Does the conceptualisation of poverty matter? Empirical example of non-generic approach of poverty attributions

Mainstream research on lay poverty explanations has almost exclusively explored perceptions of the causes of poverty using a generic, i.e., undifferentiated, conceptualisation of poverty. Thus, this approach fails to account for the many faces of poverty and different circumstances which can affect an individual’s economic situation. This article analyses three specific categories of the poor – immigrants, families with children and the retired – and compares these perceptions to generic attributions of the causes of poverty. Moreover, it examines whether different explanations can be attributed to certain socio-economic characteristics and political ideology. The data derive from a survey conducted in Finland in 2008. The results indicate that causal beliefs are more complex than has been assumed in the mainstream research on attributions for poverty. The public shares distinctive causal beliefs when it comes to the different categories of the poor. When moving from the retired to families with children and to immigrants, support for explanations which blame the individual increases and support for explanations which blame structural conditions decreases. Applied multivariate analysis indicates that attributions for the causes of poverty are to some extent related to socioeconomic characteristics and political ideology. However, the effects, as well as the group differences, are small.