07-03-2023
View on
The hopeless poverty in which more and more people find themselves threatens to disrupt society. To solve this, according to Ernst-Jan de Bruijn (Leiden University) and Tim ‘S Jongers, director of the Wiardi Beckman Foundation, we must first bridge the gap between the people ‘who turn the knobs’ and those who live in poverty . “Those worlds are miles apart.”
Text: Nicole Gommers
Speaking
Ernst-Jan de Bruijn
Rising energy prices and inflation made it clear in one fell swoop last year: the financial resilience of a large part of our society is rather disappointing, to say the least. Now that the middle class is also affected by financial problems, poverty is receiving more attention than ever. Both Ernst-Jan de Bruijn and Tim ‘S Jongers notice this. It is distressing that people who have been in hopeless poverty for much longer have received less attention so far.
Nevertheless, ‘S Jongers says: “It gives me hope for a change in mentality: the tendency is now more often that poverty is not a matter of ‘one’s own fault’. We can take that into account in future discussions. But my hope can of course also be wishful thinking.” De Bruijn conducts research into the behavioral economics perspective on poverty. “It has surprised me that we only now seem to see that a large part of the population cannot properly absorb a sudden increase in costs.”
Tim ‘S Jongers is director of the Wiardi Beckman Foundation. Until August 2022, he was a senior advisor at the Council for Public Health and Society (RVS). He is Correspondent Living Together at De Correspondent and published the book about the experiential knowledge of people in a vulnerable position. Offensive Broccoli out.
In order to arrive at a structural approach to poverty, it is important to recognize that it is an unruly theme. According to De Bruijn, almost every definition falls short. “You could define poverty as experiencing a lack of resources to meet your needs. But it also involves factors other than income and expenditure. How much financial security you have also plays a role. There is no such certainty if you can just make ends meet, while you hop from job to job and prefer not to go to the doctor because of the deductible. Subsistence insecurity is therefore an appropriate term.”
‘S Jongers: “Multiproblems that originate from a shortage of money are not just about having less. It’s also about feeling inferior. Think of a family that falls apart due to long-term stress, of people who are victims of flexibilization, of low-educated people with a limited social network and little cultural capital. Looking only at income is far too limited.”
Ernst-Jan de Bruijn: ‘If you live in poverty, you are completely preoccupied with daily problems’
The-your-own-fault-fat-bump card
Poverty has many negative side effects. Health problems caused by chronic stress in particular stand out. This Gordian knot of problems consists of less access to health care (because of the deductible), poor living conditions (from living in a neighborhood with a lot of crime to mold in the house), poor sleep, poor working conditions with little autonomy, and more. De Bruijn: “The mental and psychological impact on people living in poverty is huge. They are completely preoccupied with everyday problems. Then it makes sense that you are not concerned with healthy eating or exercising.”
The fact that the own-fault-fat-bump card is often drawn is therefore unjustified by both men. ‘S Jongers: “As a society, we have slipped so far that we cannot imagine that that lost feeling is taking over everything in life. That frustrates me enormously. Insecurity of existence causes a constant sense of panic.” The psychological impact is often not transient, he knows from experience. He grew up in great poverty and uncertainty. “When I was 34 I bought a modest apartment. Then I lay awake at night for a year thinking ‘if the roof leaks, I can’t afford it and I’ll be homeless’. In your head you stay poor. The impact on children of benefit parents will become apparent in about ten years.”
Ernst-Jan de Bruijn is a postdoctoral researcher at Leiden University. In 2021 he obtained his PhD at Wageningen University & Research with a thesis on financially vulnerable households. His research focuses on the behavioral economics perspective on poverty and problematic debt, economic decision-making and the role of social policy.
Tim ‘S Jongers: ‘Our systems are not in solidarity with people at the bottom’
According to De Bruijn and ‘S Jongers, we should look beyond point solutions. Giving allowances or giving girls access to free menstrual products is not enough. ‘S Jongers: “The historic purchasing power repair of 17 billion euros means that things have gone completely wrong. Our systems are not in solidarity with people at the bottom. You may wonder whether young people who grow up in poverty are victims of the socio-economic situation of their parents, or of the fact that we as a society have not offered a structural solution for years. No one living in poverty turns the knobs themselves. This is done by highly educated policymakers who are satisfied with their lives, housing position, income position and social network. It is a select group that differs greatly from the people they make decisions about. We must therefore first talk about the people who are not poor. They have long considered it acceptable for people to live on ten dollars a week, and they project norms that belong to their ‘culture’ onto people living in poverty. Hence the hammering on a healthy lifestyle, for example, while poor people are busy surviving every day. If we want to prevent a large part of the population from tearing themselves away from society, it is these power structures that we must examine. Do the people who turn the knobs have enough knowledge to do the right thing? Otherwise, administrative arrogance and paternalism converge. The citizen is the victim of this.”
More cuddling, less bedwetting
According to ‘S Jongers, the solution therefore lies in a broader, more well-founded view of problems. For example, we must make more use of the experiential knowledge of people who come from a disadvantaged position: “After all, poverty does not equal backwardness; poor know what it’s all about.” ‘S Jongers wants to emphasize that this is not a plea for large-scale deployment of experts by experience. “Bureaucracy has advantages, policymakers are needed. But we need to move towards a mix of experience and other sources of knowledge: thinking together about policy and its weaknesses. From the starting point that no one is self-reliant. One just has a much better starting position than the other.”
De Bruijn also believes that poverty policy should start by listening to people themselves and what they consider important. Then make decisions together. “Scientists now have a clear understanding of the impact of social insecurity on health. We know much less about how we can actually and structurally reduce health differences through social policy. I want to investigate that.” ‘S Jongers believes that it’s okay to go a little outside the box: “It’s not just about whether someone with a minimum income has more left over. We must dare to measure whether offering more security of existence leads to a mother hugging her children more often. Or that a child stops wetting the bed. That is where the real profit lies.”
This article originally appeared in the March issue of the paper magazine. Visibility also appears 4 times a year.
Subscribe now for free