Dependency-Based Explanations (AQA A-Level Sociology): Revision Notes

Dependency-Based Explanations

Introduction to dependency-based approaches

Dependency-based explanations attribute poverty to the behaviour and attitudes of poor people themselves. These theories suggest that poverty persists because poor individuals develop cultural values and patterns of behaviour that prevent them from escaping their circumstances. Understanding these explanations requires examining key concepts including the stigmatisation of the poor, the culture of poverty, the underclass, and how these ideas inform policy solutions like means-testing welfare benefits.

The culture of poverty

The foundation for dependency-based explanations lies in the work of anthropologist Oscar Lewis, who studied impoverished communities in developing countries during the 1950s and 1960s. Lewis observed that people living in shanty towns appeared to develop distinct psychological and social characteristics in response to their circumstances.

According to Lewis, the culture of poverty involved individuals experiencing strong feelings of:

• Marginality - feeling excluded from mainstream society
• Helplessness - believing they cannot improve their situation
• Dependency - relying on others rather than self-sufficiency
• Present-time orientation - focusing on immediate needs rather than future planning
• Resignation and fatalism - accepting poverty as inevitable

Lewis's work was groundbreaking because it suggested that poverty was not simply a matter of lacking resources, but involved a complex cultural adaptation that could persist across generations.

Murray's underclass theory

Building on Lewis's foundation, American political scientist Charles Murray developed the concept of the underclass in his influential 1989 work. Murray's theory focused specifically on Western industrial societies, particularly the United States and Britain.

Murray identified the underclass as a distinct group characterised by what he considered deviant traits:

• Welfare dependency - relying on state benefits rather than working
• Work-shy attitudes - avoiding employment opportunities
• Promiscuous behaviour - engaging in casual sexual relationships
• Criminal violence - turning to illegal activities

The cycle of disadvantage

Murray's analysis emphasised how these characteristics created a self-perpetuating cycle. Children growing up in underclass families became socialised into what Murray termed 'feckless' attitudes, learning poor behaviour patterns from their parents. This socialisation process meant children grew up ill-educated and ill-behaved, making them likely to continue the cycle into the next generation.

Murray particularly highlighted the role of female-headed, lone-parent families in perpetuating this cycle. He argued that the absence of father figures was especially damaging for boys, who lacked positive male role models and were more likely to engage in criminal behaviour or avoid taking on family responsibilities themselves.

The theory suggests that young males in underclass communities show little interest in legitimate employment, preferring instead to participate in the hidden economy through criminal activities to supplement welfare benefits. This behaviour pattern contributes to community breakdown and rising crime rates.

New Right solutions to poverty

The New Right political movement adopted dependency-based explanations to justify specific policy approaches to tackling poverty. Their preferred solution centres on means-tested welfare benefits rather than universal provision.

Means-testing versus universal benefits

Means-testing involves targeting welfare support only at those who can demonstrate genuine need, typically through income and asset tests. This contrasts sharply with universal benefits, which are available to all citizens regardless of their financial circumstances.

The New Right contends that if wealthy individuals paid for their own private welfare needs (such as private pensions, health insurance, and education), this would reduce the overall tax burden on society.

Economic arguments

New Right theorists believe that high taxation itself creates poverty by reducing work incentives. Their argument follows this logic: lower taxation rates encourage people to work harder and longer, fostering entrepreneurship, private wealth creation, and economic growth. They claim this ultimately benefits everyone, including the poor, through increased prosperity and job creation.

However, this position faces criticism from social democrats and Marxists who question whether the benefits of economic growth actually reach those most in need.

The dependency culture argument

Prominent New Right theorists including David Marsland, Charles Murray, and James Bartholomew argue that generous welfare states create a dependency culture. They suggest that the more generous the welfare provision, the less incentive people have to take personal responsibility for supporting themselves through paid employment.

Contemporary applications

New Right ideology has gained increasing influence over government policy in recent decades. This has led to growing political pressure to remove universal benefits and expand means-testing across the welfare system. While such approaches often prove popular with the general public, they face stronger opposition when applied to certain groups, particularly elderly people.

Critiques of dependency-based explanations

Dependency-based explanations face substantial academic criticism for being overly simplistic and potentially harmful in their approach to understanding poverty.

The victim-blaming critique

Critics argue that these explanations engage in victim-blaming by holding poor people responsible for their poverty while ignoring the structural factors that create and maintain inequality. This approach is considered both intellectually inadequate and morally questionable.

Lack of empirical evidence

Research evidence does not support claims that poor people possess fundamentally different cultural values from the rest of society. Studies consistently show that people experiencing poverty generally share similar aspirations and values to those in more fortunate circumstances.

The poverty trap problem

Critics point out that means-tested benefits can actually create greater dependency through the poverty trap effect. This occurs when people become financially worse off by taking employment due to the loss of benefits, effectively trapping them in unemployment or very low-paid work.

Welfare state consequences

A New Right approach tends to produce a residual welfare state where ordinary citizens receive second-class public services while wealthy individuals can purchase superior private alternatives. This creates a two-tier system that may undermine social cohesion.

Key sociological contributions

Academic challenges to underclass theory

Ken Roberts (2001) argues that Murray's analysis is grossly exaggerated and fails to identify any genuine homogeneous culture that supports the concept of a distinct underclass. Similarly, Alan and Carol Walker (1987) reject clear evidence for the existence of an underclass group, accusing Murray of building his arguments on 'innuendos, assertions and anecdotes' rather than solid empirical research.

Alternative frameworks

Steve Craine (1997) offers a nuanced perspective through his concept of the black magic roundabout. While rejecting the idea of an underclass as a distinct social group, Craine acknowledges that poor people may engage in what appears to be 'underclass behaviour'. However, he explains this as a consequence of being trapped in a permanent cycle of unemployment, training schemes, and low-paid work rather than as evidence of deviant cultural values.

Feminist perspectives

Feminist sociologists emphasise that most single mothers demonstrate considerable success in child-rearing despite facing structural disadvantages. They argue that the problems experienced by lone-parent families stem from poverty and lack of support systems rather than from personal fecklessness or cultural deficiencies.

Research on homelessness

Shane Blackman (1997) conducted research with homeless individuals that challenges underclass stereotypes. While acknowledging that his subjects might appear 'dangerous, drunken and lazy' to outside observers, Blackman found they shared similar life aspirations to the rest of society. Their apparent 'underclass behaviour' represented a coping mechanism for dealing with their difficult circumstances rather than reflecting their fundamental values or chosen lifestyle.