Contemporary Vision of Poverty and Islamic Strategy for Poverty Alleviation

Abstract

Currently, irrespective of one’s religious, ideological, and political inclination, poverty is seen as a destructive force in all aspects. Subsequently, various strategies have been formulated to alleviate poverty. But what are actually the components of the destructive force of poverty in the vision of contemporary Muslim scholars? What kind of Islamic strategies have they formulated out of this vision? This article seeks to answer these two main questions by first investigating into the contemporary vision of poverty that has been adopted by Muslim scholars, followed second by an investigation into the strategies for poverty alleviation they proposed, and third, by critically analyzing their vision of poverty and strategies from an Islamic perspective. Based on a textual analysis of references, this article displays an inadequacy of the vision and strategies of the contemporary Muslim scholars for ignoring material-spiritual definition of poverty, as well as for formulating strategies for poverty alleviation using an exogenous, top-down approach. In a nutshell, this article attempts to provide a justification for rescrutinization of the vision of poverty from an Islamic perspective, and for a reconstruction of the poverty alleviation strategies based on the faith of the Muslim communities themselves.

Keywords

poverty Islamic vision of poverty poverty alleviation strategy

Introduction

The main aim of this article is to rethink about poverty from an Islamic perspective through a critical analysis of the contemporary vision of poverty and poverty alleviation strategies that have been put forward by Muslim scholars. Generally, this article attempts to develop a fair, balanced, and holistic understanding of poverty and strategy for poverty alleviation from a religious perspective. More specifically, it has the following two objectives. First, to investigate the vision of poverty and strategies for poverty alleviation of contemporary Muslim scholars; and second, to analyze the strategies for poverty alleviation that have been considered as Islamic. In so doing, this article is divided into two main sections. The first paints the backdrop of the whole discussion by highlighting the contemporary vision of poverty and the contemporary “Islamic” strategies of poverty alleviation. The second delves into critical analysis of the contemporary “Islamic” strategies for poverty alleviation.

Indeed, this article is a preliminary groundwork that strictly focuses only on the understanding of the vision of poverty and strategies for poverty alleviation of contemporary Muslim scholars. It neither intends to provide a specific detailed redefinition of poverty, nor does it formulates the measurements for the identification of individuals infected by moral and spiritual poverty. An in-depth study on the redefinition of poverty and the measurements for the identification of such individuals—with the support of the verses from the Holy Qur’an, sayings of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him), and works of classical scholars—need to be addressed meticulously in a separate paper.

The Backdrop

As an effort to paint the backdrop of this article, the mainstream vision of poverty and the so-called “Islamic strategies” in poverty alleviation are discussed below. The former reflects the general perception of scholars on poverty while the latter shows how such a perception has shaped the strategies for poverty alleviation proposed by the Muslim writers.

Mainstream Vision of Poverty

Almost all Muslim scholars who write on poverty, irrespective of their ideological underpinnings, seem to dislike poverty. They do not only perceive poverty as having negative nature in itself but also implicate negative consequences to individuals, society, and nations. Poverty is regarded as being one of the worst problems in society (Nofal, 1984), as a dangerous social problem (al Qaradawi, 2002), as the most terrible social ills and main enemy to nation’s development planning (Abdullah, 1984), as a social time bomb (Fadhil, 1992), as one of the oldest enemies of mankind (Iqbal, 2002, p. 1), as the greatest evil (Huq, 1996, p. 226), as a threat to human’s beliefs and to the security and stability of the society as a whole (Salih, 1999, p. 91), as disrupting human dignity and stability of a nation (Fadhil, 1992), as not only an economic phenomena but also a social and political problem (Alhabshi, 1993, 1996), and as very dangerous to individuals and society, aqidah and belief, thinking and culture, and family and races as a whole (al Qardhawi, 1980).

