Master's Proposal

FACING POVERTY AND IMPOVERISHMENT: THE CHALLENGES AND SOME CHURCHES’ RESPONSE IN SOUTHERN AFRICA

Samuel M Silungwe

Introduction

Methodology

Outline

Schedule

Bibliography

INTRODUCTION

Research Problem

Alcock (1993:3) notes that "many people, including academics, campaigners and politicians talk about the problem of poverty, and underlying their discussion is the assumption that identifying the problem of poverty provides a basis for action upon which all will agree." However, experience shows us that not all people agree on what the problem of poverty is; and for this reason, it is not surprising that the action people would wish to encourage or justify is not all the same thing. In fact, the first thing we need to understand about poverty is that it is not a simple or small phenomenon, but rather it is a growing issue affecting both the individual and the society. Hence, we cannot sit on the fence of the poverty problem or suggest that the problem is merely one of academic or political debate, because implicit in the ongoing debate about poverty in the world today contains the question, what are we going to do about it? Indeed, what academics, campaigners and politicians should be concerned about is how to create a framework through which the current research on poverty is not merely descriptive but also prescriptive. Or to put it another way, all debates about the problem of poverty in our present time will require some of kind of constructive responses and actions. This is not to suggest, however, that there is no need for the definition or statistical measurement of poverty. Arguably, it is the issue of definition that lies at the heart of the task of understanding poverty (Alcock 1993:67). Moreover, the need for definition is in fact recognized by most of the major researchers and commentators on poverty issues.

Certainly, there will be areas of controversy in the definition and measurement of poverty; however, to handle the problem of poverty one will, of course, have to go beyond the definitional controversies, and analyze the factors that cause poverty. It need not be stressed that poverty excludes and marginalizes people. The high degree of illiteracy, malnutrition and ill health, and general neglect suffered by the poor result in their having an indifference towards the society and polity (Atal and Æ yen 1997:8). On the face of the matter, the realities of poverty and the growing gap between the rich and the poor remain the most shocking and unacceptable consequences of the ways in which dominant powers organize society. The plight of the "have-nots" and the privileges of the "haves" cannot be denied and must be acknowledged by all.

In the study proposed here, I will explore, through interviews, observations and documents, the problem of poverty and impoverishment in Southern Africa with particular reference to South Africa and Zambia as case studies, though South Africa will be the central focus of this study. To some extent, the purpose of this study is to give some comparative perspectives on how churches in these two countries are generally responding to the problem of poverty. As already noted, the problem of poverty is not only a political one but implicit in the ongoing debate about poverty is a moral question that fails falls within the social and spiritual responsibility of churches. In fact Scripture provides churches with a number of resources for dealing with issues of justice, especially its biblical emphasis on social ethics. We are living in a world of rising international inequality and deep, persistent poverty. This is a challenge to churches to battle against poverty, and seek to remove it from the scene.

It is estimated that 25% of the world’s population own and/or control 75% of the world’s wealth (Poverty and Plenty, Harare II 1996, Conference of International Black Lutherans). To put it in another way, at least 75% of the world’s population share 25% of the world’s wealth. This fundamental economic inequality has left the majority of the world’s population in dire need for resources for survival such as food, clothes and shelter. In sub-Sahara Africa alone, it is estimated that 40 to 50 percent of the population lives below the world’s poverty line.

In South Africa, racial capitalism kept the majority of South Africans in exploitative poverty. For instance, the poorest 20% of income earners receive only 1.5% of the total income in South Africa, while the top 10% have 50% of total income (Mayibuye May/June 1998). May et al (1998:2) note that a recent review on inequality in South Africa shows that the poorest 40% of households receive only 11% of the country’s total income, while the richest 10% of households receive over 40% of total income. And according to the African National Congress Magazine, Mayibuye, more than 18 million of South Africa’s total population lives below the poverty line (Mayibuye May/June 1998).

