From Observed Poverty to Territorial Exclusion:

 Rethinking Poverty in Middle-Income Contexts: A Territorial Perspective from Albania

Abstract

This article examines the persistence and transformation of poverty in contexts classified as “middle-income,” using Albania as an illustrative case. Drawing on longitudinal field observations (since 2003), analytical reflections, and recent European policy frameworks, it argues that poverty is often mischaracterised as an income-based issue, while in practice it reflects deeper territorial and institutional inequalities. The paper contributes to development policy debates by proposing a shift toward community-led, place-based approaches that strengthen local capacity and address multidimensional exclusion. These findings are relevant for policymakers seeking more effective and territorially grounded strategies to reduce poverty and inequality.

Keywords:  Multidimensional poverty, Territorial inequality, Social exclusion, Community-led development, Middle-income countries lbania,,Local development

1. Introduction

Despite sustained economic growth in many transition and developing economies, poverty remains a persistent structural condition. Conventional development frameworks often rely on aggregate macroeconomic indicators—such as GDP per capita or World Bank income classification—which tend to obscure deep spatial and social inequalities.

Albania, officially classified as an upper-middle-income country, provides a paradigmatic case in which macroeconomic progress coexists with visible rural decline, territorial fragmentation, and persistent social vulnerability.

This article is grounded in a longitudinal observation process beginning in 2003 in the Berat region, where field-level engagement revealed a substantial discrepancy between official poverty statistics and lived territorial realities. These empirical observations were later developed into analytical reflections in 2012, questioning the paradox of deprivation within contexts of apparent economic progress.

While grounded in the Albanian case, the argument developed in this paper speaks more broadly to middle-income and transition contexts where economic growth has not translated into territorially balanced and socially inclusive development outcomes.

2. Conceptual Framework and Literature Context

Poverty scholarship has progressively shifted from unidimensional income-based definitions toward multidimensional approaches. The Alkire-Foster methodology and the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) represent key advances in capturing overlapping deprivations in health, education, and living standards.

Within the European context, the AROPE indicator developed by Eurostat integrates income poverty, material deprivation, and labour market exclusion into a composite measure of social vulnerability.

However, despite methodological advances, much of the literature continues to conceptualise poverty primarily at the individual or household level. This paper argues that such approaches insufficiently capture the territorial and systemic nature of exclusion, particularly in contexts marked by uneven spatial development.

Recent European urban policy debates, including those advanced by Eurocities, increasingly emphasise the role of cities as both engines of growth and loci of concentrated deprivation.

3. Methodology

The study adopts a qualitative longitudinal interpretative methodology combining:

• Field-based observations (Berat region, Albania, 2003)
• Policy-oriented analytical writing (2012)
• Secondary statistical analysis (Eurostat, World Bank, FAO)
• Comparative policy review (EU urban and social policy frameworks, 2020–2024)

This triangulated approach allows for an integrated reading of poverty as both a lived territorial condition and a policy-defined category.

This approach is particularly suitable for capturing complex, context-dependent social phenomena that are not fully observable through quantitative indicators alone.

4. Empirical Evidence: Albania (2003–2012)

Field observations in the Berat region in 2003 indicated significant discrepancies between official poverty estimates and actual living conditions. Rural households exhibited higher levels of deprivation than national statistics suggested, particularly in terms of income stability, access to services, and livelihood resilience.

By 2012, these empirical insights had evolved into a broader analytical critique of development narratives, emphasising that poverty is not primarily a production constraint, but a distributional and governance failure.

The key empirical findings include:

• structural rural vulnerability and depopulation trends
• weak alignment between statistical systems and territorial realities
• fragmented and reactive social policy interventions
• limited institutional capacity at local governance level

5. European Comparative Context (2024)

Recent Eurostat data indicate that approximately 21% of the EU population is at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE, 2024), confirming that poverty remains structurally embedded even within highly developed economies.

Contemporary European policy discourse increasingly recognises:

• the spatial concentration of poverty
• the rise of urban-based deprivation (housing, energy, cost of living)
• the multidimensional nature of social exclusion

These developments reinforce the argument that poverty is not confined to income scarcity but is deeply embedded in territorial and institutional structures.

