Abstract
Poverty is a social construct largely based on the culture of poverty paradigm where the poor are blamed for their plight. Poverty constructed this way diverts attention from the social forces responsible for it. In order to thoroughly understand poverty in Ghana, therefore, we need to engage in the sociological imagination to see if poverty is a personal problem or a public issue. This paper aims to disprove the culture of poverty paradigm, which defines poverty as a personal problem, and redirect the attention to the macro social structure as the premise upon which poverty resides, thus making it an important public issue.The general objective of the paper is to use the macro sociological perspectives - functionalist, conflict, feminist, and postmodernist - to make a cogent case against the culture of poverty paradigm as basis for the social construction of poverty. Specifically, the paper identifies the social groups more susceptible to experience poverty in Ghana, the macro social forces responsible for their susceptibility, and propose feasible specific policy strategies to address poverty and the social pathologies tied to it.
Highlights
The paper takes off with an explication of poverty and the culture of poverty paradigms
Poverty is a social construct largely based on the culture of poverty paradigm where the poor are blamed for their plight
In order to thoroughly understand poverty in Ghana, we need to engage in the sociological imagination to see if poverty is a personal problem or a public issue
Summary
The paper takes off with an explication of poverty and the culture of poverty paradigms. The material connotation of poverty implies the inability to participate meaningfully in one's society due to lack of resources, and overt and covert forms of discrimination meted out mainly against members of minority groups in Ghana This unfortunate truth has currently found solace in the Ghanaian cultural fibre. This definition is income or material based where consumption or participation are determined primarily by command over financial resources (Nolan and Whelan, 1996, Veit-Wilson, 1998, 2004) This explanation, by implication, excludes non-material elements found in broad UN definitions, for example: ‘lack of participation in decision-making’, ‘a violation of human dignity’, ‘powerlessness’ and ‘susceptibility to violence’ (Langmore, 2000: 37). The incomprehensibility of the culture of poverty paradigm as an explanation of poverty receives attention
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