Simultaneously, the negative consequences of the poverty are also highlighted. They argued that poverty degrades Muslim’s dignity (Ahmad, 1991), emerging along with unemployment, catastrophes, indebtedness, unequitable income distribution, and so on (al Qaradawi, 2002), to various evils, including apostasy (irtidad/ar-riddah) (Fadhil, 1992), leading to crimes and hatred between rich and poor (Nofal, 1984), leading to untold sufferings resulting in begging (Sadeq, 2002, p. 17), entailed with the decline of many empires and civilization following the struggle between the haves and the have-nots (Iqbal, 2002, p. 1), leading to incapacity, helplessness, and dependence on others, driving a person close to disbelief, and it is in fact in conflict with human dignity (Chapra, 2008). As poverty is regarded as the root of many crimes and misdeeds, it jeopardizes the moral, social, and spiritual standards of a society; creates imbalances in social and moral aspects as much as of an individual as of a society (Huq, 1996, p. 226); and denies people the freedom of choice and actions that can help them getting rid of deprivation (Ahmed, 2004, p. 45). All in all, poverty is seen as serious not only from a humanitarian point of view but also from an Islamic point of view because abject poverty is incompatible with Islamic ideology (Ariff, 1988, p. 336).

Based on such a disastrous nature and consequences of the poverty, these writers make a firm stance on poverty. Qardhawi (1980) pushes that poverty must be handled, obstructed, and fought. Fadhil (1992) argues that poverty must be killed. Ibrahim (1983/1984) says that fighting poverty is a Holy War (jihad). Ahmad (1991) perceives that fighting poverty is equal to upholding dignity. Al-Qardhawi (cited by Ibrahim, 1983/1984, p. 25) issues fatwa that war could be launched due to poverty, and that Caliph Abu Bakar Al-Siddiq’s war against those who refused to pay zakat (ar-riddah) could be considered as a war against poverty (al-harb `al faqr). It is said to be the first war in Islamic history to protect the fate of the oppressed poor. Ahmed (2004) proposes poverty eradication through the provision of basic needs of every citizen and regards it as a duty of every Muslim society. Chapra (2008) issues a stance that taking care of the basic needs of the poor is a collective obligation (fard kifayah) of a Muslim society. In terms of social impact of zakat, Zaim (1985, p. 117) states that zakat ensures redistribution of income and the state uses it for the purpose of alleviating poverty. Zakat is also designed to promote the welfare function of the public expenditure. The argument is quite similar to those of Nodal (as cited in Sadeq, 1994, p. 17) who explains the function of zakat to eradicate poverty and argues that poverty is one of the worst problems in a society. Khan (1995, p. 131) says that reduction in poverty and economic inequalities is one of the primary objectives of the Islamic economics system and Islamic banking can play an important role in achieving this objective.

Contemporary “Islamic” Strategies for Poverty Alleviation

Discussion on the strategies that have been undertaken both in Islam and mainstream domain are definitely huge and do not adequately fit into the limited space of this article. It is acknowledged that the mainstream strategies in alleviating poverty have gained a considerable accomplishment, in spite of their ‘tangibility-centred’ nature that denies spiritual domain, hence becoming un-holistic. However, this paper does not mean to deliberate on the accomplishment and the un-holistic strategies. Instead, this paper only concentrates on the so-called Islamic strategies for poverty alleviation as are suggested by certain authors, with a brief introduction of an overall strategies.

In general, poverty alleviation strategies could be said to have passed four phases (Iqbal, 2002, pp. 10-12). First, in the 1950s and 1960s, it has been concentrated on the growth in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), hoping that it would “trickle-down” to the poor. But this was much to be desired. Second, in the 1970s, the attention shifted to direct provision of nutritional, health, and educational needs of the poor as a matter of public policy. But this was realized that it was not sustainable in the long run as it puts heavy burden on government budgets. Third, in the 1980s and 1990s, emphasis was shifted to efficient labor-intensive pattern of development and increase of investment in human capital formation. But it was found that promotion of labor-intensive growth is difficult, provision of basic services to the poor requires more public spending and involves the trade-off between the interests of the poor and the non-poor, and there were mismanagement of public funds and corruption. Fourth, in 2000s, the strategy shifted to promoting opportunities, facilitating empowerment, and enhancing securities. This was based on the realization on the importance of the participation of the poor in decision making, better governance of public funds, and protection of the poor from economic and natural shocks through public policies. The strategy involves, inter alia, provision of material opportunities such as jobs, credits, and infrastructure; cohesive pattern and quality of growth, market reforms that reflect local institutional and structural conditions, greater equity in the distribution of income, access to market opportunities and public sector services; sound, responsive, and accountable institutions; reduction of vulnerability to economic shocks, natural disasters; ill health and disability; building assets of poor people; diversifying household activities; and providing a range of insurance mechanisms to cope with adverse shocks.

