Page 157 - Contemporary Political Sociology Globalization Politics and Power

Citizenship 143

is also, however, an indication of even wider citizenship inequality, as
those with higher incomes increasingly opt out of public services, while

those who are not able to make the right life - style choices find it diffi cult
to get out of poverty.
Defining and measuring poverty is itself political. The defi nition closest

to Marshall ’ s ideal of society is that of Peter Townsend. As we have seen,
in Marshall ’ s conception of citizenship, social rights are related to the idea
that all citizens should be able to participate in a common standard of
“ civilized ” life. On this understanding, citizenship and poverty are anti-
thetical. In fact, in the years following the institution of the welfare state
in Britain, it was assumed that poverty had been virtually eliminated; only
poverty among the old, sick, and disabled remained a problem, and it was
understood that it would soon be remedied by continuing economic
expansion. Notoriously, Townsend re - discovered poverty in the 1960s.

He opposed the definition of poverty on which previous assessments had
been made, the “ absolute ” or “ subsistence ” definition. According to this

definition of poverty, only those who do not have enough for the neces-

sities of life are in poverty. Townsend argued that it was too restricted:
the necessities of civilized life go beyond those required simply to meet

animal needs. He defined poverty in relative terms, as the lack of goods
which enable people to participate in everyday life:

Individuals, families and groups in the population can be said to be in
poverty when they lack the resources to obtain the types of diet, participate
in the activities and have the living conditions and amenities that are cus-
tomary, or are at least widely encouraged or approved, in the societies to
which they belong. Their resources are so seriously below those commanded
by the average individual or family that they are, in effect, excluded from
ordinary living patterns, customs and activities. (Townsend, quoted in
Scott, 1994 : 78 – 9)

Although Townsend does not use the term “ citizenship ” in his work, his

definition of poverty is complementary to Marshall ’ s view of citizenship
rights: poverty has consequences for citizenship where citizenship involves
the rights to full participation in society.

Townsend ’ s definition of poverty is used quite often in research carried
out for NGOs like the Joseph Rowntree Foundation in Britain. It is dif-
fi cult to use as a measurement of poverty because it is necessary to decide
what should be included as customary, and exactly how much money is
needed to live according to these standards. Both change over time; what
is normal now would have been a luxury 50 years ago (a TV, or a phone,
for example); and costs of items change relative to each other as well as