Thesis (DPhil (Political Science))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / Bibliography / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In this dissertation I explore people’s perceptions of the causes of poverty. Literature
reveals that there are three broad theoretical explanations of perceptions of the causes of
poverty: individualistic explanations, where blame is placed squarely on the poor
themselves; structural explanations, where poverty is blamed on external social and
economic forces; and fatalistic explanations, which attribute poverty to factors such as
bad luck or illness. Furthermore, the findings of studies reviewed showed that these
explanations interact with socio-economic and demographic variables such as race,
geographical location, education, lived poverty index (LPI), living standard measure
(LSM) and employment. I therefore critically examine explanations of poverty among
South Africans as measured by individualistic, structural and fatalistic dimensions and
how it interacts with the socio-economic and demographic variables.
Employing a national representative survey of 3510 adults aged 18 and older conducted
by the Human Sciences Research Council between 18 April and 30 May 2006 the
findings of the present study confirmed most of the theoretical arguments cited in the
literature. For instance, South Africans, in general, perceive the causes of poverty in
structural terms, but a large proportion of respondents also perceive the causes of poverty
in individualistic terms. Access to basic necessities influenced perceptions of the causes
of poverty since the poor mostly perceived poverty in structural rather than individualistic
terms. White South Africans in contrast to black Africans perceive the causes of poverty
mostly in individualistic terms. Coloured respondents are the most fatalistic in their
perceptions of the causes of poverty. Further analysis show that respondents living in
traditional areas compared to those in urban formal areas are less likely to have structural
perceptions of the causes of poverty. This is a very interesting finding because my
examination on the extent of lived poverty in showed that the urban formal areas have the
smallest proportion of respondents that have gone without basic necessities over the past
year if contrasted to the traditional, rural formal and urban informal areas. I found that
education had no significant impact on structural perceptions of the causes of poverty. In
spite of my assessment of the extent of access to basic necessities which revealed that a large proportion of respondents with primary education compared to those with tertiary
education go without these basic necessities.
In addition, the study found that the relationship between the socio-economic and
demographic variables and the structural, individualistic and fatalistic perceptions of the
causes of poverty is considerably more complex and that it is possible for the race group,
level of education, employment status and geographical location of the respondent all to
interact in a multidimensional manner and have an impact on how the causes of poverty
is perceived. However, the three linear regressions examining the relationship between
the socio-economic and demographic variables and the structural, individualistic and
fatalistic perceptions of the causes of poverty should be interpreted with caution because
the explanatory power of the three regression models is quite weak (as indicated by
Adjusted R²).
In sum, the present study is extremely relevant in many ways and makes a unique
contribution at both a methodological and policy level. Methodologically, the findings
showed that the LPI may contribute to the proposed poverty line suggested for South
Africa. As such, the findings offer a valuable message for the country’s decision makers
about South Africans’ perceptions of the causes of poverty. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie verhandeling ondersoek die persepsies van die publiek met verwysing na die
oorsake van armoede. Die literatuur dui op drie breë teoretiese verklarings aangaande
persepsies oor die oorsake van armoede: individualistiese verklarings wat die blaam
vierkantig op die armes self plaas, strukturele verklarings wat armoede toeskryf aan
eksterne sosiale en ekonomiese magte en dan fatalistiese verklarings wat armoede
toeskryf aan faktore soos die noodlot of siekte. Navorsing toon dat hierdie verklarings in
interaksie met sosio-demografies, ekonomiese veranderlikes soos ras, geografiese
ligging, opvoeding, indiensneming; die ‘Lived Poverty Index’ en geslag verkeer. Die
huidige verhandeling ondersoek dus krities die verklarings, in terme van armoede onder
Suid-Afrikaners, soos gemeet deur die individualistiese, strukturele en fatalistiese
dimensies en hul interaksie met sosio-demografiese en ekonomiese veranderlikes.
‘n Nasionale verteenwoordingende opname van 3,510 volwassenes, 18 jaar en ouer wat
tussen 18 April en 30 Mei 2009 deur die Raad vir Geesteswetenskaplike Navorsing
uitgevoer het die meeste van die teoretiese argumente waarna in die literatuur verwys
word bevestig. Byvoorbeeld, Suid-Afrikaners het oor die algemeen armoede vanuit
strukturele perspektief waargeneem. Groot proporsie van respondente het armoede
egter aan individualistiese faktore toegeskryf. Toegang tot basiese noodsaaklikhede het
die persepsies van armoede beïnvloed aangesien die armes armoede meestal toegeskryf
het aan strukturele eerder as individualistiese dimensies.
Blankes, in vergelyking met Swart Suid-Afrikaners, het individualistiese eerder as
strukturele persepties getoon. Kleurling repondente was die mees fatalisties aangaande
hul persepsies oor die oorsake van armoede. Respondente wat in tradisionele landelike
areas woon het armoede in mindere mate toegeskryf aan strukturele persepsies in
vergelyking met repondente woonagtig in formele stedelike areas. Dit was baie
interesante resultaat omdat daar verwag is dat respondente wat in tradisionele landelike
areas woon armoede eerder sou toeskryf aan strukturele persepsies, terwyl repondente
woonagtig in formele stedelike areas meer individualistiese persepsies sou openbaar. Die studie het ook bevind dat opvoeding en indiensneming geen merkwaardige invloed het op
persepsies oor die oorsake van armoede nie.
‘n Verdere bevinding van die studie was dat die verhouding tussen die sosio-ekonomiese
en demografiese veranderlikes en die struturele, individualistiese en fatalistiese
persepsies van armoede aansienlik meer ingewikkeld en kompleks is. Dit is dus moontlik
dat die rassegroep, vlak van opvoeding, indiensnemingstatus en geografiese ligging van
respondent saam op multi-dimensionele manier in interaksie kan verkeer en dus
impak kan hê op hoe armoede deur die respondent gesien word. Dit is belangrik om
daarop te let dat die drie regressie analises wat die verhouding tussen die sosioekonomiese
en demografiese veranderlikes en die struturele, individualistiese en
fatalistiese persepsies van armoede ondersoek baie versigtig geinterpreteer moet word
aangesien die verklaringsterkte van die drie regressies baie swak is.
Ter opsomming was die studie onder bespreking uiters relevant ten opsigte van verskeie
areas en het dit dus unieke bydrae gemaak tot beide metodologiese en beleidskwessies.
Metodologies het die bevindinge getoon dat die ‘Lived Poverty Index’ kan bydra tot die
voorgestelde armoede-lyn vir Suid-Afrika. Die bevindinge bied waardevolle inligting vir
die land se besluitnemers aangaande Suid-Afrikaners se persepsies oor die oorsake van
armoede.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:sun/oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/5318 |
| Date | 12 1900 |
| Creators | Davids, Yul Derek |
| Contributors | Gouws, Amanda, University of Stellenbosch. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Dept. of Political Science. |
| Publisher | Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | xxi, 241 p. : ill. |
| Rights | University of Stellenbosch |
Page generated in 0.0117 seconds