Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference “ECONOMIC SCIENCE FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT” Error! Reference source not found. Jelgava, LLU ESAF, 27-28 April 2017, pp. xxx-xxx 1 Corresponding author Baiba Bela. Tel.: + 371 29447405. E-mail address:baiba.bela@lu.lv. 1 TRI CKY CI RCLE OF ADVERSI TY: PROBLEMS OF SOCI AL SUPPORT FOR VULNERABLE GROUPS I N RURAL AREAS Baiba Bela 1 , Dr.sc.soc. University of Latvia Abstract. The risk of poverty or social exclusion is considered as an important problem in all European countries, but in Latvia the share of population at-the-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion is above average in the European Union. The aim of this study is to explore the experience of poverty and social exclusion of women with dependent children and state efforts to address and to overcome these problems, focusing on rural areas. The biographical perspective is used in order to elucidate the lived experience of vulnerable persons. The available statistical data are used to provide information about welfare funding. The results show, although state spends considerable resources for social assistance and social services, urban and rural population with the same needs do not have equal opportunity to receive the support. Analysis of lived experience of women with low education and children illuminated the main problems experienced by this group and the limited assistance they receive. Key words: poverty and social exclusion, adversity, social support JEL code: available on: I 38 I ntroduction The thesis explores intersection of lived experience of poverty and social exclusion and available social support to mitigate the adversity with focus on the case of one particularly vulnerable social group - women with low level of education, two and more children, living in rural areas in Latvia. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization [..] of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality” (UN, 1948). Poverty and social exclusion are related to lack of resources, rights, goods and services and seriously restricts participation in normal activities whether in economic, social, cultural or political arenas (Levitas 2007 in Bak, Larsen, 2015). Experience of poverty jeopardises dignity and creates a feeling of shame that results in social withdrawal and a sense of powerlessness (Walker, 2014). The risk of poverty or social exclusion is considered as an important problem in all European countries, though Latvia protractedly is among the countries with highest share of persons at-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion. However social assistance has positive impact on the material situation of households and social transfers considerably reduces at-risk-of-poverty rate (Dobelniece et al, 2015), spending on benefit programs targeted at low-income groups is low and have low coverage (The World Bank, 2013). Significant regional development disparities complicate the situation even more, because the state efforts to mitigate negative consequences of poverty - amount and availability of social assistance and social services, in different municipalities varies significantly (Bela, Rasnača, 2015). Citizens are in unequal situation - "two people with identical needs receive different amount and types of social services depending on the municipality" (Ministry of Welfare, 2013: 11). Also some social groups are more prone to social risks than average population - single parents (41.1% in 2013; 37% in 2014) and adults with three and more dependent children (27.7 % in 2013; 34,5% in 2014) are at greater risk of poverty than the rest of population (21.0% in 2013; 22.5% in 2014) in Latvia (CSB, 2015, CBS 2016). Signe Dobelniece and colleagues analysed situation of social risk families with children and noted that those in rural areas are in worse situation (Dobelniece et al, 2015). Ministry of Welfare commissioned initial evaluation of needy households with children (GFK, 2013). Both analyses focus on statistics and perspective of social work specialists. The point of view of