This CASEbrief summarises 'Understanding Social Exclusion' edited by John Hills, Julian Le Grand and David Piachaud, published by Oxford University Pres

Hills, John

Le Grand, Julian

Piachaud, David

English

LSE Research Online

CENTRE FOR ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL EXCLUSIONAn ESRC Research Centre CASEbrief 23 June 2002Understanding Social ExclusionFurther InformationLondon School of EconomicsHoughton StreetLondon WC2A 2AETel: 020 7955 6679Since the mid-1990s the term and phenomenon of “social exclusion” has attractedmuch academic attention in the UK, and since 1997 has been an explicit focus ofgovernment policy. In a new book, CASE members examine the debate around themeaning of the term, and the extent and nature of problems it encompasses. Aspectscovered include poverty dynamics, intergenerational and family links indisadvantage, the labour market, deprived neighbourhoods, and the impact ofwelfare policy.Social exclusion is a contested term, with dispute over the agency responsible:globalisation, the nation state and its institutions, or excluded individualsthemselves. Understanding it involves interactions between influences and outcomesat different levels - individual, family, community, national and global.A feature of the concept is that it involves several dimensions of deprivation andparticipation. Looking at four of these - consumption, production, political activityand social engagement - UK data show that exclusion on one dimension ispositively correlated with exclusion on the others. However, the correlation is notthat strong: the dimensions are distinct rather than simply reflections of the samething.One advantage of the term is that it draws attention to dynamics, to changes overtime and links across lives and between generations. Evidence shows that such linksare strong, but not unbreakable. As with the differences between dimensions ofexclusion, there is no sign of a substantial British underclass, permanently cut-offfrom mainstream society.Evidence in the book suggests that policy can make a difference. A focus on “socialexclusion” (rather than, say, poverty or deprivation) does not transform the scale ornature of the problems to be tackled. But it may change the emphasis of policyresponses and can lead to a richer policy mix.This CASEbrief summarises findings from Understanding Social Exclusion edited by John Hills, Julian LeGrand and David Piachaud, published by Oxford University Press (paperback, ISBN 0-19-925194-0, £18.99;hardback, ISBN 0-19-925107-X, £50). The book is available from booksellers or from the Oxford UniversityPress (24 hour credit card hotline: +44 (0) 1536 454534; email: book.orders@oup.co.uk; P&P for UK: £2.95up to order value of £50.) Europe: £3.75 up to order of £50. Over £50 free.)Social exclusion: Concepts and measurement Social exclusion is a contested term. Tania Burchardt, Julian Le Grand and David Piachaud canvass anumber of perspectives, from the Marxist interpretation of social exclusion as a necessary and inherentcharacteristic of capitalism, through the continental Republican view of social solidarity and socialcohesion, to the American idea of an underclass. In particular, opinion is divided as to the agencyresponsible for social exclusion: globalisation, the nation state and its institutions, or the excludedindividuals themselves. They present a framework for understanding social exclusion drawing onelements of many different perspectives, highlighting the interaction between influences and outcomes atdifferent levels - individual, family, community, national and global. Brian Barry grapples with the thorny question of voluntary exclusion - whether it is possible, whether itmatters and what can be done about it. He defines “social isolation” as including both voluntary andinvoluntary exclusion. Apparently voluntary social exclusion, for example by members of a religiousgroup withdrawing from broader society, should be treated with scepticism, since evaluation of whether itis truly voluntary depends on the quality of choices available to members of the group. Withdrawal as aresponse to hostility or discrimination is no more voluntary than leaving a job through constructivedismissal. In addition, genuinely voluntary exclusion may be fine for the individuals concerned (providedthere is always a possibility of re-inclusion), but may nevertheless be problematic for the wider society. Burchardt, Le Grand and Piachaud use data from the British Household Panel Study to operationalise onedefinition of social exclusion, based on four dimensions of participation: consumption, production,political activity and social engagement. They show the importance of taking multidimensionalityseriously, since although exclusion on one dimension is positively and significantly correlated withexclusion on other dimensions, the correlation is not strong. The evidence also illustrates the differencebetween a snapshot and a longitudinal view of exclusion: after seven years have elapsed, one-third of theworking age population has some experience of exclusion on the consumption dimension, and one-quarter has some experience of exclusion on the production dimension.The dynamics of povertyPoverty is an important component of social exclusion. Simon Burgess and Carol Propper reviewevidence on poverty dynamics - movements in and out of poverty - for the UK. What emerges is a pictureof a society in which a large minority of individuals experience poverty at least once in a number ofyears. While for many this is a once-off event, many who escape do not move far from poverty. Withinthose who are poor, there is a group who experience repeated and persistent poverty.  These UK patternsappear to be closer to those of the US than those of Canada or Germany. Now we know these facts, theresearch challenge is to take forward modelling approaches that allow a distinction to be made betweencausal factors and those that are correlates of entry and exit into poverty, so that policy can be focused tobring about long-term improvements reducing the chances of poverty. Intergenerational and family linksJohn Hobcraft focuses on the inter-generational and intra-generational pathways into social exclusion,especially during young adulthood. He discusses how to assess the influences on adult social exclusion ofparental endowments, of childhood circumstances, attributes, and behaviour, and of prior experiencesduring adulthood. He addresses conceptual issues in the definition of adult social exclusion and inunderstanding the interplays of nature and nurture. He presents a number of practical illustrations usingdata on a cohort of people born in 1958 and gives results on pervasive and specific childhood antecedentsto adult social exclusion. To take this complex research agenda further will require judicious mix ofempirical and theoretical approaches.Children in Britain are amongst the most likely of European Union children to grow up in poverty.Youthful parenthood, solo motherhood and fragile unions are hallmarks of British family life thatcontribute to this finding. Kathleen Kiernan’s analyses show that socio-economic vulnerability inchildhood is powerfully associated with early parenthood and the partnership context within which a childis born, and that these demographic behaviours are also associated with disadvantage further along thelife course.  