Zambia used to be one of Africa’s richest countries with its copper mines and other resources is now servicing huge international debts. But today the statistics on poverty in Zambia indicate that 76% (6.5 million) of Zambia’s population (9.5 million) live below the poverty line (Central Statistics Office 1997). Though the statistics indicated above may be unreliable, no one disputes that the vast majority of the people in Southern Africa are affected with an "ill-problem"¾ ill-clothed, ill-fed, ill-housed, ill-educated or illiterate, and ill-health. In other words, the majority of the population in the two countries is being deprived of the necessity of life. In fact, this is a common trend in the whole of Southern Africa, if not the world. The percentage of the people experiencing poverty in Southern Africa pose a profound challenge for the churches in this region to discern the will of God, to know what is good, acceptable and perfect. Certainly, why should people suffer amidst plenty? Does it mean that there is not enough material and natural resources, the know-how and the people, to bring about a poverty free Southern Africa, or the rest of the world, in less than two decades?

Today, industrialization articulates one of the most dominant characteristics of modern existence. The events, decisions and activities in the industrialized countries of the West have significant consequences for individuals and societies in Southern Africa. As the Western world becomes increasingly industrialized, almost ironically, more and more people in the developing world are becoming poor. One cannot simply ignore this problem. On the basis of standard justice, any country’s economic system must encompass the fulfillment of the basic needs of the poor. This implies that the countries of this world must increase the economic participation of the marginalized and the direction of wealth and resources to the satisfaction of basic human needs. However, to sufficiently overcome the poverty crisis in Southern Africa and other regions of the world facing the same crisis, the current global economic policies must be addressed, and an alternative approach to economics must be developed, and appropriate policies implemented.

In recent years, a growing number of studies and discussions have been concerned with the extent of poverty in Southern Africa, its causes and possible policy to alleviate it. Indeed, some of these studies and discussions have been highly influential to the extent that they have attracted international interest, especially those international lending institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. However, ever since vigorous studies on poverty began in the nineteenth century, no clear political and economic thought has provided clear answers to the complexity of the realities of poverty. For this reason therefore, it is worthwhile to pause and look at the damage poverty inflicts on the individual and the community who must endure it. It is imperative that conditions are created in the world in which every person has access to basic necessities for human living. However, any attempt to tackle the problem of poverty in the developing world requires changes in the structures of the world’s economic relationships. Marginal concessions cannot substitute for a genuine reform. Moreover, marginal concessions, without proper structural changes cannot come to grips with real issues. Hence, poverty is a complex problem and is a product, in part at least, of the impact of political process and policy development. The World Bank itself declared in recent reports that eradication of severe poverty worldwide was feasible; the political will to do so is what is lacking. Therefore, poverty is both a political and moral issue, and this implies that it requires action by all stakeholders.

In the study proposed here, an attempt will be made to answer the question "why poverty is significant, and how churches can find a role to play in the process of eradicating it?" The currently ecumenical spirit to mobilize churches to act meaningfully and decisively in the struggle against poverty informs the major research question and its subsidiary questions. In view of the fact that the years 1997 – 2006 have been declared by the United Nations as the International Decade for the Eradication of Poverty, it is time that churches in Southern Africa should help to develop an agenda not only for research and reflection but for affirmative action.

Research question

Poverty is a manifold phenomenon. The phenomenon occurs all over the world, and is found in many different forms. After all, the world has never been free from poverty. Throughout history, human beings have always been affected by this devastating phenomenon. Available research findings on poverty appear to indicate that the Third World countries, in particular those in Africa are the worst affected. It is assumed that this is probably due to lack of a political will. But the problem of poverty also has a moral dimension. In this regard churches in Southern Africa cannot afford to be complacent but rather to engage in the battle against the eradication of poverty. Unfortunately churches in Southern Africa have not effectively faced the challenges of and sufficiently responded to the problem of poverty. In this study, two countries will be used as case studies, that is, South Africa and Zambia.

