One of the oldest social policy problems of all times, poverty has direct impacts on many aspects of human living conditions through physical, moral, and psychological outcomes. Therefore, countless numbers of criteria and approaches have been developed to conceptualise poverty so far. While many of them analyses the traditional aspects of poverty in the form of insufficient and irregular income to secure basic needs, others partly examine poverty in its intangible dimensions, such as education, health, life expectancy, child mortality etc.

The problem of identifying and measuring poverty is extremely complex due to the different factors that contribute to the problem. Thus, the problem requires more than economic growth. There are still a significant number of people struggling to survive even in the developed countries with strong economies. Understanding well-being and poverty is the first step to reduce poverty. Meaningful definitions are important to determine the causes of poverty and poverty reduction goals as well as the scope of what needs to be done. Local governments need the concepts of welfare and poverty to help them make the right decisions at the local level. These concepts can be a starting point for central and local governments to better understand the relationship between poverty and welfare.

However, if the necessary coordination and harmony between local governments and central government cannot be achieved in combating poverty, it is inevitable that there will be repeated interventions. This will lead to the inability to use the resources which are very precious and limited, as well as to prevent individuals from getting out of poverty. Therefore, the ability of local governments to fully fulfil the roles expected from them in the fight against poverty depends primarily on their work in a compliant and complementary manner with the central government.

Local governments also have some natural obstacles to tackle poverty. As a matter of fact, they often face problems such as determining the causes of poverty, prioritizing those interventions among other obligations, or lacking data and information that primarily target certain poor groups. Local governments, which have not been given sufficient roles with central planning before, naturally have little experience in the preparation and implementation of local development plans. Other problems and obstacles such as insufficient delegation, insufficient and disproportionate resources, and poor coordination among sectors have further restricted local governments’ capacity to meet local needs. Nevertheless, since poverty is a problem that needs to be eliminated completely, local governments have important contributions to this issue.

Poverty occupies the socioeconomic policy agenda of governments all over the world. Collaborations between partners, participatory processes, and local stakeholders are key features of the new initiatives reviewed. One of the most common trends in tackling poverty at the local level is the development of new programs to improve the level of living of poor individuals clustered in slum areas. These programs are much more than traditional direct cash supports. They are more suitably called social inclusion policies. As a matter of fact, it is now clear that poverty is not only a lack of material income, but rather a decrease in the welfare levels and rights of individuals. 

Another precise point is that central governments cannot fight poverty by themselves anymore. Therefore, it is a definite necessity for a large number of actors, such as central-local governments, the private sector, supranational organizations, and non-governmental organizations, to combat and struggle against poverty altogether. However, such partnerships are vulnerable. When the interests of one of the partners change, the entire partnership can be resolved and excellent initiatives deprived of political support and resources may collapse. The most common cause of conflict among partners is political privileges and preferences. Excessive politicization of problems and cuts in leadership can lead to disruptions. Election strategies, political maneuvers, and personal conflicts within local authorities and partner organizations may result in partial or complete separation.

In studies related to poverty and local governments, it appears that the local government capacity is an important determinant of the level of effectiveness in poverty prevention. This supports the latest local economic development literature, which argues that local governments have some degree of control over local resources that can override the effects of poverty and other structural inequalities. Therefore, it is a definite necessity to support and increase the autonomy levels of local governments in the fight against poverty in many ways, especially the sharing of authority.