A Study on Begging: A Social Stigma—An Indian Perspective

Abstract

The economic growth in India is quite visible through infrastructural and industrial growth in metros but the same is overshadowed by the poor plight of beggars in these cities. This article addresses the living conditions of the beggars and their awareness about the various government policies. The study gives an insight into the economic status of beggars and answers why people go for begging. The solution calls for a comprehensive programme and reorientation of the existing programmes. We often read and hear of aids that are directed towards the upliftment of the beggars; and the article aims to check if these aids have in any way improved their plight. Many NGOs, non-profit private organizations and corporations are helping disadvantaged populace from various segments. But this segment has not received the requisite assistance and attention and this article examines the responsibility of corporations in this concern.

How Much Do They Make? A Systematic Review of Income Generated From Begging

“…Weekly income was typically USD 20–70 (Kemp, 1997; Sailaja & Rao, 2016), though could be as much as USD 262.95 (Dean, 1999). Several studies indicate that monthly income for begging is between USD 150 and 500 (Bose & Hwang, 2003; Debeck et al, 2007; Mansour, 2017; Poremski et al, 2015), it was rarely less than this amount (Malik & Roy, 2012). Two studies found that monthly income was USD 697–2,093 (Gaga, 2015; Rahmalia & Zulyadi, 2019), though the sample sizes are unclear for both of these studies.…”

“…Because of the wide range of incomes that some panhandlers receive (Conroy, 2001; Goldstein, 1993; Luckenbach & Acosta, 1993; Wamstad, 2007), sources that rely on small samples are susceptible to having extreme values compared to studies that report average values among larger samples (e.g., Bose & Hwang, 2003; Lee & Farrell, 2003; Lein et al, 2008). Similarly, considerable variation exists regarding how income is reported with some studies providing a range (Goldberg, 1995; Jamil et al, 2019), varying measures of central tendency (Bose & Hwang, 2003; Conroy, 2001; Lee & Farrell, 2003), or as an ordinal variable (Malik & Roy, 2012; Mansour, 2017). The decision was made to include all of these studies despite the inevitable challenges raised by comparing such diversely conducted research.…”

“…This study does not use a simulation model style (see Adriaenssens & Hendrickx, 2011; Muñoz & Potter, 2014) despite the potential benefits of doing so. By using the estimated income from one hour of panhandling (Adriaenssens & Hendrickx, 2011; Bose & Hwang, 2003; Goldberg, 1995), the number of hours panhandled per day (Adriaenssens & Hendrickx, 2011; Malik & Roy, 2012; Tolkach et al, 2019) and the number of days per week (Goldstein, 1993) or per month (DeBeck et al, 2007) spent panhandling, it is possible to estimate an expected daily, weekly, or monthly income from the activity. Because each study reporting income is so varied, it is believed that misspecification of the model is likely.…”

Access to Basic Needs for Marginalized Groups in Indonesia: A Case Study of the Homeless and Beggars

“…Such conditions require education and skills. There are studies that state that the provision of education will be a solution for the poor, namely the homeless and beggars [26].…”

Beggars–tourists' interactions: An unobtrusive typological approach

“…While some studies dealing with begging, e.g. Williams and Windebank (2002), believe that begging is a survival activity practiced by those who lack alternative income-generating opportunities, and that the income from begging is considerably lower than the income from formal work, it seems that begging has turned for some beggars into something of a lucrative profession (Malik & Roy, 2012), and that mendicancy for those who beg in tourist areas can be remarkably profitable. This is evident from Gossling's et al (2004, p. 140) study in Antananarivo, Madagascar which found that 62 percent of the tourists interviewed had given money or made non-monetary donations to street children, and of those who did not, a considerable proportion stated that they did so because they believed that their donations would encourage begging and have negative social consequences in the long run.…”