causes of insular poverty is that there are a number of variables that contribute to the condition of insular poverty, but the causal nature of these variables is complex and confusing (Rural Poverty Research Center 4). The variables are interrelated and it is often difficult to discern to what degree a variable caused poverty or was caused by poverty; often, the case may be both (Rural Poverty Research Center 4). In almost no case is there a single culprit that can be identified as the root cause of individual or communal poverty (Rural Poverty Research Center 4).

Insular poverty is considered by sociologists to be one of the consequences of a larger structural phenomenon known as social exclusion (Todman 3). Buchard define social exclusion as existing when a "person is is geographically resident in a society, but (b) for reasons beyond his or her control, he or she cannot participate in the normal activities of citizens in that society, and (c) he or she would like to participate (229). These ideas of insularity and exclusion allude to the fact that there is an agent who has authority and power to create the condition of marginalization among people who are less powerful (Todman 6). As Todman, indicates, the related notions of insular poverty and social exclusion contest the traditional North American discourse about the causes of poverty (6). "In the U.S.," Todman writes, "agency for disadvantage (and advantage) is typically thought to reside within the individual. Disadvantage is typically thought to be self-induced, resulting from individual-level behaviors, attitudes, values, choices and other personal attributes" (6). The results of a 2001 poll indicated the 48% of U.S. citizens believe that poverty is caused by some deficiency on the part of the impoverished person (Iceland 70).

While it may be the case that certain personal or familial characteristics may make an individual more likely to experience poverty, many contemporary poverty researchers and sociologists contend that structural factors exert a far stronger and more sinister influence over the likelihood that an individual will become impoverished and find himself or herself a member of an insular and marginalized community of fellow poor people (Iceland 71). Because disadvantage is perceived as being caused by some sort of individual deficit, the solution is frequently deferred to the individual as well, a convenient way for society to avoid acknowledging and addressing poverty in a meaningful manner (Todman 6). Todman further explains that the concepts of insular poverty and social exclusion disrupt this dominant discourse by positing that "structural features of society and the complex systems they comprise are understood to actively constrain individuals' capacity to assume personal responsibility for and thereby to maximize their welfare" (6).

Most of the insular poor, at least in urban areas, are racial and ethnic minorities. The structural features that place people in impoverished communities in the first place and which restrict individuals' and communities' abilities to seek viable economic alternatives include institutionalized racism and other forms of prejudice, both historic and contemporary. Whether perpetrated overtly or unconsciously, such discrimination contributes to a range of other social problems that in turn exacerbate and perpetuate cycles of poverty. For example, incarceration rates among poor African Americans contributes to the phenomena of family fragmentation, increased school attrition rates among the children of an incarcerated parents, and limited access to higher education, to name just three problems (Darity & Myers 63). All of these problems are caused by poverty, directly or indirectly, and they simultaneously carry poverty over to the next generation, ensuring that the community of the insular poor will continue to exist. African American historian and scholar Richard America contends that the legacy of slavery in the United States has had a dramatic negative impact on African Americans, resulting in the "coerced and manipulated diversion of income" that persists to this day, and which results in the social, economic, and even geographic isolation of this community (40). America criticizes the United States for failing to engage in a serious and searching dialogue about the historical factors that have contributed to insular poverty, resulting in the marginalization of thousands of disadvantaged Americans (40).

In urban areas, insular poverty is also caused and perpetuated by housing shortages and inconsistencies in the quality of housing (Kay, Powell & Kearney 53). Options for housing among the insular poor are typically limited and are substandard compared to economically stable communities (Kay, Powell, & Kearney 53). The depressed conditions of such housing can cause undue economic burdens on the people who live in insular communities. When utilities or other services are limited or inadequate, the residents of insularly poor communities may be compelled to spend their own money to rectify problems that are the responsibility of a government or community agency. Such expenses are significant burdens for people whose incomes are already inadequate, and require that a household budget be stretched beyond its actual capacity.

