Two different approaches to poverty have been favoured by sociologists and researchers: absolute poverty and relative poverty. The concept of abso­lute poverty is grounded in the idea of subsistence

– the basic conditions that must be met in order to sustain a physically healthy existence. People who lack these fundamental requirements for human existence – such as suf?cient food, shelter and clothing – are said to live in poverty. The concept of absolute poverty is seen as universally applicable. It is held that standards for human sub­sistence are more or less the same for all people of an equivalent age and physique, regardless of where they live. Any individual, anywhere in the world, can be said to live in poverty if he or she falls below this universal standard.

Not everyone accepts that it is possible to identify such a standard, however. It is more appropriate, they argue, to use the concept of relative poverty, which relates poverty to the overall standard of living that prevails in a particu­lar society. Advocates of the concept of relative poverty hold that poverty is culturally de?ned and should not be measured according to some universal standard of deprivation. It is wrong to assume that human needs are everywhere identical – in fact, they differ both within and across societies. Things that are seen as essential in one society might be regarded as luxuries in another. For example, in most industrialized coun­tries running water, ?ush toilets and the regular consumption of fruit and vegetables are regarded as basic necessities for a healthy life; people who live without them could be said to live in poverty. Yet in many developing societies, such items are not standard among the bulk of the popu­lation and it would not make sense to measure poverty according to their presence or absence.

There are dif?culties in the formulations of both absolute and relative poverty. One common technique for measuring absolute poverty is to determine a poverty line. Using a single criterion of poverty can be problematic, because such de?nitions fail to take into account variations in human needs within and between societies.

Explanations of poverty can be grouped under two main headings: theories that see poor indi­viduals as responsible for their own poverty, and theories that view poverty as produced and re­produced by structural forces in society. These competing approaches are sometimes described as ‘blame the victim’ and ‘blame the system’ theories respectively.

causes of poverty and deprivation

The twin causes of poverty are underdevelopment of economy and inequality in the distribution of national income. Important factors are:

(i)      Underdeveloped nature of economy.

(ii)     Rapid growth of population in an overpopulated country; even if the national income increases, the per capita income remains the same due to increase in population.

(iii)    Large inequalities in the ownership of earning assets such as land, buildings, industry, etc.

(iv)    Low level of productivity in agriculture and industry.

(v)     Larger scale unemployment and underemployment.

(vi)    Inequality of opportunity in acquiring education and skills.

(vii)   Regional disparity among the various states ; due to this, the regions develop at a different pace. For example, economic development is much faster in states like Punjab, Haryana, Maharashtra than in Bihar, orissa and other north-eastern regions.