Assessing ‘New Poverty and the Changing Welfare Regime of

Turkey’

Prepared by
ÖZLEM GONCA YALÇINKAYA 1325604

For the course

SOCIAL POLICY AND DEVELOPMENT
Dr. SEYHAN AYDINLIGİL

Fall, 2008
METU, ANKARA
 In this article, mainly, 1) Turkish social security system, 2) failures of established
and successful policies of social integration, 3) national development and Anatolian
integration and 4) dynamics of transformation of local organizations and the
transformation of patronage type political structures into modern structures are being
handled in relation to ‘new poverty’ and ‘social exclusion’, ‘marginalization and
‘underclass’ and in Istanbul context as oppose to the older kinds of poverty and
migration. That’s why; this issue is supposed to be an issue of social policy. In terms of
new poverty and social exclusion, I am, especially, interested in forced migrations from
Southeastern and Eastern Anatolia and their lack of ability in terms of formal social
protection mechanisms and formal employment opportunities as oppose to their
aggregation to informal sector. Besides, in my point of view, while discussing this study,
it is very important to integrate the place of Turkey in global economy, as well as in
international division of labor, into wider global economy and inequalities between 1st
and 3rd world countries in terms of capitalist accumulation and capital globalism.

Social Policy and Welfare Regime:

Before talking about new poverty and its manifestations, we should analyze
changing aspects of social policy and welfare state. Buğra and Keyder (2005, p. 10)
points out that after 1970s, we encounter with decline of welfare state in developed
countries whereas national developmentalist ideologies had begun to be eroded. New
patterns of production, consumption and income have overshadowed the former ones
(Ibid.). As a result of globalization, economic growth [ or the rise of financial capital] has
gained importance against social policy and welfare state. While assessing the impact of
globalization on welfare states and social policies or developmentalist ideology of a
specific state, it is crucial to analyze the existing welfare regime in that country. Welfare
regime refers to ‘division of responsibility between the state, labor market and the family
in welfare provisioning’ (Ibid.). Esping Anderson classifies three types of welfare
regimes which are conservative- based on employment status and supporting role of
family-, liberal- which is market centered- and social democratic- includes state policies
based on equal citizenship- types of which Germany, US and Sweden constituted (Ibid.)
(Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.15). In addition to these ideal types, we face with South
European, Latin American and East Asian ones (Ibid.). Welfare regime is also considered
as ‘the totality of formal and informal relations which provide social protection and to the
individual in risk situation, that is in situations such as those of old age, sickness,
disability or unemployment’ (Ibid. pp.10-11). That’s why; it is closely interrelated with
poverty (Ibid. p.11). Then, we can say that in the absence of social protection mechanism,
it is likely to be trapped in poverty (Ibid.). So, while assessing new poverty we should
take this information into account.

Before mentioning on new poverty in Turkey, it would be useful to touch upon

welfare regime in Turkey. As it was in Southern countries, ‘social protection provided to
the individual by the extended family’ keeps its priority in Turkey, considering older or
former types of poverty (Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.9). When people get unemployed and
require support, they apply to family help (Ibid.). In this way, they do not become
destitute in the absence of social welfare mechanisms (Ibid.). However, while discussing
on new poverty, we will confront changes in Turkish context and globally which effect
informal social support mechanisms. In terms of shifts in social policy reforms,
‘economic and demographic changes, such as the dissolution of rural structures and the
increasing pace of rural- urban migration, the advent of flexible production relations in
industrial structure, declining opportunities of industrial employment in the context of
changes towards post- industrial society that have taken place simultaneously with de-
ruralization, the changing position of some countries from a country of emigration to a
country of immigration, the problems caused by an increasingly competitive global
market, the necessity of disciplining municipal spending that is for the most part
distributed through patronage relationships, and the aging of the population’, are very
indispensable to combat with ‘permanent poverty’ and threat of social exclusion (Buğra&
Keyder, 2003, p.14).

As well, Turkey, as a candidate in EU membership, should take some measures.