Whether in large metropolitan areas or rural regions, the insular poor are usually housed in communities where they are further isolated from opportunities to generate income. In both the city and the country, the insular poor live on the literal margins of society. Because of their geographical position, they can be-and are-easily overlooked by communities of people who are economically stable or financially prosperous. The geographical dislocation of the insular poor, whether metropolitan or rural, also distances them from important opportunities, such as education, and makes it more difficult and costly to access basic goods and services. In this way, expenditures increase for people whose incomes are restricted (Kay, Powell, & Kearney 53). It costs more to travel to services. The greater the distance, the more likely that additional expenses will be incurred. When a single mother needs to leave home to buy food, for example, and the grocery store is miles away, she may need to hire a child care provider to ensure her child's safety. Yet all of these expenses chip away at the tiny reserve that the insular poor have.

The greater the costs, the less opportunity there is to save. The less money saved, the less possibility there is for the individual to move out of poverty. The insular poor are thus trapped in a cycle of poverty from which there seems no escape. Because of their acute economic need, the insular poor often turn to services that they consider a temporary alleviation of their financial problems; but which only serve to further exacerbate the acuity of their poverty (Rank 41). Predatory lenders, for example, pitch their services to the most vulnerable insular poor who need immediate cash relief, even though they are unlikely to be able to return the payment and the exorbitant interest attached to it (Rank 41; Shapiro 111).

While the rural poor are affected by racism and other forms of institutionalized prejudice just as urban poor are, they may well be considered even more insular than the urban poor, and the causes of their insular poverty may be still more complicated. As the Rural Poverty Research Center emphasizes, "Rural places have different characteristics than urban areas-different access to resources,... economic structures, ... institutions, ...social norms, and... demographics-which in turn distinguish the causes and consequences of rural poverty from urban poverty" (3). In addition, despite the fact that "one in five Americans is rural, and a higher share of rural residents lives in poverty than urban (14% versus 11% for urban residents)," the insular poor of rural regions are probably even more invisible than the urban poor (Rural Poverty Research Center 3). Quite simply, we do not see the rural poor, and so we are not compelled to think about their conditions and their needs. For this and other reasons, poverty in rural areas tends to be more enduring and severe than it is in urban areas (Rural Poverty Research Center 3).

One of the causes that contributes to insularity among rural poor people is the fact that traditional methods of earning income have been disappearing in recent years. As agricultural production gives way to industrial and technological jobs, people in rural areas are left without jobs. Often, they have limited academic or professional experience in other areas that could facilitate a transition from agriculture to another sector of employment. The loss of this traditional way of life also has a severe psychological effect on many rural dwellers, and depression is certainly not conducive to efforts intended to recuperate financial stability and ensure long-term well-being.

The causes of insular poverty among the rural poor may be quite different, but the consequences of insular poverty are similar. Insular poverty, especially when it is persistent, tends to trap individuals and communities in inescapable cycles of unemployment or substandard employment offering wages that are barely livable and which provide little or no opportunity for saving. As poverty becomes more acute and debts accumulate, the insular poor often seek temporary solutions to their cash flow problems. These solutions, however, only serve to perpetuate the cycle of poverty, as they exact outrageous sums that are difficult, if not impossible, for the insular poor to pay. Perhaps the most damaging consequences of insular poverty, however, are psychological. Because the insular poor have been relegated to the literal margins of society, they are largely overlooked, and are often completely unseen, by people who are not part of their community. This makes the possibility of breaking through the insularity of poverty very unlikely.

Solutions to Insular Poverty: History of Efforts and New Possibilities

Despite its belief that poverty is largely an individual problem, the United States has not entirely neglected its responsibility for the marginalized poor of this society. Many different policies and programs have been implemented as a way to rectify insular poverty (Bessant, Dalton, Smyth, & Watts 70; 76). One of the earliest policies that was adopted was the welfare system, which, despite its good intentions to serve as a means of temporary financial assistance, is largely considered to be terribly ineffective for the insular poor and wasteful for taxpayers. The welfare-to-work program of President Clinton's administration was intended to redress some of these deficiencies for both stakeholder groups; however, as Ehrenreich points out in her book, Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America, poor adults who were suddenly sent to work acquired a mind-boggling and budget-busting set of new expenses that made their new "salary" laughable (170).

