Poverty risk is closely associated with housing tenure, writes Helen Johnston
This week we hear again of job losses in Co Donegal. Although the Celtic Tiger has meant economic growth, employment, improved wellbeing and increased opportunities for many, pockets of disadvantage and poverty still exist.
A new report published by the Combat Poverty Agency highlights the uneven distribution of poverty in Ireland at regional and local levels. The highest levels of poverty are found in counties in the Border and western regions (Donegal, Leitrim, Longford and Mayo) and the lowest in the mideastern counties around Dublin city. In general, the countryside and villages have slightly higher poverty levels than other areas, especially in comparison with Dublin and the larger cities. But although Dublin has a low rate of poverty it has high rates of housing and environmental deprivation.
Poverty risk is closely associated with housing tenure. The risk of poverty is more than five times greater for local authority tenants than for people living in other types of housing. The housing market, aided by public policy, reserves public and social rented housing mainly for low-income households. The risk of poverty is also high for those in the private rented sector, at twice the national average.
In summary, poverty is found throughout the country, with higher-risk areas tending to have a lower share of the population. The uneven distribution of poverty becomes more apparent the more detailed the spatial level involved. The greatest poverty concentration is by housing tenure, with local authority and private rented households accounting for 60 per cent of all households experiencing poverty and deprivation, though they represent only 17 per cent of the total population.
In exploring the reasons for spatial variations in poverty risk, the report finds little causal link between location and poverty. The key factors are socio-economic: unemployment, low-paid work, non-participation in the labour force due to old age or illness, lone parenthood, low levels of education, and social class. Thus, the spatial distribution of poverty largely reflects variations in the socio-economic profile of the population. At the same time it is clear that a spatially concentrated "under-class", which is cut off socially and economically from the rest of society, does not exist.
So, what needs to be done to tackle poverty throughout the country? It is clear from this evidence that poverty is a structural rather than a spatial phenomenon. Thus, national policies need to be supported by strong local anti-poverty policies and area-based programmes.
The National Action Plan against Poverty and Social Exclusion highlights the spatial dimensions of poverty and identifies the need for regional and local anti-poverty strategies to support the national strategy. The uneven distribution of poverty is also linked to a wider policy concern on balanced regional development, as reflected in the regional and peace II programmes under the National Development Plan. These support area-based approaches to tackling poverty.
Local authorities and area-based programmes have a key role to play in improving the delivery of services at local level through promoting greater integration, community access and user involvement and by developing outreach mechanisms to meet the needs of vulnerable groups.
They can also achieve a multiplier effect by combining investment in physical regeneration with economic and social initiatives.
Anti-poverty policies can be targeted at low-income tenants in local authority and private rented accommodation. The main challenge here is the selection effect associated with social housing. While there has been a policy shift over the scale of social housing in order to avoid large concentrations, there has been little change in the restrictive allocation of social housing. Furthermore, the dynamic nature of social housing ensures a constant recruitment of poorer tenants to replace those who, having improved their situation, move on.
In addition, there is an internal process within social housing where tenants move from different estates, usually from low-demand to high-demand areas. This often reflects differences in how estates are managed as much as the quality of housing. There is a need for the promotion of good estate management practices.
A stronger focus on "place" or neighbourhood poverty is warranted. The residualisation of public housing has resulted in tenants experiencing inferior housing quality and a range of other neighbourhood drawbacks.
The discontinuity between regeneration initiatives and social programmes is disconcerting, with the exception of some localised initiatives (eg, Ballymun).
A neighbourhood effect is also likely to arise from the limited access to services and opportunities for residents of poor areas. For example, employer recruitment practices may discriminate against people from certain localities, either through crude selection policies or because of limited access to informal recruitment networks. Also, the quantity and quality of services provided can be less than are available in other, more affluent, areas; eg, healthcare, schools, financial and retail services, sports and recreation facilities, transport. Support for community development and initiatives that build social capital is required.
Finally, there is a need to monitor poverty trends at regional and local levels on an ongoing basis and to relate these to national trends. Regional and local poverty reduction targets should also be set in line with the national target to reduce the combined poverty and deprivation measure to 2 per cent by 2007.
It is possible to adapt this target based on reducing the poverty differentials that exist between regional and local authorities. These targets should be set in the context of administrative authorities drawing up plans to reduce poverty in their areas, as part of an overall national strategy.
Helen Johnston is director of the Combat Poverty Agency. This article is based on a report by Dorothy Watson, Christopher T Whelan, James Williams and Sylvia Blackwell: Mapping Poverty: National, Regional and County Patterns