6. Analytical Shift: From Income Poverty to Territorial Exclusion

This analytical transition reflects not only a conceptual evolution but also a shift in how policy frameworks interpret and respond to poverty.

The comparative evidence suggests a clear conceptual evolution:

·         From income-based deprivation

·         Toward multidimensional social exclusion

·         And ultimately toward territorially embedded structural inequality

This shift is summarised in Table 1 (Comparative Empirical Framework, 2003–2012–2024), which illustrates the transformation of poverty across time and policy regimes.

Table 1. Evolution of Poverty Conceptualisation (2003–2012–2024)

Period	Dominant Perspective	Key Characteristics	Policy Implications
2003	Income-based poverty	Focus on income thresholds; underestimation of rural deprivation	Targeted social assistance
2012	Multidimensional poverty	Recognition of overlapping deprivations (health, education, living conditions)	Integrated social policies
2024	Territorial exclusion	Spatial inequality, institutional fragmentation, community marginalisation	Place-based, community-led development

 

Poverty is thus increasingly understood as a systemic outcome of uneven territorial development rather than an isolated economic condition.

7. Policy Implications: Community-Led Territorial Development

The findings support a shift toward community-led territorial development (CLTD) as an alternative policy framework.

This model is based on four interrelated principles:

1. Territorial embeddedness – recognising spatial inequality as a core development dimension
2. Community agency – repositioning local populations as active development actors
3. Integrated policy design – linking social, economic, and environmental interventions
4. Multi-level governance – strengthening coordination between EU, national, and local levels

Such an approach aligns with emerging European policy orientations toward place-based development and social innovation.

8. Conclusion

This article demonstrates that poverty in middle-income contexts cannot be adequately explained through income-based frameworks alone. The Albanian case illustrates how macroeconomic progress may coexist with persistent territorial and institutional exclusion.

The persistence and transformation of poverty over time suggest the need for a paradigmatic shift in development thinking—from redistribution-centred policies toward territorially grounded and community-driven development systems.

Future policy frameworks must prioritise spatial justice, institutional capacity, and local empowerment as central pillars of sustainable development.

For policymakers, this implies the need to move beyond narrowly targeted social assistance schemes and toward integrated, place-based strategies that empower local communities as active agents of development. Such approaches require not only financial resources but also institutional innovation, multi-level governance coordination, and sustained investment in local capacities.

References (APA Style)

Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011). Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7–8), 476–487.

Eurostat. (2024). People at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE) statistics. European Commission.

FAO. (2012). The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2012. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

 World Bank. (2024). World Development Indicators.

Hoxhaj, L. (2012). A mund të bashkëjetojnë uria me bollëkun? Tirana Observer, 20 December 2012.

Hoxhaj, L. (2012). A mundemi ne ta mposhtim urinë? Blog publication.

Eurocities. (2024). Urban poverty and social inclusion in European cities. European Cities Network.

Author:

Luiza Hoxhaj

Center for European Policy Studies on Regional and Local Development (Tirana, Albania)

Ripërcaktimi i Varfërisë në Shqipëri

Nga të ardhurat te territori dhe qeverisja e zhvillimit

Hyrje: një problem që nuk lexohet saktë

Varfëria në Shqipëri vazhdon të trajtohet kryesisht si një fenomen i matshëm përmes treguesve të të ardhurave dhe mesatareve kombëtare. Kjo qasje, megjithëse e dobishme për krahasime makroekonomike, nuk arrin të pasqyrojë realitetin e fragmentuar territorial të vendit.

Në fakt, Shqipëria nuk përballet me një varfëri të vetme, por me forma të ndryshme të saj që lidhen ngushtë me territorin. Në disa zona rurale ajo shfaqet si boshatisje demografike dhe mungesë e shërbimeve bazë. Në zona të tjera si mungesë mundësish ekonomike dhe izolim strukturor. Në qytete, si rritje e kostos së jetesës dhe pasiguri sociale.