EU has gone changes to constitute ‘Social Europe’ (Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.14). In this
respect, state is expected to assure that all individuals are to be able to participate in
society as equal citizens (Ibid. pp. 14- 15). Considering labor market, it is accepted that
full time, regular and stable jobs have been ceased (Ibid. p.15). In this respect, people are
supported by ‘citizenship income’ as it is in France (Ibid). Then, it is expected that these
developments will guide Turkish policy makers. However, according to my point of
view; looking at the headlines in newspapers and mass meetings, what is expected from
the state is not financial support during the times of unemployment initially. Rather,
people are in need of resurgence of their security basis and rise in regular job
opportunities as oppose to flexible modes of production, decrease in employment in
public sector, privatization in health sector and attempts to soften the rigidities in labor
market to increase employment such as abolish of seniority and informing compensation
due to neo- liberal policies and rules of competition to get more from lion’s share in
global market. In this respect, I think, what F. Şenses mentioned is important. He points
out that poverty could not be alleviated without integrating policies about employment
inducing industrialization and social policy tools (2003, p.123). In other words, first of
all, policies on employment should be developed in order to avoid from dependency
culture and social exclusion originated from regular income supports (p.126).

Conceptualizing poverty:
Poverty is conceptualized in association with growth and income distribution
(Buğra& Keyder, 2005, p. 3). It requires a clear awareness of inequality and explicit
policy attention beyond standard growth inducing strategies (Ibid.). Besides, poverty is
about deprivation in terms absolute and relative poverty, self- esteem, respectability etc.
(Ibid.). Here again, capability approach gains importance in terms of ability to get out of
deprivation and gaining self esteem for poor people which will lighten the social
exclusion. Poverty is also conceived as ‘failure in basic need satisfaction’ in relation to
‘capability deprivation’ (Ibid. p. 4). It is associated with entitlements such as rights and
opportunities (Ibid.). These entitlements include ‘access to public health, and education
services or to transportation facilities and as well as the availability of social assistance in
different forms’ (Ibid. p.5). That’s why; in the case of capability deprivation, people face
with unfreedoms and lack of reason to value (Ibid.). In respect to social policy, positive
discrimination is required (Ibid. p.6). In the absence of required social policy what is
experienced is facing with underclass, marginality or social exclusion in relation to
peculiar forms of welfare regime and social organization of each society (Buğra&
Keyder, 2003).

Emergence and manifestations of ‘new poverty’ and changing welfare regime

Before mentioning on new poverty, I think, it would be useful to touch upon the
changing aspects of forces behind development ideology and political economy. Buğra&
Keyder (2005, p.11) define that in developing countries, developmentalist state does not
provide social protection against risk categories (Ibid.). Rather, it engages in formal
employment opportunities either in state owned enterprises or state protected private
sector enterprises (Ibid.). As a result, social protection resides in patronage relations or
family and personal relations of other types in the context of import substituting
industrialization strategy (Ibid.). However, after 1970s and by decline of Fordist mode of
production and transition to more flexible modes of production, we face with decay of
these informal social support mechanisms (Ibid.). Additionally, advent of post industrial
societies through the tertiarization of economic activity, forces of globalization and
demographic pressures influence the age structures and family types (Ibid.).

What we should give importance is the technological changes around the globe.
Through the opportunities provided by technological developments, flexible production
has scattered all around the world which gives way to man unemployment, rise of ‘home
work’, low wages, irregularity of jobs and absence of social security as well as the rise of
informal sector and decline of self- employment (with rise of gross markets such as
Carrefour or Bauhaus (Buğra& Keyder, 2005, p. 12) (Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.21, 28). In
terms of informal sector, people gain an income even below minimal wage (Ibid.). Also,
professional service sector jobs have gained pace as oppose to decline in manufacturing
jobs (Buğra& Keyder, 2005, pp. 11, 12, 13). Besides, existing social policies remain
inappropriate to cure the problems above since they were adjusted to former organization
or structure of production and consumption patterns as well as contextual developments
peculiar to Turkey [such as terrorism] (Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.21). Then, poverty
should be analyzed in this context in order to achieve a totalitarian outlook.
 To make the issue clear, we can talk about the changing patterns of production
and income term by term. I think, in this way, we are to comprehend the new poverty in
relation to labor market. Before 1980s, formal employment relations with social security
coverage were broad in both private and public enterprises (Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.17).
Informal sector was to be expected to merge within formal sector (Ibid.). By the end of
1980s, homework and sub- contracting relations began to develop (Ibid.). In this way,
informal sector or unregistered economy began to be very common. In my point of view,
this should be related to de- ruralization and disintegration of family ties, as it was
indicated by researchers. Also, we should take the rise of service economy into account.
As it was indicated above, service sector requires specialization. When we consider that
the education background of new migrants, especially the Kurdish population, we can see
they are not ready for service sector. Additionally, their inability to compete for job
opportunities in urban settings, their lack of required skills, lack of capital, lower
education levels and lack of Turkish language skills resulted in urban poverty for those
people, who migrated involuntarily by breaking all the ties with old living styles (Kurban
et, al,, 2006, p. 129), (Yükseker, 2004, p.10).