Subsidiary questions

  1. What resources are available in the world, in particular Southern Africa, to bring about a poverty free region?
  2. Why is it that an advanced technological society, in which solutions to most difficult problems have been sort, poverty still exists amidst plenty?
  3. How can churches in Southern Africa confront the many faces of poverty?
  4. On what basis could churches claim that eradicating poverty is a moral imperative?
  5. How can churches review their tacit alliances with the dominant groups in society, and with the rich?
  6. What impact will the campaign for debt cancellation (i.e. Jubilee 2000) have on poverty relief in highly indebted poor countries?
  7. How could churches assist in the eradication of poverty without addressing the question of inequality in general?
  8. How can churches provide solutions to poverty through the anti-poverty strategies that take account of and seek to influence major social and economic forces?
  9. What lessons are churches learning from the ongoing trend of economic globalisation?
  10. What theological models are available for churches to justify their role in discussing economic issues?
  11. How did the early church fathers respond to the problem of poverty?
  12. Why is it important to measure the poverty gap?
  13. How possible is it for churches in Southern Africa to engage their respective governments to alleviate poverty by the year 2015?
  14. What economic options should Southern Africa adopt in order to improve the quality of life of their people?

 

METHODOLOGY

Any academic study requires a methodology to reach its conclusion: that is, a research must have ways of producing and analyzing data so that a theory can be tested, accepted or rejected. Thus, methodology is concerned with both the detailed research methods through which data are collected, and the more general philosophies upon which the collection and analysis of data are based (Haralambos and Holborn 1995:808). Stake (1997:7) claims that "the analysis of data is a matter of giving meaning to the first impressions as well as to the final compilations." In other words, the analysis of data essentially means taking something apart, that is, our impressions and observations. In this section, I shall describe briefly the epistemological basis for choosing the qualitative approach as the paradigm for the study, and documents, interviews and questionnaire as my research instruments.

As the first step, I should like to make a statement concerning bias, in form of a short history of the development of my interests and values as they related to the subject of this research. My mind is not indeed a blank state on the questions of this proposal. In fact, my interests values, and close acquaintance with the research problem are the source of my motivation of this study. I therefore undertake this study, then, with recognition of a vested interest in its outcome. However, this does not imply that the outcome of this study has to take one direction or another, or to demonstrate that, for example, there is or is not an immediate solution to the problem of poverty.

Neuman (1994:404-405) claims that paradigms in human and social sciences help us to understand phenomenon; they advance assumptions about the social world, how science should be conducted, and what constitutes legitimate problems, solutions, and criteria of proof. In literature there are two widely discussed paradigms, that is, qualitative and quantitative paradigms. For the purpose of this study, I choose to use the qualitative paradigm. However, selecting an approach does mean that the researcher may not move from the methods normally associated with that style. Each approach has its strengths and weaknesses, and each is particularly suitable for a particular context. I find that a quantitative paradigm cannot tell what I want to know: the realities of the experience of another human being and what that person thinks and feels about the experience. I adopt a qualitative perspective simply because my concern is to understand the individuals perceptions about the problem of poverty, to seek insights rather than statistical analysis. In fact there are distinctions between qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. In this regard, Stake (1995:37) notes three major distinctions:

  1.  
  2. The distinction between explanation and understanding as the purpose of inquiry;
  3.  
  4. The distinction between personal and impersonal role of the researcher, and
  5.  
  6. A distinction between knowledge discovered and knowledge constructed.

However, as Stake (1995:37) argues, the distinction is not directly related to difference in qualitative and quantitative data but a difference in searching for causes versus searching for happenings. In line with the above distinctions, quantitative researchers usually press for explanation and control, while qualitative researchers press for understanding the complex interrelationships among all that exist. Creswell (1994:1 - 2) defines a qualitative paradigm as an inquiry process of understanding a social or human problem, based on building a complex, holistic picture, informed with words, reporting detailed views of informants, and conducted in a naturally setting.

