1 / 10

Debating ‘inclusion’: learning from development and poverty scholarship

Disability & the Majority World: Towards a Global Disability Studies Manchester, 7-8 July 2011. Debating ‘inclusion’: learning from development and poverty scholarship. Nina Marshall PhD candidate, School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol

lev
Download Presentation

Debating ‘inclusion’: learning from development and poverty scholarship

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Disability & the Majority World: Towards a Global Disability Studies Manchester, 7-8 July 2011 Debating ‘inclusion’: learning from development and poverty scholarship Nina Marshall PhD candidate, School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol nina.marshall@bristol.ac.uk

  2. The rise and rise of ‘inclusive development’ • Increasingly hegemonic assertions of ‘inclusive development’ in policy, research and practice arenas (c.f. Barron & Amerena 2007; Lord et al 2010) • Background of lack of cross-over between disability studies & development scholarship (c.f. Grech 2009; Yeo & Moore 2003) • ‘Inclusion’ has particular meanings for disability activists and scholars but also has a history within development research and practice • Cannot assume ‘inclusion’ is a positive for disabled people or accept it as a concept that needs no challenge (c.f. McRuer 2007; Dingo 2007; Power 2001) • To understand how ‘inclusive development’ has come about and consider its potential effects , suggested we can explore the genealogy of in/ exclusion within the development and poverty literature and see what connections can be made

  3. Overview • The history of social in/exclusion in development debates • Historical origins • Conceptualisation and definition • Linking to development debates • Debating social in/exclusion in development • Value added? • Adverse incorporation and social exclusion • Implications for and connections to ‘inclusive development’ • Conceptual baggage • Transformative potential • Avenues for critical reflection

  4. Bringing social in/exclusion into development • Social exclusion’s European conceptual origins • Silver’s (1994) three paradigms: • Solidarity paradigm • Specialisation paradigm • Monopoly paradigm • Common definitional characteristics (de Haan, 1998) • Exclusion as opposite to social integration • Multi-dimensionality • Exclusion as a state or situation but frequently process, with focus on role of institutions • Linking social in/exclusion to development • to poverty • to social justice • to capabilities approach (e.g. Sen 2000)

  5. Debating social in/exclusion’s utility What does it add? • Focus on (institutional) processes not individual attributes (Kabeer 2000) • Widening the issue areas considered in comparison with poverty: widening concerns, broadening explanations, focusing on multi-dimensionality, historicising and politicising poverty (Hickey & du Toit 2007) • Promoting self-reflexivity in the policy domain (Kabeer 2000) BUT critiqued for • Exportation without critique – relevance in the global South? • Whether it challenges the mainstream policy agenda (Clert 1999): is it an affirmative or a transformative remedy? (Kabeer 2000) • Potential to categorise into ‘the included’ and ‘the excluded’ without differentiation or acknowledging agency (Porter 2000) • Underlying ‘moral meta-narrative’ (Hickey and du Toit 2007) Adverse incorporation: a more appropriate concept? (e.g. du Toit 2004; Hickey and du Toit 2007)

  6. Implications for ‘inclusive development’ • Within the development world, ‘inclusion’ is conceptually associated with particular paradigms of development: development actors come to the idea of ‘inclusive development’ with conceptual baggage. • ‘In/exclusion’ may positively shift focus onto the institutional processes which exclude disabled people and produce them as a vulnerable, impoverished and marginalised group. • The diversity and vagueness of conceptualisations of in/exclusion may dilute its transformative potential and allow a dichotomous perception that focuses only on the excluded. • ‘Inclusive development’ presents both opportunities and constraints for disabled people in the global South: the tension between these requires recognition and exploration (c.f. Simon-Kumar and Kingfisher 2011).

  7. Reversing the Q&A hierarchy: over to you… • In what ways do you think ‘inclusion’ as conceptualised within disability studies differs from how in/exclusion is conceptualised in development studies? • What might we gain from the development studies debates when considering the issue of ‘inclusive development’? • In what ways might a disability perspective add to the theorisation of in/exclusion within development studies?

  8. Bibliography • Barron, T. and P. Amerena, P, (eds) (2007) Disability and Inclusive Development, London: Leonard Cheshire International. • Clert, C. (1999) ‘Evaluating the concept of social exclusion in development discourse’, The European Journal of Development Research 11 (2): 176-199 • Dingo, R. (2007) 'Making the 'Unfit, Fit': The Rhetoric of Mainstreaming in the World Bank's Commitment to Gender Equality and Disability Rights', Wagadu, 4 (Summer 2007): 93-107. • Grech, S. (2009) 'Disability, poverty and development: critical reflections on the majority world debate', Disability & Society, 24 (6): 771-784. • de Haan, A. (1998) ‘’Social Exclusion’: An alternative concept for the study of deprivation?’, IDS Bulletin 29 (1): 10-19 • de Haan, A. and Maxwell, S. (1998) ‘Poverty and Social Exclusion in North and South’, IDS Bulletin 29 (1): 1-9.

  9. Bibliography (cont.) • Hickey, S. and du Toit, A. (2007) ‘Adverse incorporation, social exclusion and chronic poverty’, Chronic Poverty Working Paper 81 • Kabeer, N. (2000) ‘Social exclusion, poverty and discrimination: towards an analytical framework’, IDS Bulletin 31 (4): 83-97 • Lord, J., Posarac, A., Nicoli, M., Peffley, K., McClain-Nhlapo, C. and Keogh, M. (2010) Disability and International Cooperation and Development: A Review of Policies and Practices, SP Discussion Paper, No. 1003, Washington D.C.: World Bank. • McRuer, R. (2007) 'Taking it to the Bank: Independence and Inclusion on the World Market', Journal of Literary Disability, 1 (2): 5-14. • Porter, F. (2000) ‘Social exclusion: what’s in a name?’, Development in Practice 10 (1): 76-81 • Power, M. (2001) 'Geographies of disability and development in Southern Africa', Disability Studies Quarterly, 21 (4): 84-97.

  10. Bibliography (cont.) • Sen, A. (2000) ‘Social exclusion: concept, application, and scrutiny’, Social Development Papers No. 1, Asian Development Bank • Silver, H. (1994) ‘Social exclusion and social solidarity: three paradigms’, International Labour Review 133(5-6): 531-578 • Simon-Kumar, R. and Kingfisher, C. (2011) ‘Beyond transformation and regulation: productive tensions and the analytics of inclusion’, Politics and Policy 39 (2): 271-294. • Yeo, R. and Moore, K. (2003) 'Including disabled people in poverty reduction work: "Nothing about us', without us"', World Development, 31 (3): 571-590.

More Related