Buğra and Keyder (2003, pp.13-14) argue that poverty is not merely originated
from economic crises and it will not end when the stability is sustained. Rather, it is
perceived that poverty continues even there maintained economic growth, growth without
employment [in other word financial capitalism or savage capitalism] (Ibid.). New
investment areas demand fewer workers (Ibid.). However, economic crises are
responsible from the manifestation and permanence of new poverty, so we can not
disregard it (Şenses, 2003, p.123). As well, the reel wages are to fall nowadays (Buğra&
Keyder, 2003, pp. 13-14). Moreover, more flexible modes of working conditions are
demanded in relation to fluctuations in demand (Ibid.). As a result, what we encounter is
the rise in informal economy or rise in the number of unregistered or irregular workers,
child and women labor etc in addition to de- ruralization process (Ibid. p.14). Researchers
point out that they ‘carry a high risk of becoming working poor [which is utilized to
define the situation of people engaging in irregular or low paid works] with earnings
insufficient to raise themselves and their families above the US 1$ a day poverty line’
(Ibid.). Additionally, researchers define that only 89% of population have a social
security (Ibid. p.18). 12 million people in Turkey (in 2003) have Green Card which is
supposed to be very low and insufficient (Ibid.). However, social security or social
support as well is very indispensable for opportunity in equality (Ibid. p.18-19). In
addition, it is proposed that, there should be opened up new employment areas or existing
ones, such as construction sector, should be supported in order to eliminate social
exclusion and rise the demand for unskilled workers by paying attention to the skills and
education background of new migrants (Ibid. p.18-19, 25). Then, merely, to hope for help
from economic policy is not solution. We should look for new solutions for this kind of
poverty, such as sustaining financial support through mechanisms of social state or social
fund.

Istanbul has being considered as a global city in terms of income and

consumption patterns and life styles which have started to polarize lately (Buğra&
Keyder, 2003, pp. 3-12). Accordingly, it is pointed out that de- industrialization, abolish
of older consumption and income patterns are typical in Istanbul which is an outcome of
rise in service sector and constitution of service sector and high cost consumption
relatively (Ibid.). In this respect, industrial areas and zones are excluded from city center
whereas new city centers are created, purified or reorganized in order to attract tourists
[for capitalist gentrification purposes] (Ibid.). As well, manufacture industry has been
diminishing in metropolitan reorganization of Istanbul (Ibid.).

In this respect, we face with the disintegration of social structure and polarization
have resulted in the inability of new comers to be employed in the cities and the absence
of modernization process for this part of the population as well as the lack of integration
of the population as a whole (Ibid.). For an instance, as industrial zones were gotten out
of city centers, the state initiated collective housing in the periphery of city center [such
as Keçiören and Kurtköy] (Ibid. p.21). So, this social exclusion is exacerbated with
spatial exclusion (Ibid.). Then, on the one hand, we coincide with people who have global
ties and networks (Ibid. p. 3- 12). On the other, we face with a group of people who do
not change their ways of life, income and consumption patterns immediately Ibid.). Here
again, we mainly coincide with new poverty or social exclusion in relation to all these
developments.

We have tried to touch upon the effects of globalization on Istanbul and changing
patterns of life as well as production and consumption. Buğra and Keyder indicate that
new types of employment and levels of income adjust themselves to wealthier areas of
the world which results in 'new levels of differentiation between those who become part
of the networks and those who are left out' (2005, p.124). In this respect, social policy
could not counterweight the neo- liberal developments (Ibid.). Since pressures of
globalization, the political will and social mobility restrain the state's resources, structural
tendency toward polarization triggers a potentially explosive situation of social exclusion
(Ibid.). This imminent conflict has redounded 'during the successive crises of the last
decade which caused further unemployment, erosion of real incomes and increasing
difficulties in access to public goods (Ibid. p.125). It was assumed that, by
industrialization, informality would be informal sector would dissolved into formal
economy and employment (Ibid. p.126). However, for new migrants who are not
employed in formal sector with formal social assistance, it is probable to suffer poverty
and be vulnerable to risks (Ibid. p.127). Also, this process gets complicated by de-
industrialization, post- Fordism, globalization and transition from national
developmentalism to neo- liberal capitalism (Ibid.).