Thus the basic purpose of a qualitative paradigm is to describe and develop a special kind of understanding for a particular social situation, role, group, or interaction. Qualitative research is also analytical or interpretative in that the researcher must discern and then articulate subtle regularities within the data. Therefore, in a qualitative study, reduction, organization, manipulation, display, and above all contemplation of data are primary rather secondary activities. Locke et al. (1987:84) argue that, "most, though not all, qualitative research is naturalistic in that the researcher enters the world of participant(s) as it exists and obtains data without any deliberate intervention to alter the setting." Human beings are the primary data-gathering instruments. Thus, this kind of research is carried out in the natural setting or context of the entity studied. The objective is a reconstruction of experience as it has been experienced in the natural setting.

In all formats for qualitative study, detailed descriptions of context and what people actually say or do form the basis for inductive rather that the deductive forms of analysis. That is, theory is created to explain the data rather than being collected to test a pre-established hypothesis. Robson (1993:61) argues that in the naturalistic inquiry inductive data analysis is preferred over deductive as it make it easier to give a fuller description of the setting and brings out interactions between inquirer and respondents. In short, qualitative research is inductive because researchers rarely know the specifics of data analysis when they begin a project. Unlike in the quantitative study in which all data is collected before analysis, in the qualitative approach data collection and analysis are intertwined.

A qualitative research is descriptive in that text (recorded words rather than numbers) is the common form of data. Thus diaries, documents, field notes, interviews and transcripts are the primary source of information. In fact, the approach adopted and methods of data collection will depend on the nature of the inquiry and the type of information required.

Generally speaking, there is no best approach or method; the selection of an approach and methods is usually driven by the kind of research questions the researcher is seeking to answer. Knowing that I can never know in the same sense that I know my own thoughts and feelings, what another persons’ experience is really like, I want nevertheless to get as close to that knowing as possible. I therefore choose documents, interviews and questionnaire as my research instruments. For analytic and interpretative purposes, this study will make use of a combination of methods. A combined method study is one in which the researcher uses multiple methods of data collection and analysis. The main advantage of employing multiple methods is that it permits triangulation. Creswell (1994:174) cites Greene et al., who advanced five purposes for combining methods in a single study:

Similarly, Haralambos and Holborn (1995:856) cite Bryman who has suggested a number of ways in which the using a plurality of methods can be useful:

In combined method study, methods might be drawn form ‘within methods’ approaches such as different types of quantitative collection, or alternatively it might involve ‘between methods’, drawing on qualitative and quantitative data collection procedures (Creswell 1994:174). In a way, triangulation can be seen as an important reason for combining qualitative and quantitative paradigms, as noted above. Robson (1993:383) also claims that "triangulation in its various guises, for example, using multi methods, or obtaining information relevant to a topic from several informants, is an indispensable tool in real world enquiry." He argues that "it is particularly valuable in the analysis of qualitative data where the trustworthiness of the data is always a worry. It provides a means of testing one source of information against other sources. Both correspondences and discrepancies are of value" (Robson 1993:383).

In other words, if two sources of information give the researcher the same evidence then, to some extent, the cross-validate each other, and if there is a discrepancy, its investigation may help in explain the phenomenon. Though the using of more than one method in an investigation can have advantages, it almost always adds to time investment required. Similarly, though the employing multiple methods to a single study might enable the researcher to illuminate of nullify some extraneous influences, results across methods do add to confusion and uncertainty. However, one important benefit of employing multiple methods is in the reduction of inappropriate certainty (Robson 1995:290).

The work proposed here is based on the ongoing research in Southern Africa, which is trying to give us a better measure and understanding on poverty in the region. Reliance for evidence in the proposed study will be placed on both primary and secondary sources. However, the heaviest dependence will be placed on the secondary sources to be collected from: Churches’ Poverty Commission, the Non-governmental organizations linked with poverty projects, the relevant government ministries (in South Africa). The other source of information will be the University of Cape Town Library. Since this study has a comparative component, data on Zambia will be the other source of evidence.

