1

Social Exclusion

2

A slippery term?The term social exclusion was coined in the 1970’s to describe sections of the population that had fallen through the welfare net. However, there are multiple, nuanced definitions of what social exclusion means in detail.

The content of this presentation is based upon: Mel Walker, 2013, Social Exclusion, in Dwyer & Shaw, Introduction to Social Policy, London, Sage.

3

The Social Exclusion Unit

(1997)

“a shorthand label for what can happen when individuals or areas suffer from a combination of linked problems such as unemployment, poor skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime environments, bad health and family breakdown”.

Social

Exclusion is:

4

The impact of social exclusion upon individuals and communities is greater than the sum of its parts.Hence, the elements of social exclusion are interconnected;multidimensional;

mutually reinforcing;

cumulative.

5

“affects both the quality of life

of ndividuals and the equity and cohesion of society as a whole” (Levitas et al, cited in Walker 2013)

Social exclusion…

6

Social Exclusion: A central theme of New Labour after

1997

“a Britain renewed … with no one shut out or excluded, no one told that they do not matter.”(Tony Blair, 1997, cited in Walker 2013:28)

Poverty + inequality = ‘Old Labour’

7

were keen to

Social exclusion was ‘more’ than ‘traditional’ ‘poverty’: It is more damaging to individual esteem, corrosive for society as a whole and is more likely to be passed down from generation to generation than material poverty. (Jones cited in Walker 2013:28).

establish that;

Walker (2013) goes on to explore the similarly pervasive effects of mental health upon social exclusion.

8

The closure of the Social Exclusion Unit

In 2006 the SEU closed and powers were transferred to the smaller Cabinet Office Task Force with a brief to tackle

intergenerational ‘high risk’ households.

‘Dysfunctional’ families whose problems were based in

‘culture’ rather than ‘poverty’.These families were locked in a cycle of social exclusion; Deviant families ‘left behind’ the rising tide of affluence

(Armstrong in Walker 2013:28)

£ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £

9

MUD; SID; RED

Ruth Levitas continues to be a leading exponent within the social exclusion area of study. Levitas identifies three perspectives/paradigms in the social exclusion area of study. (‘Discourses’).

MUD – Moral Underclass DiscourseSID – Social Integrationist Discourse

RED – Redistributionist Discourse

10

MUD – Moral Underclass

The first of Levitas’ generalised ‘ideal’ explanations.• Individuals or communities are seen as

deviant, immoral, impulsive, welfare dependant, unhealthy and criminal.

Critique: Generally serves Political purposes & Individuals or communities cannot be understood in isolation from their relationship to wider societal structures and groups.

11

SID – Social IntegrationistSocial exclusion results from exclusion from thepaid labour market.

Getting people into paid workis seen as a key if not dominant solution

to wider social exclusion problems.SID was central to New Labour’s ‘conditional’ welfare state such as ‘Welfare to Work’.

Work brings more benefit than a material wage. Critique: Paid work is not all the same; there differences and problems in the labour market. (i.e. the ‘working poor’ & invisible informal ‘caring’).

12

RED - REdistibutionist

Associated with ‘Old Labour’: Poverty and Structural inequality cause social exclusion.Structural inequality is caused by powerful groups excluding others; often resulting in poverty.The solution is for the state to intervene to REDITRIBUTE structural resources (ie through taxation)