For the poverty alleviation through Islamic approach, Iqbal (2002) starts with a belief that strategies for poverty alleviation involve two trade-offs, that is, first, between interests of the “haves” and the “have-nots,” and second, between the role of public sector versus the market (pp. 12-13). For the first trade-off, he comes back to the very worldview of the Islamic teaching, that life in this world, and the context of poverty, the difference in income and wealth, is actually a test. Those bestowed by Allah Subhanahu wa ta’ala (May He be glorified and exalted) (SWT) with high income and wealth need to share the resource with the poor, and the poor, while not grudging against the rich, are assured to be richly rewarded in the life Hereafter for bearing their hardship patiently.

As for the trade-off between the public sector and the market, Iqbal (2002) suggests an “institutional approach” to achieve its redistributive goals (pp. 13-20). The market as an institution is allowed to play its role, while other institutions, such as zakah, awqaf, takaful, irfaq (non-profit sector), and so on, become supplements to correct some in-built tendencies in the market solutions.

The above idea of alleviating poverty through the “institutional approach,” as Iqbal (2002, p. 13) terms it, has become one of the main approaches advocated by many Muslim scholars. In realizing the zakat, for instance, Yasin and Tahir (2002) advocates full-scale Islamization, as opposed to a less efficient policy such as maintaining the status quo, introducing zakat only, and replacement of interest with profit sharing. al Qaradawi (2002, p. 569) regards zakat system as a permanent mechanism from within the economy in continuous transferring of income from the rich to the poor, with the aim to enrich and remove the later completely from poverty level through sufficient income and ability to take charge of all their needs by themselves. According to him, the basic objective of zakat indeed is to solve poverty, along with other social problems such as unemployment, catastrophes, indebtedness, inequitable income distribution, and so on. This could be done by providing the poor and the needy, as two of eight groups of recipients of zakat (asnaf), with necessary education, training, and capital equipment.

More direct that manifests the institutional approach is the writing by Ahmed (2004). He believes that zakat, along with awqaf, are able to play a role in policies of redistribution of assets and opportunities, capacity building and wealth creation, and extending income support, hence alleviating poverty (Ahmed, 2004, p. 15). Ahmed (2004, pp. 15-18) believes in the ability of zakat and awqaf to play a role in policies of redistribution of assets and opportunities, capacity building and wealth creation, and extending income support. He suggests four approaches in alleviating poverty through the zakat and awqaf institutions: first, by integrating zakat and awqaf into the overall development scheme; second, by introducing laws and regulations that can create incentives for the proper functioning of zakat and awqaf institutions and establishing institutions that operate in an efficient and transparent ways; third, by introducing effective organizational structures that could build trust among people to maximize collection/revenues; and fourth, by creating institutional development and diversity, with the help of various institutions using contemporary organizational structures and instruments to reinforce the endeavors in poverty alleviation.

Awqaf is also perceived as one of the irfaq (nonprofit) sectors that is able to support the elimination of interest in accomplishing redistributional function, hence poverty alleviation (Tag el Din, 2002). Cizakca (2002) believes that awqaf system could help in reducing government expenditure, hence reducing budget deficit, the need for government borrowing, curbing the crowding-out effect, reduction in interest rates, removing major impediment to private investment and growth, as well as solving the problem of undersupply of public goods.

Huq (1996, pp. 229-230) also advocates the institutional approach by going beyond the institutions of zakat and awqaf per se to include positive roles of other Islamic economics institutions as well. Apart from zakat (which he terms as involuntary sadaqat or compulsory tax on idle wealth/income after the nisab is met), he also mentions ushr (compulsory payment in the form of tax from the produce of land or specifically zakat on the produce of land); voluntary contributions such as hibah, waqf, gifts, wills, and so on; mudaraba (profit sharing on trading capital in place of interest); law of inheritance; organization of various cooperatives, and so on. Two other institutions that have been advocated by other scholars are microcredit or microfinance (Hassan & Alamgir, 2002; Obaidullah, 2008a, 2008b; Obaidullah & Khan, 2008), and takaful (mutual surety) (Bakar, 2002). In fact, Hassan and Alamgir (2002) argue that microcredit has been found to be an effective instrument for creating self-employment, while Bakar (2002) argues that takaful could become an important element in the modern poverty-reduction agenda by protecting people from shocks, both economic and natural.

