The poor in the northern rural areas in transforming Russia: a double exclusion

Transition countries are sometimes characterised by the downward mobility of previously successful groups and the spread of poverty to working populations. So why do some groups of the “new poor” fare worse than others and who are the long-term poor? Does official registration with a social agency provide sufficient grounds to identify a person as a long-term poor? This article looks at both definitions and causes of long-term poverty using a longitudinal study of the officially registered poor people and the 1999-2001 survey of a northern rural region of Russia.

[Full text of the article is in Russian language only.]

The article explores whether the definition of long-term poor can be obtained by combining definitions given by social workers, community members and poor people themselves, as well as considering poor people’s past behavior.

The author finds that apart from the official definition of the poor, ie those eligible for social assistance, the poor are often additionally categorized by social workers and community members as:

• respected, or “good” poor, whose low incomes originate from unfavorable external conditions or a large number of dependants and who make efforts to overcome poverty
• “affluent” poor, i.e. people with underreported incomes, such as self- employed or unregistered entrepreneurs
• “failed” poor, e.g. households with drinking members, who, as the article asserts, are the real long- term poor

When examining the causes of long-term poverty, the author demonstrates that, along with initials level of poverty and its duration, long- term poverty arises because of social exclusion on both institutional and behavioral levels. By institutional exclusion the author means a necessity to hold a low-paid (often public) job and/or perception by a social agency and community as “unworthy” social assistance. By behavioral exclusion the author means adaptation of unsuccessful survival strategies that lead to a conservation of poverty rather than overcoming it.

The paper suggests that in-depth interviews have shown that it is often the long-term (“failed”) poor who are excluded both from social safety nets, social networks and are denied a permanent job. The author suggests this demonstrates that the official registration with social agencies is not necessarily a sign of extreme poverty. Indeed, the “respected” poor are more likely to get social assistance. The author concludes by noting that social assistance can hardly serve as a compensatory resource and cannot help to overcome long-term poverty, as, it is argued, upward social mobility mostly happens due to increased labor efforts or assistance from one’s social network.