Ky realitet e bën gjithnjë e më të pamjaftueshme leximin e varfërisë përmes mesatareve kombëtare.

Kufijtë e statistikës së mesatares

Një nga problemet më të thella në analizën e varfërisë në Shqipëri lidhet me mbështetjen e tepërt në tregues agregatë kombëtarë. Këta tregues krijojnë një “iluzion statistikor homogjeniteti”, ku një realitet shumë i ndryshëm territorial përkthehet në një shifër të vetme.

Kjo qasje ka dy pasoja kryesore:

• fsheh pabarazitë territoriale
• dobëson aftësinë e politikave publike për të ndërhyrë në mënyrë të targetuar

Në këtë mënyrë, varfëria nuk shihet më si fenomen kompleks territorial, por si devijim nga një mesatare kombëtare, çka e redukton ndjeshëm efektivitetin e ndërhyrjeve publike.

Përvoja në terren: rasti i Beratit

Një nga përvojat më domethënëse në këtë drejtim lidhet me periudhën 2003–2004, gjatë ushtrimit të detyrës si Prefekt i Qarkut Berat, kur u ndërmor një studim mbi varfërinë në nivel qarku.

Qëllimi i këtij procesi ishte të kalohej nga statistika në terren, duke e parë varfërinë jo si shifër, por si realitet social dhe territorial.

Rezultatet e studimit evidentuan një mospërputhje të madhe midis statistikave zyrtare dhe realitetit lokal. Ndërsa në nivel kombëtar varfëria raportohej rreth 13%, në terren ajo shfaqej në nivele dukshëm më të larta, në disa zona duke iu afruar 50%, ndërkohë që edhe vlerësimet ndërkombëtare sugjeronin intervale më të gjera.

Ky hendek nuk ishte teknik. Ai ishte strukturor.

Ai tregonte se varfëria në Shqipëri ka një dimension të fortë territorial, i cili nuk kapet nga mesataret kombëtare.

Nga analiza te veprimi: një qasje e hershme place-based

Në vijim të këtij procesi, u tentua ndërtimi i një qasjeje më gjithëpërfshirëse në nivel qarku, duke përfshirë aktorë institucionalë, lokalë dhe socialë.

Në praktikë, kjo përfaqësonte një formë të hershme të asaj që sot njihet si:

• place-based development
• multilevel governance
• dhe integrim i politikave sociale me ato ekonomike

Qëllimi ishte të kalohej nga identifikimi i problemit te ndërtimi i zgjidhjeve të koordinuara në nivel territori.

Megjithatë, si shpesh ndodh në kontekste me institucione të paqëndrueshme, procesi nuk u vazhdua dhe nuk u institucionalizua më tej.

Problemi i vazhdimësisë institucionale

Një nga sfidat strukturore të qeverisjes publike në Shqipëri është mungesa e vazhdimësisë së politikave.

Iniciativat që ndërtojnë njohuri dhe eksperiencë në terren shpesh nuk trashëgohen nga administratat pasuese, duke krijuar një cikël fragmentimi institucional.

Ky fenomen ka dy pasoja të rëndësishme:

• humbje e kapitalit institucional dhe eksperiencës
• mungesë e politikave afatgjata të qëndrueshme

Në këtë mënyrë, politikat publike nuk zhvillohen si procese, por si ndërhyrje të shkëputura.

Varfëria si fenomen territorial dhe institucional

Nga kjo analizë del qartë se varfëria nuk mund të kuptohet vetëm si problem ekonomik. Ajo është rezultat i ndërveprimit midis:

• strukturës territoriale të zhvillimit
• kapacitetit institucional për qeverisje
• dhe mënyrës se si shpërndahen mundësitë ekonomike dhe sociale

Kjo kërkon një ndryshim paradigme në mënyrën e ndërtimit të politikave publike.