Another approach to Islamic poverty alleviation adopted by Muslim scholars is what could be called economic approach, which is based mainly on the belief in economic growth. Iqbal (2002, pp. 15-16), for instance, believes in the importance of economic growth in alleviating poverty, especially in the pattern of growth that corrects the distribution of income. In addition, population growth and demographic changes are also suggested to be taken into consideration, so that young people could be developed into a productive workforce through human capital formation, job creation, finance facilities, and secure environment.

Sirageldin (2002) proposes “effective growth strategies with a built-in equitable opportunity mechanism” as the foundation for sustainable poverty-reduction policies (p. 41). To him, these strategies are in harmony with the Islamic ethical system, in particular the axiomatic approach developed by Naqvi (1994) which is based on four basic tenets: Unity (Tawhid) which indicates the vertical dimension of the ethical system; Equilibrium (al-‘adl wa’l-ihsan) which provides for the horizontal dimension of equity leaving a lot of freedom for policy details; Free-will (ikhtiyar) in which careful intellection is required to interpret-reinterpret that freedom within specific social contexts, and to suit the needs of changing times (p. 31); and Responsibility (fard) which states that although “responsibility” is voluntary, individuals and society need to conserve for the public good Sirageldin (2002, p. 26).

Khan’s (1995, p. 19) ideas also could be considered as falling into the economic approach. Although he does not directly talk about the growth, his suggestions are full of economic formulation. He suggests a set of criteria for poverty elimination that is believed to be able to fulfill the basic needs of the people. These criteria are firstly, low-cost; secondly, the state is not forced to indulge in heavy borrowing; and thirdly, it is consistent with (indeed built-in within) the system. The strategy emphasizes motivating all human resources to take up every possible opportunity to contribute to family income; subsistence and poor families should be given every encouragement for self-employed activity and improved family enterprise. This strategy is believed to be in consistent with the spirit of Islamic economy and that Islam provides for institutions for the success of such a strategy.

Critical Analysis of the Vision of Poverty and the “Islamic” Strategy for Poverty Alleviation

Contemplating on the above vision of poverty and the so-called Islamic strategies for poverty alleviation leads one to realize that the vision and strategies are actually suffering of at least three deficiencies. They are first, the absence of the redefinition of the very poverty itself; second, the exogenous domination of the vision on poverty and poverty alleviation strategies; and third, the adoption of a top-down approach to vision of poverty and the strategies for poverty alleviation. The deliberations of these deficiencies are as follows.

The Absence of a Redefinition of Poverty

As shown earlier, there are already literatures that attempt to deliberate on the Islamic vision of poverty and on the Islamic strategies for poverty alleviation. However, they are heavily concentrated on two main things. First, in regard to the vision of poverty, all of them dislike poverty and suggest the elimination of poverty as much as possible to avoid its negative consequences. Second, in regard to the strategies for poverty alleviation, they concentrate heavily on either Islamic institutions or on economic formulation. In both cases, poverty is accepted as is understood by conventional thinking, leaving alone the very base of the attempt, namely, the definition of the poverty itself. They, for instance, elaborate on the use of zakat and awqaf,¹ or on microfinance,² or on takaful,³ or on economic formulation,⁴ but all seem to be done with a view of overcoming the problem of the undefined conventional poverty, not an Islamically defined poverty.

Undeniably, they are commended for at least providing the bases for the endeavors in poverty alleviation. Nevertheless, their vision and strategies are embedded with the mere economic indicators and instruments such as growth, market, income, wealth, employment, capital, assets, revenues, and profits, as if that poverty is void of spiritual dimension. To make them in tandem with Islam, they propose an injection of Islamic elements such as Unity (Tawhid), Equilibrium (al-‘adl wa’l-ihsan), Free-will (ikhtiyar), and Responsibility (fard) (Naqvi, 1994, p. 31; Sirageldin, 2002, p. 26).