This article, carried out by Buğra and Keyder in 2003 in Istanbul, was originated
from various interviews done with various groups such as Kurdish young men living in
bachelor rooms in Eminönü or women interviewed in the queue of victuals houses in
Bakırköy or Eminönü (p.8). The main purpose is defined as to calculate the number of
people who get support and who are in need (Ibid.). The questions are about the income
and employment opportunities, problems considering education of children and their
attitudes towards these issues, their relationships with their homelands and formal or
informal support mechanisms they are able to reach (Ibid. pp.8-9). In this way, we can
say researchers are to reveal the differences between the former types of poverty, which
is supposed to be the result of chain migrations, and new kinds of migrations which are
not calculated rationally and which resulted, mostly, from the forced migrations and push
factors as well, rather than the pull factors in cities as it was before.

In relation to former migrations and forms of poverty, it was supposed that the
integration of the people to modern life would be sustained and ‘successful integration of
Anatolian immigrants throughout the entire period of national development’ in terms of
gecekonduzation industrial development era in 1950s (Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.6).
Through new employment opportunities, these promises were to be realized to a degree
in relation to import substitution era. In addition, since these migrations were chain
migrations, co- locals, kinship groups or extended families were to be considered as the
informal support mechanisms that were finding jobs for the new comers and providing
financial support for them when needed or when they became unemployed. Moreover,
since these new comers were in contact with people remaining in homelands or villages,
they were able to benefit from the opportunities provided by this contact such as supplies
and foods etc. coming from villages. That’s why, poverty was perceived as temporary. As
well, it was not conceived as it would result in ‘social exclusion’.

As oppose to this former poverty, new poverty in Turkey is treated as subjected to

'social exclusion, marginality and the increasing difficulty of integration in terms of
economic relations' (Buğra& Keyder, 2005, p.21). That’s why; it is not likely new comers
have any hope for their future or well being. They are helpless since they do not have
informal support mechanisms due to the lack of chain migrations or existence of forced
migrations. In terms of forced migrations, some of the villages were completely emptied-
due to the danger of PKK and no one left behind (Kurban et. al., 2006, p.16).
Furthermore, due to this fact, it is just a dream to turn back to homeland in the case of a
failure, as it was before, for people migrated from Southeastern and Eastern Anatolia
(Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.23). Besides, they lack the ability of the other members of the
extended family or community to support or look after them (if we dismiss the emergence
of child labor as a result). Furthermore, Buğra and Keyder (2003, p.15) assess that these
new comers have begun to be slum dwellers with grossly inadequate access to health,
education and standard municipal services. In terms of UNDP’s Human Poverty index,
these slums are associated with high illiteracy, low life expectancy, under weight
children, and the unavailability of improved water resources (Ibid.). According to a
research carried out by M. Pınarcıoğlu and O. Işık, new migrants reside in poor houses
and they pollute the drinking water resources without consideration in addition to their
lack of improving their life standards (2001).

In this manner, according to the researches of Erder, these people could be

categorized as people who get poor after the migrations (TMMOB, 2003, p.570). People
in this group are excluded from both mechanisms of labor and housing market and they
remain alone apart from their rational choice and will (Ibid.). Additionally, they remain
outside the social networks and flexible opportunities of conformity as oppose to chain
migrations which results in the intensification of urban poverty among specific groups
(Ibid.). Buğra and Keyder (2003) point out that these new comers feel insecure in the
society and they detach from it as a result of this urban poverty. We can say new poverty
is a vicious circle which reproduces itself within the distorted structure of socialization in
Turkey. In other words, as Işık and Pınarcıoğlu define, we are face to face with a new
form of poverty which cannot be transmitted from one part of population to the other
(Ibid. p.19). Rather, it seems permanent without any hope (Ibid.).

