In modern society poverty is understood not as a state of absolute economic deprivation but as an extreme case of social inequality, as "poverty in affluence", and the concept of poverty is multidimensional, containing subjective and objective dimensions as well as multiple deprivations. As poverty is often associated with stigmatisation and social exclusion one may therefore assume that the poor are socially isolated. Arguments supporting a relation between social isolation and poverty come from poverty and segregation research and from theories of social exclusion and social closure. Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP) the author shows that poverty leads to loneliness and that the poor are restricted in the realisation of certain social contacts. Among the poor subgroups can be identified whose social integration is precarious and the transition to social isolation fluent. People who cannot cope with economic hardship as well as those in persistent poverty are more likely to be affected by the consequences of poverty on social relationships than others and this is especially true for the poorest among the poor. Although the findings do not suggest that poverty directly leads to social isolation, they demonstrate that the poor face a high risk of being isolated and that certain aspects associated with poverty (i.e. persistence of poverty) may lead to complete and ongoing isolation.
The global spread of the coronavirus pandemic has particularly dramatic consequences for the lives of migrants and refugees living in already marginalised and restricted conditions, whose ongoing crisis is at risk of being overlooked. But refugees are not only extremely vulnerable and at risk of infection, as several reports show, quickly develop their own protection measures like the production of hygienic products, the publication of their situation and calls for action and help. Therefore, this paper aims to research the effects of the coronavirus crisis on refugees in camp settings with a special ethnographic focus on how refugees actively deal with this crisis and if they, through already developed resilience, are capable of adapting to the restrictions as well as inventing strategies to cope with the difficult situation. To account for the variety of refugee camps as well as the different living conditions due to their locality, history and national asylum politics, we will look at three different locations, namely refugee asylum homes in Germany, hotspots on the Greek islands as well as one refugee camp in Kenya. The main questions will be how, under structurally and institutionally framed conditions of power and victimisation in refugee camps, forms of agency are established, made possible or limited. The goal is to show which strategies refugees apply to cope with the enhanced restrictions and exclusion, how they act to protect themselves and others from the virus and how they present and reflect their situation during the coronavirus pandemic. Finally, this discussion offers a new perspective to consider refugees not only as vulnerable victims, but also as actively engaged individuals.