Belgium is facing a significant challenge in generational poverty, with new figures from Eurostat highlighting the extent of the issue compared to its neighboring countries.
The statistics reveal that individuals who grew up in stable financial conditions in Belgium have a 7.7% chance of falling into poverty later in life.
Alarmingly, this figure rises to 20.1% for those who experienced poverty during their childhood, resulting in a stark 12.4 percentage point difference.
This disparity is substantially higher than the European average of 7.6 percentage points, placing Belgium as the fifth worst in the European Union for generational poverty.
Wim Van Lancker, a poverty expert from KU Leuven, commented on the implications of these figures, stating, “Once again, these figures confirm what we have long known: poverty is particularly persistent in our country.”
He suggests that Belgium’s policy focus on work incentives may inadvertently perpetuate poverty. “While work reduces the risk of poverty, long waiting lists for childcare and social housing contribute to the cyclical nature of poverty,” Van Lancker explained.
In Flanders, the situation is exacerbated by strict requirements for access to social housing. Residents must live in the same municipality for at least five years before qualifying for social housing, significantly hindering their ability to relocate for better job opportunities.
Additionally, the prioritization of working parents for childcare services fails to alleviate the financial burdens faced by many families in poverty. “This approach does not lift families out of poverty,” Van Lancker added.
In stark contrast, other European nations are managing generational poverty more effectively.
Bulgaria ranks highest in terms of generational poverty risk, with a staggering 33.7 percentage point difference between those who grew up in stable financial situations and those who did not.
Following Bulgaria are Romania, Italy, and Hungary, all of which report significant gaps. Belgium’s neighbors, however, are faring much better; the Netherlands has a gap of only 3.3 percentage points, while France’s difference stands at just 2 percentage points.
Eastern European countries like Slovakia and Poland also demonstrate more favorable outcomes, with generational poverty differences of 9.8 and 4.2 percentage points, respectively.
These statistics raise questions about the effectiveness of Belgium’s social policies in addressing the root causes of poverty.
Van Lancker emphasizes that “Belgium’s policies often have good intentions but achieve the opposite effect.” He highlights that even social benefits remain relatively low, pushing vulnerable populations further into poverty.
The lack of adequate support systems appears to be a key factor in the persistence of generational poverty in Belgium, leading to calls for a reevaluation of current policies to ensure they effectively address the needs of those most at risk.
As Belgium grapples with this pressing social issue, it is clear that more targeted strategies are needed to break the cycle of poverty and support families in need.
Addressing the challenges faced by low-income households, particularly in accessing childcare and housing, may be essential in creating a more equitable society where all individuals have the opportunity to thrive.