As I have tried to indicate above, social network and informal support have been
diminishing. In other words, people are not able to help their families, relatives or co-
locals [in terms of self helping communities] since they are in need of help, too if we do
not dismiss forced migrations or push factors in homelands (Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.31).
In the absence of such kind of social support mechanisms, social network and solidarity
etc. these people are to be left to brokers in charity (Ibid. p. 30). In addition, as it was
defined clearly by Işık& Pınarcıoğlu in Nöbetleşe Yoksulluk (Poverty by Turn), new
religious communities, such as Hakyol, Deniz Feneri or Milli Görüş, hunt down these
poor and desperate people to exploit them for their political or ideological purposes
(2001). What is more is that these aids are distributed by local governments legally for
political rant seeking even they are financed through informal and illegal relations (Ibid.).
According to my point of view; on the one hand, in the absence of social support
mechanisms, these utilitarian organizations preempt these people to use them against
Kemalist ideology and unity of Republic. On the other, through these organizations, a
new neo- liberal project is being carried out in the face of minimal state and
commodification of services. In this way, people abandon their social and citizenship
rights and do not struggle for their rights through mechanisms of ‘Soft Islam’ and ‘charity
economy’.

It is indicated that, as oppose to Latin American organization of social support,

we face with lack of experience in organization of social support (Buğra& Keyder, 2003
p.33). Local municipalities fail to clarify the conditions to get support, to define the
balance- sheet of aids and to be transparent (p.33-34). As I have tried to mention above,
these aids are carried out through charity brokers, such as Deniz Feneri etc. Even people
in need welcome these aids done by NGOs, it should be needed that they do not serve for
long term purposes and these aids are irregular and for short term (Ibid. p.35-36). That’s
why; people are not to be able to make long term arrangements and plans (Ibid.). Then,
aids should be delivered by state or local municipalities without politicizing them. In
addition, these services or social supports should be revised in order to make a room for
individual initiative and provide people opportunities to make long term plans about their
and their families’ future.

Considering Social Solidarity Fund, its main objective is specified as ‘to help
citizens in the state of poverty and destitution, or, when necessary, to help non- citizens
who are in Turkey legally or otherwise, to take measures that will enforce social justice
by ensuring social aid and cooperation’ (Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.36). In terms of social
aid in state of poverty and destitution, it is denoted that this fund is in accordance with
Social Europe (Ibid.). It is one of the off budgets, which was created after 1980s in order
to enhance the efficient use of public resources (Ibid. p.37). Here, I want to mention on
one issue. There initiated High Commissions, after 1980s, in order to use public resources
efficiently, to depoliticize key positions in state bureaucracy and to inhibit corruption.
However, it is widely known that High Commissions are to minimize state and make
these offices to be opened to external intervention- mainly IMF and WB- through
technocracy for capitalist globalization purposes. That’s why; this fund should be
analyzed by taking this issue into account. Also, it is necessary for the future of social
services and support.

Anyway, it is financed by income and corporate taxes, operation taxes, traffic

fines, and RTÜK advertisement incomes in addition to various extra sources and credit
such as 2% of local management budgets (Ibid. p.37). It is indicated that this fund mainly
provides supplies such as coal and clothes in addition to fellowship etc. (Ibid. p.37-38). It
is reported that the majority of the resources is utilized for Southeastern and Eastern
Anatolia (Ibid .p. 38). However, as I have tried to point out above, people from
Southeastern or Eastern Anatolia construct the majority of new poor. That’s why; the
content and quality of the aids should be revised. As well, new policies should be carried
out for these regions associated with regional development, employment strategies and
social security- if we assume that the majority of people benefiting from Green Card live
in these regions and most of the people engage in agricultural activities. Also, it is based
on socio- economic development index of State Planning Institute (Ibid.). Unfortunately,
it is widely known that nepotism and arbitrariness rule the distribution of aids (Ibid.p.40-
41). Then, what is needed to be done is to define clearly who will get support in what
amount under which circumstances (Ibid.p.44). Then, social aid should be based on social
rights, rather than charity, by maintaining transparency and systematic (Ibid. pp. 44-46).