Of all the scholars researched, only Huq (1996, p. 225) seems to mention briefly about the meaning of poverty, but still it hardly could be considered as an Islamic definition. He still uses “the level of living” and “subsistence level” as the indicators of poverty.⁵ His categories of the poor are based on incomes, ability to buy goods, and services (purchasing power) to fulfill minimum basic needs for economically decent living. In addition, he defines the poor (fuqara) as those who lack the opportunities or abilities or both to earn their livelihoods, which may lead to suffer social humiliation, economic deprivation, and moral and spiritual vacuum (Huq, 1996, p. 226). Kahf (2002, p. 22) also, in mentioning about the first two categories of zakat recipients—the poor and the needy—briefly mentions the difference in opinion of zakat scholars on the definition of the poor and the needy, based on human needs in relation to wealth and income. The first group of scholars he says defines the poor as a person who has less than his needs in terms of wealth and income whereas the needy is that who owns nothing. The second group of scholars, however, considers that the poor is in a worse situation than the needy. The detailed discourse on this, however, was not deliberated because to Kahf (2002, p. 22), it is immaterial who is in a worse situation. What matters is that both cannot support their needs by their own means, hence the supplementary support for sustenance, in this case, through zakat.

The definition of poverty and the poor outlined by both Huq (1996) and Kahf (2002, p. 22) is still not been able to liberate itself from the entanglement of tangible indicators used by conventional economics. Both basically ignore the spiritual dimension embedded within the poor-self, as is within the rich-self. So is Sirageldin (2002, p. 31). Even though stressing on the insufficiency of the quantitative money-metric consumption (or income)–based approach in measuring the multidimensionality of the concept of poverty, he could not come out of the tangible indicators. His suggestion to overcome the above problem is based on the expansion of needs and measurement of sociopolitical externalities.⁶ Such a phenomenon too could be found in the work of Khan (n.d., p. 4). He sees poverty, supposedly from Islamic perspective, as related to two concepts, that is, the concept of necessities (dharuriyyah) and the concept of exemption limit (nisab). Necessities here refer to all activities and things that are essential to preserve the five fundamentals of human life, that is, religion, physical self, intellect or knowledge, offspring, and wealth (that is the maqasid al-shari’ah, though he does not use the term so). One is considered poor if he does not possess sufficient necessities to fulfill his basic needs based on the above five foundations for good individual and social life. Nisab refers to a certain minimum quantum of any good or wealth that must be possessed before that good and wealth is subject to zakat. In zakat, the nisab requirement implies that those who do not meet the nisab requirement are not only excused from paying zakat but also considered poor and hence eligible to receive zakat. Even a supposedly Islamic-oriented writing such as of Patel (1983, p. 4) defines poverty in a material-oriented sense. He says, “Poverty, in its pure meaning is the insufficiency and the lack of the material means to live a tolerable and meaningful existence.”

If there could be considered a little bit of Islamic elements in the definition of poverty, they are perhaps the definitions put forward by Salih (1999, p. 91) and Iqbal (2002, p. 12). Both consider poverty as a test of man’s allegiance to his Creator and a great fear. The Quranic verse which is related to this argument, inter alia, is as follows: “We will surely test you with a measure of fear and hunger and a loss of wealth, lives, and fruits; and give good news to the patient” (al-Qur`an 2:155). Ahmed (2004) also holds to the testing stance. Besides that, he also agrees with Chapra (1980) who says that Islam is a religion of balance and therefore has given equal emphasis on both the spiritual and worldly affairs. Ahmed (2004) is well aware of the integration of the material and spiritual dimensions of poverty. He argues that the concept of richness/poverty in Islam does represent not only deprivation of goods and services but also lack of richness/poverty in spirit.

Unfortunately, however, Ahmed (2004) has purposely left out this broader comprehensive concept of poverty, to only focus on the notion of deprivation in the economic sense. He does so with the belief that the economic concept of poverty and its eradication indirectly addresses the spiritual aspects. Like what has been asserted by Rahman (1974), Ahmed (2004, p. 20) believes that the individuals can improve their spiritual lives by improving their material life. Ahmed (2004, p. 55) too, in spite of his consciousness that the concept of poverty has evolved from deprivation of material needs, education, and health to more broader ideas of vulnerability, exposure to risk, voicelessness, and powerlessness still focuses his discussion on the former economic notion. Such a similar treatment of the definition of poverty also has been adopted by Mannan (1988, pp. 305-306). In spite of his acknowledgment that human poverty in Islam is concerned both with material as well as cultural and spiritual poverty, and that the abundance of goods does not alone ensure richness in Islam, he purposely shy away from the inclusion of cultural and spiritual poverty in his discussion on the comprehensive meaning of poverty, to just confine the discussion to material poverty and Islamic responses to it.

