This National Conference got underway with the observation that, in Italy as in Europe, emerging forms of poverty have mainly affected segments of the population that were previously relatively protected but that have now become socially and economically vulnerable. This phenomenon has also been accompanied by the onset of other hardships, stemming from the intensification of migration flows.
Against this backdrop, it was felt that poverty can no longer be considered solely as a problem arising from the exclusion of individuals from the labor market. Indeed, the growing number of workers in financial difficulty demonstrates that assured employment no longer suffices to generate even a modest level of wellbeing. This changes the very nature of poverty, which is expanding to include more and more people who do not (and do not wish to) see themselves as poor because they have hitherto lived on a minimum income, and who possess both professional qualifications and skills.
It was noted that the processes of impoverishment – dictated by a variety of factors such as the effects of globalization, increasing job insecurity, the economic crisis of recent years, and the erosion of the welfare state – have created instability in social relations involving work and family life. In particular, with the growth of family difficulties, those paying the highest price are the least protected population groups in society, such as the older and younger generations. In Italy, in the face of substantial disparities between the country’s northern and southern regions, one of the most worrying aspects of the phenomenon to emerge has been child poverty.
It was stressed during the discussions that in order to formulate targeted measures to deal with the problem, the issue must first be considered in its proper context. Impoverishment is a difficult problem to measure. In particular, it is necessary to take into account the various signs pointed up by relative poverty indicators, which in reality measure the income distribution of a country, as well as by absolute poverty indicators, which accurately measure the magnitude of the phenomenon. However, the fact that the figures thrown up by these two sets of indicators are dissimilar, and that occasionally a greater disparity accompanies a reduction in poverty, was seen as giving rise to a need to reassess and rationalize the assessment methods employed.
Furthermore, emphasis was laid on the need to bear in mind that there is also an anthropological – and not just an economic – aspect of impoverishment. Indeed, it was felt that in order to understand the phenomenon of newly-emerged forms of poverty fully, it is necessary to gauge the impact of relational, cultural and ethical factors in creating and fueling the problem. To address the issue, it thus becomes essential to take on board and nurture the person as a whole, making him or her a conscious agent of his or her own deliverance. This is an approach based on educational support, which is one of the most potent factors in combating poverty.
From a policy perspective, however, the first step identified as needing to be taken was a rethink of the public welfare system, which, faced with a vast array of beneficiaries, does not address the problems effectively and in depth. Redesigning the system also entails a greater involvement on the part of local authorities, albeit subject to their accountability for expenditure and a standardization of services.
In addition, in order to improve social cohesion, a new model combining subsidiarity with solidarity was also seen as needed, based on the involvement of the various stakeholders and more coordinated and efficient social intervention efforts. Indeed, the non-profit sector has profound insights into grassroots problems and is able to intervene through the use of tools and strategies that are also innovative.
Accordingly, it was felt that joint public- and private-sector efforts should hinge on pragmatism and the implementation of a community welfare model in which even private-sector actors should be free to come up with new solutions – a model not so much based on attributing to the nonprofit sector a role of standing in for the state, but rather on ensuring effective subsidiarity. Finally, in this regard, another aspect raised was that of corporate welfare, which, in times of economic hardship, has shown itself capable of providing valuable additional support to individuals and families.