What is particularly worrying about the fact that the "proportion of

rural households in relative poverty rose from 16% to 19%

between 2004 and 2007", is the fact that this figure has not changed since Brian McLaughlin's report in the late 1970s; plus the 'Rural Lifestyles' report of the 90s......both cited 20-25% of rural households in/on the margins of poverty........

SO SOMETHING IS NOT GOING RIGHT!

James Derounian

University of Gloucestershire

Thanks James, an interesting point.

Analysis of statics for endless period of time has never helped any nation. Its time to take action. Critical appriciation  and analysis of the actions taken alone would lead the nation towards workable and result oriented methodologies. To be proven right or wrong is not what matters. What actualy matters is  how we succeded or failed and the vision to improvise on them.

Ms. Shakti Sharma,

Chairperson :Swayam Shakti Foundation, India

Author ; Tearless Eyes Fearless Heads

 

Thanks for your comments, Ms. Sharma. We hope that the priorities for action identified in the report will now be taken foward by government and others.

With reference to James's point, I worry about relative poverty, both for obvious reasons (it should be falling, but never does), but also because it will only change (I think I've got this right) when one of two things happen: poor people become richer at a faster rate than the relatively rich become richer (unlikely in the current climate); rich people become poorer relative to the already poor (unlikely it seems in this, or any, climate!).  Although I understand - and support in many ways - this now standard relatavist approach, I do wonder whether more emphasis should be placed on finding and supporting those in absolute poverty.  We should be able to do this easily - from memory, Mike Noble's work (Oxford University) proved that this is possible via interrogation of readily available Government data about income, benefits etc.   My fear is that these seemingly constant figures for relative poverty can be seen as being too big to be believed, and/or too big to tackle, but always, and understandably, very useful for those keen to ensure that the needs of rural areas aren't ignored in policy terms.  This provokes the question, are 'we' really determined to tackle rural poverty, or is so much of what we do, in terms of research, analysis, report writing, conefernce-going, and lobbying, actually little more than pragmatic lip service that actually does more to help the already well-off in rural areas than the much remarked upon 20 or percent of rural people who are relatively poor?  One way or another if we want to overcome poverty, we have to make poor people richer, and give more help to those who are otherwise disadvantaged by, e.g., disability.  When, I wonder, will we, as a society, decide to reduce poverty rather than constantly research it and bemoan its existence.  I'm involved in research, and so I guess, mea culpa too!  Gordon Morris

Thanks Gordon, food for thought for all of us.