The Domination of an Exogenous Vision on Poverty and Poverty Alleviation Strategies

Another deficiency of the vision on poverty and strategies for poverty alleviation relate very much to their exogenous characteristic. As reflected in the above discussion, scholars who are dominating the thinking on poverty are actually the outsiders, not the poor themselves. These outsiders not only develop the definition of poverty based on their own respective perception but also do not take into account the poor’s perception of poverty in the construction of the definition as well as in the formulation of the strategies for poverty alleviation.

Salleh and Md. Yusoff (1997) actually did research and write a paper on the poor’s perception of poverty, but seems that it is the only one available on it. Even though there is an attempt to seek people’s perception from below as has been done by Amiel and Cowell (1997), it was just the perception of the people of the already determined standard axioms used in the literature on poverty measurement (i.e., anonymity, growth of the poor, monotonicity, focus, and principle of transfers). Using a sample of 486 students from Australia, Israel, and the United States, Amiel and Cowell (1997) investigated the extent to which individuals’ perceptions of poverty correspond to the axioms. It was found that the first 3 axioms were reasonably well supported by the respondents, while the fourth gained very little support and the last was the least well supported. It is therefore a poor’s perception of the axioms of poverty outlined by still the outsiders, not by the poor themselves. Institutionally, Islamic Development Bank (IDB) has in fact had its consciousness in going down to the grassroots, but the impact is much to be desired. For example, IDB tries to establish strategic partnership and collaborations and, as clearly stated in the Mission of IDB in the Vision 1440H, ascertain the needs and aspirations of target communities before formulating any program. It also consults the stakeholders especially the Muslim communities themselves in every proposed program and design the program in close collaboration with them, as well as encourage local initiative (IDB, 2006b, pp. 31-35). However, at the implementational level, such an effort does not necessarily work. The real determinant of the efforts and the full power is in the hand of neither the IDB nor the communities, but instead in the hand of their respective authority, again as an exogenous agent.

The Adoption of Top-Down Approach to Vision of Poverty and the Strategies for Poverty Alleviation

Come together with the exogenous characteristics of the definition of poverty and the poverty alleviation strategies is the adoption of a top-down approach. This is another deficiency suffered by the definition of poverty and the poverty alleviation strategies. A top-down approach may come up with a favorable political will, resources, bureaucratic machinery, and facilities, but they are still considered as outsiders, hence “exogeneity” of their ideas. Most of the outsiders involved in the formulation and designation of the definition and strategies, respectively, are usually development authorities and agencies—local and foreign—many of which are not necessarily inclined to Islam. Their epistemological and philosophical roots may be totally different from those of the Muslim poor communities. Although by material indicators there has been a considerable contribution to the alleviation of poverty, but the contribution comes together with an accompaniment of a new alien cultural–societal construction, and in many cases, even contradicts their previous indigenous belief and cultural practices.

Conclusion

The above discussion leads to a conclusion that may provide a base for further research. The contemporary vision of poverty seems to treat poverty as fully negative, without a room for rescrutinization, let alone an effort to do so. Such a stance does not provide an opportunity to study in-depth many Islamic teachings relating to poverty. For instance, in a Hadith Qudsi, Allah SWT says,

Some of My worshippers are only reformed and best fitted with poverty and if I to enrich them this will spoil them, and some of My worshippers are only reformed and fitted with richness and if I impoverish them this will spoil them.

In other words, the poor and the rich seem to be selective, depending on Allah’s prerogative, mercy, and love, in ensuring the avoidance of spoiling the worshippers. Another Hadith sounds as follows: Abu Hurairah reported that the Messenger of Allah SAW had said, “Richness does not lie in the abundance of worldly goods but richness is the richness of the heart itself” (Muslim, p. 501).