Socio-economic vulnerability is also implicated in parental separation, and parentalseparation can compound the disadvantage.  Parental separation in turn is associated with youthfulparenthood, solo motherhood and partnership dissolution. Disadvantage and demography matter, both asdirect and indirect mutual influences on adult experiences. The labour market and social exclusionAbigail McKnight documents trends in low-pay and in-work poverty from the 1970s to the 1990s, andexamines a selection of policies designed to reduce the causes or consequences of in-work poverty.  Theempirical evidence shows large rises in low-paid employment and a decrease in relative earnings of low-paid employees.  While work tends to protect a household from poverty, employment in 1996 was lesslikely to protect a household from poverty than in 1968.  Part of this difference is due to an increase inthe share of households solely dependent on a low-paid employee and an increase in the likelihood ofpoverty in such households.  Designing policies which reduce the causes of in-work poverty ischallenging, but the greatest danger in ignoring it is that children both become very exposed to povertyand tend to carry the scars into their adult lives. Social exclusion and neighbourhoodsRuth Lupton and Anne Power focus on the neighbourhood dimension of social exclusion. They suggestthat neighbourhood characteristics contribute to social exclusion via three mechanisms.  Poorneighbourhoods have negative intrinsic characteristics: their location, housing stock and economicstructure.  As a result, they lose out in the process of residential sorting, drawing in the least advantagedmembers of society.  Thirdly, long term concentrations of poverty cause neighbourhoods to acquirefurther problems - poor environments, services and facilities, high crime and low collective efficacy.Drawing on CASE’s study of twelve disadvantaged areas, they illustrate these processes and draw outimplications for policy. Liz Richardson and Katharine Mumford use two pieces of in-depth research about low-incomeneighbourhoods to explore the meaning and function of ‘community’. Communities are social systems aswell as places where people consume goods and services. They term the combination of services andfacilities with social organizations, “social infrastructure”. Social infrastructure is one component ofneighbourhood viability. When the infrastructure begins to unravel, facilities close, services enter crisismanagement, and anti-social behaviour escalates.This is costly, in human and financial terms. Where the social infrastructure comes under great pressure,ways must be found to bolster it before it begins to unravel. The findings show that community action canbe an important part of such strengthening. Small community groups cannot, by themselves, combat theeffects of exclusionary forces like poverty, polarization and depopulation. But they can enable the formalinfrastructure to work better by brokering between services and residents; directly provide additionalservices and facilities; and enhance social organisation through  their existence, the networks they foster,and the confidence they build to strengthen shared norms and values.CASEbrief 23ISSN: 1460-9770About the researchThe research reported here was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, with additional support from STICERD,the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, the Nuffield Foundation, the UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, and the Gatsby CharitableFoundation. We are grateful to them and to the Data Archive at Essex University, the Department for Work and Pensions, andthe Office for National Statistics for access to datasets used in our research.Welfare policy and exclusionThis book examines the impact of welfare policy in countering and preventing exclusion in several ways.First, David Piachaud and Holly Sutherland examine policies towards child poverty. Evidence aboundsthat poverty in childhood has consequences for poverty in later life. Understanding the causes of childpoverty and the impact of policy are therefore crucial in addressing social exclusion. Policies adopted inNew Labour’s first term are analysed to assess how far they go towards the goal of abolishing childpoverty in a generation. Compared to what would have happened under unchanged policies, these policiesreduce the number of children in poverty by over one million. This is partly through the promotion ofpaid work but primarily through redistribution to poorer families. But even if further policies to promotepaid work were unrealistically successful, 1.7 million children would remain poor. The goal of equalopportunities for all children is more radical than has thus far been recognised.  Phil Agulnik, Tania Burchardt and Martin Evans examine the success (or otherwise) of the welfarestate in combating social exclusion arising from the risks which individuals face during the lifecoursefrom three eventualities: unemployment, disability during working life and loss of income in retirement.Common themes emerge. Policymakers have a tendency to re-define the problem rather than tackling rootcauses, and this frequently results in simply shifting the problem elsewhere (for example fromunemployment to disability, or from pensioner poverty to pensioner inequality). Preventative measures areoften given precedence over responsive measures, but in reality the two cannot be easily disentangled (atheme returned to below). Looking at education, Howard Glennerster and Jo Sparkes’s dissection of the research evidence showshow closely educational achievement, early life experiences, and schooling impact on one another.CASE’s research reinforces the strength of links between educational failure and social exclusion. Basicliteracy and numeracy and ‘soft’ skills matter as well as examination performance.School reforms in the 1990s boosted average and above-average performance, but did not work for thedeprived. Recent evidence is more encouraging, but gaps between deprived and other secondary schoolsare yawning. School funding systems do not allocate enough additional resources to cope with disruptivechildren or to boost parental involvement.Does the policy response change?Finally, John Hills considers whether this kind of evidence and a focus on “social exclusion” changespolicy. He suggests it can change the emphasis and lead to a richer mix, rather than transforming policy:- The concept emphasises wider aspects of deprivation, not just cash.- Taking account of income dynamics allows differentiation between groups by trajectory.- Contrasting “passive” and “active” welfare systems is too simplistic. Distinguishing between policiesaffecting the chances of good and adverse events and their effects gives four types of policy: prevention, promotion, protection, and propulsion.- Interventions protective for one generation can be preventive for the next.- A focus on inclusion can change how we look at policy instruments.

Understanding social exclusion

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online