 

OUTLINE OF THE EXPECTED WORK

CHAPTER ONE:

  1. NATURE OF THE STUDY
  2. 1.0. Background to the Study

    1.1. The Need for the Study

    1.2. The Purpose of the Study

    1.3. State of the Problem

    1.4. Significance of the Study

    1.5. Definition of Terms

    CHAPTER TWO:

  3. METHODOLOGY
  4. 2.0. Introduction

    2.1. Research Design

    2.1.1. Research Approaches

    2.1.2. Case Study

    2.1.3. Document Study

    2.1.4. Interviews

    2.1.5. Questionnaire

    2.2. Methodology to the Study

    2.2.1. Kinds of Data

    2.2.2. Sources of Data

    2.2.3. Population and Sample

    2.2.4. Instrumentation and Validation

    2.2.5. Limitations

    CHAPTER TRHEE:

  5. GENERAL REVIEW OF THE CONCEPT OF POVERTY
  6. 3.0. Introduction

    3.1. Poverty: Conceptual Problems

    3.1.1. The Definitions and Measurement of Poverty

    3.1.2. The Nature of Poverty

    3.1.3. Understanding Poverty

    3.1.4. Poverty and Inequality

    3.1.5. Ideology and Poverty

    3.2. Poverty and Development

    3.2.1. The Third World and Industrialization

    3.2.2. The Third World and Globalization

    3.3. Poverty and Globalization Policy – Macroeconomics

    3.4. Comparative Standards

    3.5. A Frame of Analysis

    CHAPTER FOUR:

  7. CASE STUDIES IN POVERTY: SOUTH AFRICA AND ZAMBIA
  • 4.0. Introduction
    •

    4.1. The State of Poverty in South Africa – Case Study

    4.1.1. Economic Policies Pre-1994

    4.1.1.1.Equity, Income and Distribution

    4.1.2. Poverty and Inequality Post-1994

    4.1.2.1. Entitlement and Deprivation

    4.1.2.2. Urban and Rural Divide

    4.1.3. Macroeconomic Framework

    4.1.3.1. The Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP)

    4.1.3.2. The Growth, Employment and Redistribution Strategy (GEAR)

    4.2. The State of Poverty in Zambia – Case Study

    4.2.1. Economic Policies – 1964 to 1989

    4.2.2. Macroeconomic Policies in the 1990s

    4.2.3. Zambia’s Poverty Assessment

    4.2.3.1. Analysis of causes of Poverty

    4.2.3.2. Incidence of Poverty – Urban and Rural

    4.2.4. Policy Options

    CHAPTER FIVE:

    5. THE ROLE OF CHURCHES

    5.0. Introduction

    5.1. South Africa and Zambia: A Comparative Study

    5.1.1. Policy Framework

    5.1.2. Strategies for Action

    5.1.3. The Anti-Poverty Projects

    5.1.4. The Churches’ Poverty Commission

    5.1.5. Jubilee 2000

    CHAPTER SIX:

    1. THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION
  • 5.0. Introduction
    •

    5.1. Biblical views on Poverty

    5.2. Christian views on Poverty

    5.3. Contemporary views on Poverty

    5.4. Civic Virtue, Poverty and Social Justice

    5.4.1. Prioritisation

    5.4.2. Safety Nets and the Poor

    5.4.3. Social Divisions and Poverty

    5.4.4. Sustainable Development, Poverty and the Poor

    5.4.5. Preferential Option for the Poor

    5.5. Theology and the Culture of Unconcern

    CHAPTER SEVEN:

    1. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

     

    AN ESTIMATE OF THE WORK SCHEDULE

    January to March:

    A Preliminary study. Review of documents of the Churches’ Poverty Commission (CPC). Also to review related literature on Zambia. Search for references related to the CPC. Search and examine published material in the University’s library.