I want to mention on two more issues: gecekonduzation and Green Card. First of
all, researchers indicate those new comers are in demand of construction permission to
build their own gecekondus (Buğra& Keyder, 2003, p.42). If state permits building
gecekondus, it is expected that most of the new poor will get out of this vicious circle
(Ibid.). However, we should not forget that former slum dwellers (or gecekondulu)
composed rentier development and aggregated into capitalist rant seeking by the help of
political purposes. This rant seeking is among the reasons behind new poverty and this
vicious circle. As well, we should rethink sustainable development’ which gives priority
to human ecology and respect for nature against distorted urbanization. That’s why; this
proposition should be reformulated by taking this fact into account. As I have tried to
touch upon above, new poverty results in unemployment and informal economy which
decrease the number of people with social security and formal social protection in such a
corporatist system. That’s why; more people become in need of Green Card. However,
since the criteria are not well defined, many people suffer form desperation. From the
point of view of people who benefit from Green Card or who fulfill the conditions, Green
Card results in social exclusion since people are biased against these people (Ibid. p.43).
It is widely accepted Green Card makes people lazy and irresponsible (Ibid.).

As well, most of the governors classify poor people into two which are people
who get Green Card and people who are ashamed of getting Green Card (Buğra&
Keyder, 2003, p.45). That’s why; people hesitate to apply for Green Card and they cannot
benefit from their citizenship rights (Ibid.). According to my point of view, formal
employment inducing social policies have priority over policies substituting employment
and right to work. That’s why; Green Card should not have priority over employment.
However, for a short term, Green Card is inevitable for people to live a decent life and get
out of poverty and maintain social mobility. Besides, nowadays, we experience a set of
reforms considering privatization in basic social services such as health, education etc.
and Social Security Reform. In this respect, if we assume that social policy is necessary
for equality in opportunity and social integration, rather than a life ring for governors
against social damping, then, Green Card is indispensable for equality in opportunity and
social policy. Nevermore, neo- liberal rhetoricians propose that state should be
minimized and public resources should not be utilized for populist purposes (Ibid. 46).
So, they are opposed to projects such as Social Risk Mitigation Project since it is
accepted as a threat to neo- liberal project (Ibid). But, due to the reasons I have tried to
mention above Green Card is indispensable for social integration.

Researchers indicate social policy should deal with the impact of new poverty for
future generations (Buğra& Keyder, 2003). Also, it should be noted that social exclusion
as such is treated as a disease which has a cure and which should be cured (Ibid.p.20-21).
Then, we should deal with the level of schooling among the children of this new or urban
poor. They are disadvantaged since their families hardly send them to school and they are
obliged to work in order to attribute to family income. Then, the universal free education
and supporting families financially to send their children to school is supposed to be very
crucial. According to my point of view, this should be among the initial purposes of
policy makers. As Durkheim specified education is necessary for the integration and well
being of the society. Additionally, it is necessary for their social mobilization upwardly.

Then, the support of state is very crucial for their integration and mobilization.
Buğra and Keyder (2003) define that even small amounts of financial support make
difference for their lives such as Conditional Cash Transfers provided for mothers’ in
condition of sending their children to school. I lay stress upon the financial support since
it is argued that financial support is better than support in kind since people are free to
decide how to use the support. However, it was revealed that most of the people used
these kinds of aids in order to cater their immediate needs. I think, rather than facing with
these dysfunctions or rather than stigmatizing people by giving aid or support, there
should be provided Unconditional Basic Income to everyone according to the degree of
need or level of income, which is financed by taxation.

Talking about urban poverty or new poverty and especially social exclusion as
such, I mean Kurdish issue in Turkey and forced migration, political organization and
will is very important and crucial in order to activate social support mechanisms. In this
respect, social policy is meaningful only if a specific state adopts the norm of social state.
Yükseker argues that Turkish Republic is based on the notion of 'social state' (2006, p.
219). However, internally displaced people could not enjoy the social rights and social
services originated from the social state during and after the forced migrations (Ibid.). It
is supposed that empowerment of social rights will lighten the social exclusion (Ibid.).
That's why; the scope and conditions of Green Card should be revised while funds
provided by World Bank for /the poorest of the poor', such as Social Risk Mitigation
Project, and Direct Income Support (for especially farmers), should be employed usefully
(Ibid. p.221). Besides, those people who cannot enjoy their citizenship rights and are in
danger of marginalization are distrustful and anxious about people and they are almost
alienated, which results in antagonism (Erdilek, 2004). Then, the quality of education and
access of these people to education opportunities should be improved (Açıkgöz, 2007,
January 7). Unless the authorities take measures, these people could be the base of
violence in cities in nearly 10 years (Ibid.). We should take the raise of usurpation,
stealing by snatching, crime organizations etc into account which reduce cities or urban
spaces uninhabitable places (Ibid.). In the case of such a danger, 'gated communities' or
security services will not be the answer (Ibid.).