Nevoja për një paradigmë të re zhvillimi

Një qasje e re ndaj varfërisë nënkupton kalimin:

• nga mesatare kombëtare → te analiza territoriale
• nga politika të fragmentuara → te zhvillimi i integruar
• nga qeverisje e centralizuar → te qeverisje shumë-nivelëshe
• nga ndërhyrje sociale të izoluar → te politika zhvillimore territoriale

Në këtë kuadër, territori nuk është vetëm një njësi administrative, por një njësi zhvillimi ekonomik dhe social.

Implikime për reformën territoriale

Debati mbi varfërinë territoriale lidhet drejtpërdrejt me mënyrën se si strukturohet qeverisja territoriale në Shqipëri.

Një reformë territoriale që mbetet vetëm në nivel administrativ rrezikon të mos ndikojë në mënyrë reale mbi pabarazitë ekzistuese.

Sfida nuk është vetëm organizimi institucional i territorit, por aftësia për ta kthyer atë në një platformë aktive zhvillimi, ku politikat publike ndërtohen mbi realitete lokale dhe jo mbi mesatare kombëtare.

Në këtë kuptim, reforma territoriale dhe politikat e zhvillimit duhet të jenë pjesë e të njëjtit model të integruar.

Përfundim

Varfëria në Shqipëri nuk është vetëm mungesë të ardhurash. Ajo është pasojë e një modeli zhvillimi territorial të pabalancuar dhe e kufizimeve institucionale në mënyrën e qeverisjes së këtij zhvillimi.

Përvoja në terren dhe analiza institucionale tregojnë se pa një ndryshim të qasjes — nga ekonomike në territoriale dhe nga fragmentare në të integruar — politikat kundër varfërisë mbeten të pjesshme.

Në thelb, sfida nuk është vetëm reduktimi i varfërisë, por ndërtimi i një modeli zhvillimi ku territori, komuniteti dhe institucionet veprojnë në mënyrë të koordinuar dhe të qëndrueshme.

Burime dhe përvojë empirike

• Hoxhaj, L. (2010), Kundër varfërisë duke investuar në edukim, Tirana Observer
• Hoxhaj, L. (2012), A mund të mposhtim urinë?, Tirana Observer
• Hoxhaj. L  (2012) A mund të bashkëjetojnë uria me bollëkun? Tirana Observer
• Field Assessment, Qarku Berat (2003–2004), author-led territorial poverty study
• INSTAT (2008), LSMS
• World Bank (2012), Poverty Assessment Report
• FAO (2012), Food Insecurity Report
• OECD (2009), Place-based Development Framework 

Nga Luiza Hoxhaj

7/05/2026

Rethinking Poverty in Albania

Policy Paper

From Income Support to Territorial Development

Key Message

Poverty in Albania remains underestimated when measured primarily through income indicators. Territorial disparities, rural decline, and emerging urban vulnerabilities reveal a deeper and more structural form of exclusion. Addressing this requires a shift from fragmented social assistance toward integrated, community-led territorial development approaches.

The Problem

Albania is classified as a middle-income country, yet this classification masks significant internal disparities. Poverty is unevenly distributed across territories and increasingly manifests in three interconnected forms:

• Deep rural poverty, particularly in areas such as Selenicë, characterised by depopulation, limited access to services, and weak economic opportunities
• Underutilised development potential in areas like Dimal, where resources exist but lack structured support and coordination
• Growing urban vulnerability, driven by rising living costs, housing pressures, and unequal access to services

This multidimensional reality is insufficiently captured by conventional income-based metrics.

Why Current Approaches Fall Short

Existing policy approaches face three key limitations:

• Over-reliance on income-based measures, which fail to capture territorial and structural exclusion
• Fragmented and reactive social policies, focused on short-term assistance rather than long-term development
• Limited local governance capacity, constraining the ability of municipalities to design and implement integrated solutions

As a result, poverty is managed rather than reduced.

What Needs to Change

A shift in perspective is required—from treating poverty as an individual condition to recognising it as a territorial and systemic challenge.