    May to August:

    To contact officials in churches, government ministries and non-governmental organisations, and set time with them for interviews. To conduct a pilot study, or to send the questionnaires to the selected population.

    September to October:

    To start analysing evidence and writing of the first drafts in chapters, and submitting of the finished draft at a time.

    November:

    Writing of second drafts in chapters and submitting the finished at a time.

    December:

    Polishing and final submission.

     

     

    BIBLIOGRAPHY

    African National Congress. 1994. The Reconstruction and Development Programme. A

    Policy Framework. Johannesburg: Umanyano Publications.

    Alcock, P. 1993. Understanding Poverty. London: MacMillian Press.

    Askonas, P. and Frowen, S. (eds.). 1997. Welfare and Values. Challenging the Culture of

    Unconcern. London: MacMillian Press.

    Atal, Y. and q yen, E. (eds.). 1997. Poverty and Participation in Civil Society. UNESCO

    Publications.

    Bamberger, M. Yahie, A. M. and Matovu, G. 1996. The Design and Management of Poverty

    Reduction Programs and Projects in Anglophone Africa. Washington D.C.: the World

    Bank.

    Coyyam, H. and Moser, C. 1994. Urban Sector Services: An Assessment of service provision

    in the context of Zambia’s urban poverty. Washington D. C.: The World Bank.

    Danziger, S. H., Sandefur, G. D. and Weinberg, D. H. 1994. Confronting Poverty:

    Prescription for Change. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Harvard University Press.

    Duchrow, U. 1986. "Choosing Life: Resistance to Idolatry and "Autonomy" in the Economic

    Field (Barmen I and II)." Translated by David Lewis. In Global Economy: A Confessional

    for the churches? Geneva: WCC Publications.

    Elliott, C. 1975. Patterns of Poverty in the Third World: A Study of Social and Economic

    Stratification. New York: Praeger Publishers.

    Graham, C. 1994. Safety Nets, Politics and the Poor. Transitions to Market Economics.

    Washington D. C.: The Brookings Institution.

    Haralambos, M. and Holborn, M. 1995. Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. London: Harper

    Collins Publishers.

    Madsen, D. 1983. Successful Dissertations and Theses. A Guide to Graduate Student

    Research from Proposal to Completion. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.

    May, J. et al. 1998. Poverty and Inequality in South Africa. Report prepared for the Office of

    the Executive Deputy President and the Inter-Ministerial committee for Poverty and

    Inequality. Durban: Praxis Publishing.

    Menendez, A. 1991. Access to Basic Infrastructure by Urban Poor. Washington D. C.: The

    World Bank.

    Neuman, L. W. 1994. Social Research Methods. Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.

    Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Psacharopoulos, G. and Nguyen, N. X. 1997. The Role of government and the Private Sector

    in Fighting Poverty. Washington D. C.: The World Bank.

    Republic of South Africa. Ministry of the Office of the President. 1994. Key Indicators of

    poverty in South Africa. RDP Report. Pretoria: South Africa Communication Services.

    Republic of Zambia. 1997. Living conditions Monitoring Survey 1996. Lusaka Central

    Statistics Office.

    Robson, C. 1993. Real world Research. A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-

    Researchers. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Stake, R. E. 1995. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Subbarao, K. et al. 1997. Safety Net Programs and Poverty Reduction. Lessons from Cross-

    Country Experience. Washington D. C.: the World Bank.

    Van de Walle, D. and Nead, K. (eds.). 1995. Public Spending and the Poor. Theory and

    Evidence. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Wilson, F. and Mampele, R. 1989. Uprooting Poverty: The South African challenge. Report

    for the second Carnegie Inquiry into Poverty and Development in Southern Africa. Cape

    Town: David Philip.