Popular perceptions of poverty in Dutch society

L.C.J.M. Halman, W.J.H. van Oorschot

    Research output: Book/ReportReportProfessional

    702 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Studies on poverty are mainly engaged with the definition and measurement of poverty, while the issue of what people consider reasons for living in need is often neglected. In this article we explore four types of poverty explanations based on a) the distinction between poverty as a matter of fate or not, and b) the question whether poverty is due to individual or collective factors. The four types of poverty explanations are: the individual is to blame (laziness), it is the individual's fate (unluck), society is to blame (injustice), and society's fate (inevitable part of progress). It is investigated if these different types of explanations can be attributed to social-demographic characteristics, perceptions like self-interest and of welfare recipients, as well as to religious and political attitudes and values. Although the analyzes yield some evidence that such characteristics are related with such explanations, the evidence must not be exaggerated. Poverty is a social issue and therefore it is not so strange that social-political orientations, like welfare state attitudes, appear more important attributes than religious orientations. The analyzes seem to substantiate ideas forwarded by theories of secularization stating that religious values have lost their dominance in contemporary Western society. The importance of postmaterialism for both dimensions seems to confirm Inglehart's suggestion that postmaterialism has taken over religion's position. Further, subjective factors appear more important for poverty explanations than objective factors.
    Original languageEnglish
    Place of PublicationTilburg
    PublisherWORC, Work and Organization Research Centre
    Number of pages31
    Volume99.11.01
    Publication statusPublished - 1999

    Publication series

    NameWORC paper
    Volume99.11.01

    Fingerprint

    poverty
    post-materialism
    political attitude
    religious attitude
    welfare recipient
    Society
    secularization
    social issue
    welfare state
    evidence
    Values
    Religion
    society

    Keywords

    • poverty
    • sociology and psychology

    Cite this

    Halman, L. C. J. M., & van Oorschot, W. J. H. (1999). Popular perceptions of poverty in Dutch society. (WORC paper; Vol. 99.11.01). Tilburg: WORC, Work and Organization Research Centre.
    Halman, L.C.J.M. ; van Oorschot, W.J.H. / Popular perceptions of poverty in Dutch society. Tilburg : WORC, Work and Organization Research Centre, 1999. 31 p. (WORC paper).
    @book{44396b204770475ab265d644eeaf8e47,
    title = "Popular perceptions of poverty in Dutch society",
    abstract = "Studies on poverty are mainly engaged with the definition and measurement of poverty, while the issue of what people consider reasons for living in need is often neglected. In this article we explore four types of poverty explanations based on a) the distinction between poverty as a matter of fate or not, and b) the question whether poverty is due to individual or collective factors. The four types of poverty explanations are: the individual is to blame (laziness), it is the individual's fate (unluck), society is to blame (injustice), and society's fate (inevitable part of progress). It is investigated if these different types of explanations can be attributed to social-demographic characteristics, perceptions like self-interest and of welfare recipients, as well as to religious and political attitudes and values. Although the analyzes yield some evidence that such characteristics are related with such explanations, the evidence must not be exaggerated. Poverty is a social issue and therefore it is not so strange that social-political orientations, like welfare state attitudes, appear more important attributes than religious orientations. The analyzes seem to substantiate ideas forwarded by theories of secularization stating that religious values have lost their dominance in contemporary Western society. The importance of postmaterialism for both dimensions seems to confirm Inglehart's suggestion that postmaterialism has taken over religion's position. Further, subjective factors appear more important for poverty explanations than objective factors.",
    keywords = "poverty, sociology and psychology",
    author = "L.C.J.M. Halman and {van Oorschot}, W.J.H.",
    note = "Pagination: 31",
    year = "1999",
    language = "English",
    volume = "99.11.01",
    series = "WORC paper",
    publisher = "WORC, Work and Organization Research Centre",

    }

    Halman, LCJM & van Oorschot, WJH 1999, Popular perceptions of poverty in Dutch society. WORC paper, vol. 99.11.01, vol. 99.11.01, WORC, Work and Organization Research Centre, Tilburg.

    Popular perceptions of poverty in Dutch society. / Halman, L.C.J.M.; van Oorschot, W.J.H.

    Tilburg : WORC, Work and Organization Research Centre, 1999. 31 p. (WORC paper; Vol. 99.11.01).

    Research output: Book/ReportReportProfessional

    TY - BOOK

    T1 - Popular perceptions of poverty in Dutch society

    AU - Halman, L.C.J.M.

    AU - van Oorschot, W.J.H.

    N1 - Pagination: 31

    PY - 1999

    Y1 - 1999

    N2 - Studies on poverty are mainly engaged with the definition and measurement of poverty, while the issue of what people consider reasons for living in need is often neglected. In this article we explore four types of poverty explanations based on a) the distinction between poverty as a matter of fate or not, and b) the question whether poverty is due to individual or collective factors. The four types of poverty explanations are: the individual is to blame (laziness), it is the individual's fate (unluck), society is to blame (injustice), and society's fate (inevitable part of progress). It is investigated if these different types of explanations can be attributed to social-demographic characteristics, perceptions like self-interest and of welfare recipients, as well as to religious and political attitudes and values. Although the analyzes yield some evidence that such characteristics are related with such explanations, the evidence must not be exaggerated. Poverty is a social issue and therefore it is not so strange that social-political orientations, like welfare state attitudes, appear more important attributes than religious orientations. The analyzes seem to substantiate ideas forwarded by theories of secularization stating that religious values have lost their dominance in contemporary Western society. The importance of postmaterialism for both dimensions seems to confirm Inglehart's suggestion that postmaterialism has taken over religion's position. Further, subjective factors appear more important for poverty explanations than objective factors.

    AB - Studies on poverty are mainly engaged with the definition and measurement of poverty, while the issue of what people consider reasons for living in need is often neglected. In this article we explore four types of poverty explanations based on a) the distinction between poverty as a matter of fate or not, and b) the question whether poverty is due to individual or collective factors. The four types of poverty explanations are: the individual is to blame (laziness), it is the individual's fate (unluck), society is to blame (injustice), and society's fate (inevitable part of progress). It is investigated if these different types of explanations can be attributed to social-demographic characteristics, perceptions like self-interest and of welfare recipients, as well as to religious and political attitudes and values. Although the analyzes yield some evidence that such characteristics are related with such explanations, the evidence must not be exaggerated. Poverty is a social issue and therefore it is not so strange that social-political orientations, like welfare state attitudes, appear more important attributes than religious orientations. The analyzes seem to substantiate ideas forwarded by theories of secularization stating that religious values have lost their dominance in contemporary Western society. The importance of postmaterialism for both dimensions seems to confirm Inglehart's suggestion that postmaterialism has taken over religion's position. Further, subjective factors appear more important for poverty explanations than objective factors.

    KW - poverty

    KW - sociology and psychology

    M3 - Report

    VL - 99.11.01

    T3 - WORC paper

    BT - Popular perceptions of poverty in Dutch society

    PB - WORC, Work and Organization Research Centre

    CY - Tilburg

    ER -

    Halman LCJM, van Oorschot WJH. Popular perceptions of poverty in Dutch society. Tilburg: WORC, Work and Organization Research Centre, 1999. 31 p. (WORC paper).