Another policy that has been used partially as a remedy for insular poverty is affirmative action which, seeks to bridge the income and wealth gap that isolates African-Americans on the island of insular poverty. The premise of affirmative action is that a policy is needed to address income inequalities based on race because those with power and money are not willingly going to share or concede their wealth or resources that foster economic stability simply because they want to be fair or because they believe that income equality is important. Despite its corrective intentions, affirmative action remains a deeply divisive solution for income inequality. Furthermore, it remains unclear whether affirmative action has actually resulted in decreasing insular poverty to any measurable degree.

As Borjas (1996) indicates, the federal government has a history of exhibiting "sudden and remarkable swings in policy proposals" (72). Such inconsistencies seem to suggest that the federal government is entirely incapacitated when it comes to establishing effective policies and programs to decrease and eventually eliminate insular poverty. Furthermore, the history of the government's policies and programs demonstrate an insensitivity to the differing needs that characterize the urban poor and distinguish them from the rural poor. The Rural Poverty Research Center contends that "The diversity of needs and capacity in different places makes tailored policies more effective, which argues for community-based policy, yet the limited capacity to fund community-based policy initiatives in many poor communities argues for federal funding, guidelines, and oversight" (3). Any future policies that are crafted and programs that are implemented with the intention of alleviating poverty must take these differences into account. Poor communities, like poor people themselves, are not a uniform group; there is as much difference within the communities as there is between their community and communities that enjoy financial stability. One step that legislators and policymakers should take is to involve the insular poor in the discussion, planning, and implementing phases of programs intended to assist their communities.

Despite the robust U.S. economy and unprecedented levels of personal wealth, there remain communities of people who are described as the insular poor, both in urban and rural areas of the United States. These people are poor not because of some egregious personal deficit, but because of the glaring inadequacy of our nation's social systems and structure, both with respect to its historical characteristics and its contemporary features. The causes of insular poverty are complex because there are many variables that are interrelated, and the causes are not entirely the same for the insular poor or rural regions and the insular poor living on the margins in metropolitan areas. To date, the strategies that have been proposed, both in policy and in practice, to alleviate the economic and psychological burdens of the insular poor have been ineffective, and marginality exists as it always has, with more people being displaced to the ranks of the insular poor every day. Creative solutions for reducing poverty may exist, but they will only be identified and implemented effectively if the very people they are intended to help are involved in the process of identifying and implementing them.

Works Cited
America, Richard F. "Racial inequality, economic dysfunction, and reparations."Challenge 38.6 (1995): 40-45.

Bessant, Judith, Tony Dalton, Paul Smyth, and Rob Watts. Talking Policy: How Social Policy is Made. Crows Nest, New South Wales: Allen & Unwin, 2006.

Borjas, G.J. "The New Economics of Immigration: Affluent Americans gain; Poor

Americans Lose. The Atlantic Monthly 278.5 (1996): 72.

Burchardt, Le Grand, and David Piachaud. "Social Exclusion in Britain 1991-1995." Social

Policy and Administration 33.3 (1999): 227-44.

Darity, William A., and Samuel L. Myers. Persistent Disparity: Race and Economic Inequality

in the United States Since 1945. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar, 1998.

Galbraith, Kenneth. The Affluent Society. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1969.

Horowitz, Daniel. The Anxieties of Affluence: Critiques of American Consumer Culture, 1939-

1979. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 2004.

Iceland, John. Poverty in America: A Handbook. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press,

2003.

Kay, Vina, John A. Powell, and Gavin Kearney. In Pursuit of a Dream: Linking Housing and

Education Policy. New York: Peter Lang, 2001.

Lowe, Gary R., and P. Nelson Reid. The Professionalization of Poverty: Social Work and the

Poor in the Twentieth Century. New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1999.

Rank, Mark Robert. One Nation, Underprivileged: Why American Poverty Affects Us All.

New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Rural Poverty Research Center. Place Matters: Addressing Rural Poverty. 2004. Retrieved on

April 30, 2007 from http://www.rprconline.org/synthesis.pdf

Shapiro, ThomasM. The Hidden Cost of Being African-American: How Wealth

Perpetuates Inequality. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Todman, Lynn C. "Social Exclusion: Its Utility in the U.S. Welfare Context." Retrieved on April

30, 2007 from http://www.adler.edu/AdlerAssets/documents/ISE/

Working%20Paper%20-%20Social%20Exclusion%20-

%20Its%20utility%20in%20the%20U.S.%20social%20welfare%20context.pdf