Both teachings open a vast area for the rescrutinization of the definition of poverty and the formulation of strategies for poverty alleviation. The former signals the selectiveness of the rich and the poor, while the later reflects the importance of spirituality in matters relating to poverty. Both could perhaps provide an understanding why the poor Companions (ahlus suffah) were never requested by the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) to be rich, while a rich Companion Sayyidina Abdul Rahman bin ’Auf was not allowed to be poor. If such a rescrutinization is taken into account in the definition of poverty, the formulation of an Islamic poverty alleviation strategy may come up with a new form. For instance, the target groups could perhaps be broadly categorized into four groups. First, those who are poor both spiritually and materially; second, those who are poor spiritually and rich materially; third, those who are rich spiritually and poor materially; and fourth, those who are rich both spiritually and materially. Expectedly, one may probably clear with the measurements of the materially rich and poor, but wonder on how to measure the spiritually rich and poor. Leaving this question alone for a while to be researched and deliberated further later on, this categorization would probably entail with two implications. First, the target groups of the poverty alleviation need to encompass all strata of society, including the rich themselves. Second, true target groups may be identified, resources may be rightly allocated, and wastage may be avoided. The most to be given serious attention and intervention, with reasonable allocation, is of course the first category of the target group, viz. those who are poor both spiritually and materially. This is followed by the second group, that is the rich who are spiritually poor that may expose them to adverse attributes such as oppression, corruption, and so on, and the third categories who even though poor materially but neither troubling nor burdening the society due to their rich in spirituality. The aim of the whole process is definitely to create the fourth group who are rich both spiritually and materially.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author is indebted to Islamic Research and Training Institute (IRTI), Islamic Development Bank (IDB) in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, for his appointment as a Visiting Scholar at the Institute that enables him to initiate a research on Islamic Management of Poverty, and to Universiti Sains Malaysia and Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education for granting a Research University Team (RUT) Grant to undertake a research on Islamic-Based Development that enables the study and finally the writing of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biography

Muhammad Syukri Salleh, (DPhil, Oxon) is professor of Islamic Development Management at the Centre for Islamic Development Studies (ISDEV), Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.

References

Abdullah

. (Ed.). (1984). Kemiskinan dan kehidupan golongan berpendapatan rendah [Poverty and the life of low income group]. Bangi, Selangor: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Ahmad

. (1991). Islam, poverty and income distribution. Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

Ahmed

. (2004). Role of zakah and awqaf in poverty alleviation. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank.

al Qaradawi

. (2002). Zakah role in curing social and economic malaises. In Kahf

. (Ed.), Economics of zakah—A book of readings (2nd ed., pp. 569-620). Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank.

al Qardhawi

S. Y

. (1980). Problema kemiskinan: Apa konsep Islam [The problems of poverty: What is Islamic concept] ( Fanany

., Trans.). Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia: Penerbitan Pena Mas.

Alhabshi

S. O

. (1993). Tidakkah Islam menggalakkan kita mengumpul harta? [Is it not that Islam encourages us to accumulate wealth?] In Nik Hassan

N. M. H.

Abdul Rahman

S. F

. (Eds.), Islam, budaya kerja dan pembangunan masyarakat - Satu kefahaman [Islam, working culture and societal development – An Islamic understanding], (pp. 127-135). Kuala Lumpur: Institut Kefahaman Islam Malaysia.

Alhabshi

S. O

. (1996). Poverty eradication from Islamic perspectives.

Amiel

Cowell

. (1997). The measurement of poverty: An experimental questionnaire investigation. Empirical Economics, 22, 571-588.

Ariff

. (1988). Comments on M.A. Mannan’s “The economics of poverty in Islam with special reference to Muslim countries.” In Iqbal

. (Ed.), Distributive justice and need fulfilment in an Islamic economy (Rev. ed., pp. 336-341). Islamabad, Pakistan: International Institute of Islamic Economics.

10.

Bakar

M. D

. (2002). The problem of risk and insurable interest in takaful: A jurisprudential analysis. In Iqbal

. (Ed.), Islamic economic institutions and the elimination of poverty (pp. 233-262). Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

11.

Chapra

M. U

. (1980). Islamic welfare state and its role in the economy. In Ahmad

. (Ed.), Studies in Islamic economics (pp. 143-169). Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

12.

Chapra

M. U

. (2008). The Islamic vision of development in the light of the maqasid al-shari`ah. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank.

13.

Cizakca

. (2002). Latest developments in the Western non-profit sector and the implications for Islamic awqaf. In Iqbal

. (Ed.), Islamic economic institutions and the elimination of poverty (pp. 263-296). Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

14.

Fadhil

. (1992). Minda Melayu baru [New Malay mind]. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Institut Kajian Dasar.

15.