As a conclusion:
In this paper, I have tried to mention on the new poverty and changing welfare
regime. In this respect, what is to be done is to make a connection between global
transformations and peculiarities of Turkey. Without addressing the conditions in 3rd
World Countries and their relations with core countries and supranational organizations
such as WB, IMF or WTO, it is hard to handle new poverty. It is obvious that new
poverty is about international division of labor and about exporting poverty, inequality
and crises to these 3rd world countries.

What is needed is to provide social policies for new poor by respecting changing
consumption, production and income patterns. In my point of view, regional development
is indispensable for eliminating poverty or even for inhibiting conditions causing new
poverty. Also, state should be a mediator between the rich and poor, which redistributes
the national resources for the sake of each and every individual. Even I support social
aids such as Basic Income Support, what I regard as crucial is to make investment on
human capital and to make investment for employment opportunities that comprehends
all citizens disregarding ethnicity, gender etc. According to my point of view, some sort
of aids should not be dysfunctional. I mean the priority should be given regular and
permanent jobs rather than compensating the inadequacies of financial capitalism or more
flexible modes of production without security. Humanism, not profit or rant seeking
comes first. Then, I think, welfare regime should be adjusted to technological or
ideological changes in production to combat with poverty.
References

Açıkgöz, B. (2007, January 7). OHAL'in tutunamayanları. Radikal. Retrieved on

January 4, 2008, from the World Wide Web:

http://www.radikal.com.tr/ek_haber.php?ek=r2&haberno=7203

Buğra, A. & Keyder, Ç. (2003). New Poverty and the Changing Welfare Regime
of Turkey. Report Prepared for the United Nations Development Programme. Retrieved
on January 4, 2008, from the World Wide Web:

http://www.undp.org.tr/publicationsDocuments/new_poverty.pdf

Buğra, A.& Keyder, Ç. (2005). Poverty and Social Policy in Contemporary

Turkey. Retrieved on January 4, 2008, from the World Wide Web:

http://www.spf.boun.edu.tr/docs/WP-Bugra-Keyder.pdf

Erdilek, N. (2004). Zorunlu Göç ve Şiddet. Retrieved on January 4, 2008, from

the World Wide Web:

http://www.radikal.com.tr/ek_haber.php?ek=r2&haberno=3601

Işık, O. & Pınarcıoğlu, M. M. (2001). Nöbetleşe Yoksulluk. Iletişim Publishing:

Istanbul.

Keyder, Ç. (2005). Globalization and Social Exclusion in Istanbul. In

International Journal of Urban and Regional Research , 29 (1), pp.124-134.
 Kurban, D. et. al. (2006). ''ZORUNLU GÖÇ'' ile YÜZLEŞMEK: Türkiye'de
Yerinden Edilme Sonrası Vatandaşlık İnşası. TESEV Demokratikleşme Programı.
Retrieved on January 4, 2008, from the World Wide Web:

http://www.tesev.org.tr/etkinlik/zorunlu_goc_final.pdf

Şenses, F. (2003). Ayşe Buğra ve Çağlar Keyder, New Poverty and the Changing
Welfare Regime of Turkey (Yeni yoksulluk ve Türkiye’nin Değişen Refah Rejimi),
Birleşmiş Milletler Kalkınma Programı, Ankara, 2003, s.59. In ODTÜ Gelişme Dergisi,
30 (1-2), pp. 121- 128.

TMMOB. (2003). TMMOB İNSAN HAKLARI KOMİSYONU ZORUNLU GÖÇ

RAPORU. Retrieved on January 4, 2008, from the World Wide Web:

http://www.tmmob.org.tr/38GK/37CR_PDF/9_EKLER_9.pdf

Yükseker, D. (2006). YERİNDEN EDİLME VE SOSYAL DIŞLANMA:

İSTANBUL VE DİYARBAKIR'DA ZORUNLU GÖÇ MAĞDURLARININ
YAŞADIKLARI SORUNLAR. In ''ZORUNLU GÖÇ'' ile YÜZLEŞMEK: Türkiye'de
Yerinden Edilme Sonrası Vatandaşlık İnşası. TESEV Demokratikleşme Programı.
Retrieved on January 4, 2008, from the World Wide Web:

http://www.tesev.org.tr/etkinlik/zorunlu_goc_final.pdf