Social Inclusion – just another passing fad? Ilan Katz Fairer Future Conference, TasCOSS, Hobart, October 2008

1. Social Inclusion – just another passing fad? Ilan Katz Fairer Future Conference, TasCOSS, Hobart, October 2008

2. Will Cover • What is social inclusion? • Why is it important? • How is it being used in policy around the world? • Relevance to current Australian and Tasmanian situation

3. Social Exclusion ‘A short hand 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.’ (UK Department for Social Security, 1999, p23).

4. Social Inclusion • “Positive action taken to include all sectors of society in planning and other decision-making” (UK Government Planning Portal, 2008)

5. Related areas • Social Capital • Networks, participation, trust • Social disorganisation • Community breakdown • Community Cohesion • Inter-racial relationships • Community Strength

6. Three ways of thinking about social inclusion and policy • A political philosophy • A way of thinking about what kind of society governments should be promoting • A way of organising government around social issues • Associated with particular types of structures and functions in government • A mechanism to address particular social issues • New policies and programs to tackle complex social problems

7. The idea of social inclusion

8. Distributional to Relational • financial indicators to multi dimensional disadvantage; • static to a dynamic analysis; • individual household to the local neighbourhood; • separation and permanence, a discontinuity in relationships with the rest of society’. (Room, 1995)

9. Social Exclusion Discourses • Redistribution Discourse (RED). • Material deprivation • Traditional ‘old’ labor focus on income • ‘Excluders’ are corporations and wealthy individuals • Solution seen as redistribution of wealth through higher taxes and benefits

10. Social Exclusion Discourses • Social Inclusion Discourse (SID). • Dislocation from the mainstream of society • Social as well as economic – relationships • Goal is participation in mainstream society • Solution; get people into work • Jobs seen as more than raising income – links people back into mainstream aspirations.

11. Social Exclusion Discourses • Moral Underclass Discourse (MUD). • excluded people are responsible for their own marginalisation • Underclass have lost contact with mainstream values • Main features are joblessness, single parenthood (illegitimacy) and anti-social behaviour • solution; use state powers (eg quarantining benefit) to force participation (Levitas, 1998)

12. Forms of Social Exclusion • Wide exclusion • Refers to the large number of people being excluded on a single or small number of indicators. • Deep exclusion • Refers to being excluded on multiple or overlapping dimensions. Deep exclusion is more entrenched than wide exclusion. • Concentrated exclusion • Geographic concentration of problems (Milliband, 2006)

13. Types of exclusion • Material deprivation (poverty) • Labour market exclusion • only valid indicators of exclusion when they correlate with exclusion from social relations. • Service exclusion • Exclusion from social relations • Networks • Support • Fear • Confinement (JRF PSE survey)

14. Conceptual challenges • Not about equality/equity • Underlying philosophy is about inclusion • Treats the norm/mainstream as the benchmark • Is it a way to avoid or dilute addressing poverty? • Inclusion and Exclusion very hard to operationalise • Can’t say how many people are socially excluded. • Virtually everybody can be defined as excluded on some dimension or other. • Measurement doesn’t do justice to the concept • Ignores agency and mechanisms which are the main innovations of social exclusion.

15. Problems • Overlap with social capital, social disorganisation etc can create confusion • Intentionality – can someone or some group intentionally exclude themselves? • AmartyaSen; Active vs Passive exclusion • ‘Dole bludger’ vs hermit • Social Inclusion is more ‘warm and fuzzy’ but does not have the theoretical weight of Social Exclusion

16. Social Inclusion and policy

17. Advantages of social inclusion approach • Acknowledges and confronts complexity of ‘wicked’ policy issues. • Focuses on mechanisms for exclusion and effective inclusionary processes • ‘Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime’ • Breaks down policy ‘silos’ in order to provide holistic solutions.

18. Advantages • Strong belief that policy (government) can positively address difficult social issues. • Has a longer term outlook than traditional policy processes. • Implies a ‘bottom up’ as well as a top down approach.

19. Policy frameworks associated with social inclusion • Joined up government • Recognition that problems cannot be addressed by any one department or in policy silos • Programs also involve range of stakeholders • Carrot and stick approaches • Similar to ‘mutual obligation’ or ‘activation’ • Stakeholder involvement • citizens should contribute directly to policies and programs, as opposed to intermediate organisations such as local government and trade unions • Engages with NGO and private sector.

20. Typical policy issues • Geographic disadvantage (neighbourhood renewal, rural exclusion) • Homelessness • Youth Crime/Anti Social Behaviour • Mental health • Community cohesiveness (racism) • Jobless families • Access to services • Early intervention

21. Relevance to Australia • Opens up new ways of thinking about old problems • Challenges individual notions of policy by focusing on groups and communities • Requires vertical and horizontal integration – and pooled funding • Implies collective responsibility • Requires much higher levels of citizen participation and engagement

22. Conclusion • Social Inclusion is not just a fad! • Provides too much new and relevant insight and ways of intervening to be ignored • However rhetoric and jargon may well change • Social Exclusion is more theoretically grounded than Social Inclusion, but Inclusion is politically more acceptable • Main benefits are a more holistic approach to social problems and new ways of tackling disadvantage. • Nevertheless it has some significant conceptual and practical issues and not a panacea.

23. Ilan Katz Social Policy Research Centre Ilan.katz@unsw.edu.au www.sprc.unsw.edu.au G2 Western Campus University of New South Wales Kensington 2052 NSW, Australia +61 2 9385 7810