This implies:

• Moving from people-based to place-based policies
• Empowering communities as active agents of development
• Integrating economic, social, and environmental interventions
• Strengthening multi-level governance coordination

Policy Recommendations

To operationalise this shift, the following actions are recommended:

1.    Develop place-based anti-poverty strategies at municipal level, tailored to territorial specificities

2.    Strengthen local governance capacity, including planning, implementation, and financial management

3.    Pilot community-led development models, building on participatory approaches and local ownership

4.    Improve poverty measurement systems, incorporating territorial and multidimensional indicators

5.    Align national and EU funding instruments with local needs and priorities

Pilot Opportunity: A Territorial Approach in Practice

A combined pilot approach could demonstrate the effectiveness of territorial development models:

• Selenicë: Focus on addressing structural rural poverty through integrated livelihood, service access, and community resilience initiatives
• Dimal: Leverage agricultural and local economic potential through coordinated development strategies and value chain support
• Urban areas: Introduce targeted interventions addressing cost-of-living pressures, service access, and social inclusion

This combined model offers a scalable framework for national policy and EU-supported programmes.

Conclusion

Poverty in Albania is not simply a matter of income—it is a reflection of territorial imbalance and institutional gaps. A transition toward community-led, place-based development is essential to achieve sustainable and inclusive growth.

Such a shift requires not only financial resources but also a renewed policy vision that places territories and communities at the centre of development. 

Key words: #poverty,#territorial inequality,#social exclusion,#Albania,#Eurostat,#community development,#spatial development

Luiza Hoxhaj

26/04/2026

---

The University as the Core of Thought: Against the Spiral of Silence

 Reflection inspired by a public discussion on the role of universities, and not only, in society

The reflection that follows was inspired by a recent text by Professor Zyhdi Teqja, which addresses a sensitive experience within a university context. While the original reflection emerges from a specific institutional situation, it raises a question that reaches far beyond a single university. It invites us to consider a broader phenomenon that concerns not only academic institutions, but society as a whole: the phenomenon of silence.

Silence in public life rarely appears as an open prohibition. More often, it manifests in subtler forms—through avoidance, through the quiet marginalization of voices that raise inconvenient questions, or through the collective decision not to engage with certain issues. Sometimes it appears not as censorship, but as indifference.

In this sense, silence can become a powerful social mechanism. It does not necessarily silence people directly; instead, it reduces the visibility of those who speak. Their ideas are not openly rejected; they are simply ignored. Over time, this silent ignoring can achieve what open opposition sometimes cannot: it gradually erodes the public presence of ideas and concerns that deserve attention.

Social theory has long described this phenomenon. Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann famously conceptualized it as the “spiral of silence,” a process in which individuals become reluctant to express views they perceive as unpopular or unsupported by dominant institutions. As this reluctance grows, the apparent consensus strengthens, and the spiral deepens.

Universities, however, were historically created precisely to resist such dynamics.

A university is not merely a place where knowledge is transmitted. It is a space where ideas are tested, confronted, and debated. It is an institutional environment where disagreement is not a disturbance but a necessary condition for intellectual progress.

The history of universities—from Bologna to Oxford, from Humboldt’s reforms in Berlin to the great research universities of the modern era—shows that academic institutions flourish not because they enforce unanimity, but because they cultivate pluralism of thought.

A university where only one vision is considered legitimate gradually loses its academic nature. It risks becoming something closer to an administrative structure than a living intellectual community.

For this reason, the phenomenon of silence is particularly concerning when it appears within universities. When silence becomes normalized, it does not only affect individual scholars. It weakens the very institutional culture that allows universities to fulfill their role in society.

Universities should therefore be understood as the core of intellectual courage in a society. They are the places where the ability to think differently should not merely be tolerated, but actively protected.

If universities themselves begin to fear the plurality of visions, society risks losing one of its most important safeguards against intellectual stagnation.

Breaking the spiral of silence is not only an individual act of courage. It is also an institutional responsibility.

Universities must remain places where voices are not reduced through indifference, where debate is not replaced by quiet conformity, and where the diversity of ideas continues to be recognized as the very foundation of academic life.

Because in the end, universities endure not through silence, but through the courage of those who continue to think—and speak—differently.