Hassan

M. K.

Alamgir

D. A. H

. (2002). Microfinancial services and poverty alleviation in Bangladesh: A comparative analysis of secular and Islamic NGOs. In Iqbal

. (Ed.), Islamic economic institutions and the elimination of poverty (pp. 113-168). Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

16.

Huq

. (1996). Poverty, inequality and role of some of the Islamic economic institutions. In Mannan

M. A.

Ahmad

. (Eds.), Economic development in an Islamic framework (pp. 224-261). Islamabad, Pakistan: International Institute of Islamic Economics, International Islamic University.

17.

Ibrahim

. (1984). Kemiskinan dari perspektif agama dan politik [Poverty from religious and political perspective]. Kuala Lumpur: Institut Pertanian Malaysia. (Original work published 1983)

18.

Iqbal

. (2002). Introduction. In Iqbal

. (Ed.), Islamic economic institutions and the elimination of poverty (pp. 1-24). Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

19.

Islamic Development Bank. (2006a). Strategic plan (1426H-1430H) (Rajab 1425H / September 2004). Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Development Bank.

20.

Islamic Development Bank. (2006b). Vision 1440H: A vision for human dignity. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Development Bank.

21.

Kahf

. (2002). Introduction to the study of the economics of zakah. In Kahf

. (Ed.), Economics of zakah: A book of readings (2nd ed., pp. 15-57). Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank.

22.

Khan

M. F

. (1995). Essays in Islamic economics. Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

23.

Khan

Z. A

. (n.d.). Causes of poverty and role of citizen in alleviating it from Islamic perspective.

24.

Mannan

M. A

. (1988). The economics of poverty in Islam with special reference to Muslim countries. In Iqbal

. (Ed.), Distributive justice and need fulfilment in an Islamic economy (Rev. ed., pp. 305-335). Islamabad, Pakistan: International Institute of Islamic Economics.

25.

Naqvi

S. N. H

. (1994). Ethics and economics: An Islamic synthesis. Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

26.

Nofal

A. E

. (1984). Al-Zakat (the poor due) (translated from Arabic by Tawfik

.). Cairo, Egypt: The Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs.

27.

Obaidullah

. (2008a). Introduction to Islamic microfinance. Hyderabad, India: International Institute of Islamic Business and Finance.

28.

Obaidullah

. (2008b). Role of microfinance in poverty alleviation: Lessons from experience in selected IDB member countries. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Development Bank.

29.

Obaidullah

Khan

. (2008). Islamic microfinance development: Challenges and initiatives (Dialogue Paper No. 2). Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank.

30.

Patel

Z. A

. (Ed.). (1983). Small kindnesses: Poverty and Muslim charity. Nuneaton, UK: Muslim Venture Publications.

31.

Rahman

. (1974). Economic doctrines of Islam (Vol. 1). Lahore, Pakistan: Islamic Publications.

32.

Sadeq

A. A

. (1994). A survey of the institution of zakat (Cataloging-in-Publication Data). Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: King Fahd National Library.

33.

Sadeq

A. A

. (2002). A survey of the institution of zakah: Issues, theories and administration (2nd ed.). Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank.

34.

Salih

S. A

. (1999). The challenges of poverty alleviation in IDB member countries. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: Economic Policy and Strategic Planning Department, Islamic Development Bank.

35.

Salleh

M. S.

Md. Yusoff

. (1997). The poor people’s perception of poverty and its implications on the realization of Islamic development in Kelantan, Malaysia, Humanomics, 13(3/4), 215-244.

36.

Sirageldin

. (2002). The elimination of poverty: Challenges and Islamic strategies. In Iqbal

. (Ed.), Islamic economic institutions and the elimination of poverty (pp. 25-46). Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

37.

Tag

Din

S. E. D. I

. (2002). The elimination of riba: A measure truly dedicated to poverty alleviation. In Iqbal

. (Ed.), Islamic economic institutions and the elimination of poverty (pp. 187-232). Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

38.

Yasin

H. M.

Tahir

. (2002). Poverty elimination in an Islamic perspective: An applied general equilibrium approach. In Iqbal

. (Ed.), Islamic economic institutions and the elimination of poverty (pp. 47-112). Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation.

39.

Zaim

. (1985). Recent interpretations of the economic aspects of zakah. Paper read at Management of Zakah in Modern Muslim Society, 02–12 Sha’aban 1405 H (22 April-02 May 1985), at Karachi, Pakistan.