SOCIAL INCLUSION

1. SOCIAL INCLUSION History Definitions Debates Policy

2. HistoryWhere did the concept of social inclusion come from? • France • The concept developed in France in the 1970s. • Initially used to describe groups excluded from social support - the disabled, single parents and uninsured unemployed. • In 1980s, with increased unemployment, France introduced a program that included minimum income, tailored support and a signed contract which specified the means by which individuals were to become productive and included members of society. • In the French tradition, the emphasis is not simply on economic outcomes but on citizenship and social solidarity, with social exclusion seen as a breaking down of the social fabric. (Buckmaster and Thomas 2009)

3. European Union • The concept spread from France in the 1980s with Jacques Delors, President of the European Commission, promoting a social dimension to European integration. • In 1997 the European Social Protocol was incorporated into the Amsterdam Treaty. • The European Social Inclusion Strategy was part of the 2000 Lisbon Strategy which aimed to make a decisive impact on the eradication of poverty by 2010. • (Buckmaster and Thomas 2009) • Due to the economic downturn, social inclusion has shifted from a matter of social and economic functioning to one of employment and the sustainability of benefit systems (Daly and Silver 2008).

4. The UK • The New Labour Government in 1997 accepted the European Social Inclusion Strategy and social exclusion became a key policy focus. • A Social Exclusion Task Force was created to ensure government departments worked together – joined-up solutions to joined-up problems. • A distinction was made between wide exclusion and deep exclusion. • Wide exclusion is experienced at a general level by a relatively large proportion of the population – responses include broader strategies that aim to improve educational attainment and health, increase employment, reduce poverty and enhance access to transport, housing, financial, information and other services. • Deep entrenched forms of exclusion experienced by a minority of disadvantaged people require more targeted and intensive policy responses. • For Third Way Politics therole of government was to ensure that citizens were able to participate in the economy and, thereby, in social life. • (Buckmaster and Thomas 2009)

5. Australia • In 2002, SA Premier Mike Rann established an initiative closely based on UK approach but changed name to Social Inclusion. This was supported by a Social Inclusion Unit and Board • In 2007 the Rudd Government implemented a Social Inclusion Agenda with structures similar to SA. • Early priorities were in the areas of employment participation, mental health, homelessness, child poverty, support for local communities and overcoming Indigenous disadvantage. • The Government then released a compendium of social inclusion indicators that were designed to assist the Social Inclusion Board to develop measures of social inclusion, and to discuss social inclusion related issues. (Buckmaster and Thomas 2009) • .

6. Definitional differences • European • Social exclusion is generally seen to be the result of a break-down of the social bond between the individual and society. • National solidarity is tied to political rights and duties and therefore the state has a responsibility for bringing people back into society. • Anglo-American • Social exclusion is a consequence of discrimination that limits some people’s ability to exercise their choices and preferences. • The state has a relatively limited role in dealing with social exclusion.

7. Definitional agreement • Social exclusion • is a broader concept than poverty • is due to a lack of opportunity to participate • is seen as an absence of necessary resources • is multidimensional in character • subsumes the earlier concept of poverty as deprivation • Many researchers have adopted social exclusion as it shifts the focus onto the factors that contributed to the precariousness that often accompanies unemployment or disengagement from the labour market. • (Saunders, Naidoo and Griffiths 2008)

8. Debates - negative responses • The lack of definitional clarity can lead to the concept being used for different political purposes. • A focus on a threshold for social inclusion ignores social marginality. • Inclusion is a top-down process that is done to people. • The concept promotes an insider/outsider view of society. • The concept is too often focused on paid employment leading to: • labour market exclusion being conflated with social exclusion • paid work being seen as the only way to be socially included • unpaid work being devalued • concerns about low pay or poor working conditions being marginalised

9. Debates - positive responses • The lack of definitional clarity can lead to the concept being : • used for a range of different political purposes • re-defined as new issues arise • used to forge political consensus • … given the multiple connotations of [social exclusion], it might provide a political opportunity to cement a broadly based alliance in favour of new social policies … if we define exclusion as a thoroughly new, multidimensional phenomenon touching people at all levels of the social hierarchy in some respects or at some point in their lives, large, cross-class coalitions to combat it may become easier to build • (Silver 1994/5)

10. The Australian Social Inclusion Board • The Australian Social Inclusion Board: • was established in May 2008 • is the main advisory body to the Australian Government on social inclusion • The Board’s terms of reference are to: • provide advice and information to the Minister for Social Inclusion • consult widely and provide input on different aspects of social inclusion – including issues of measurement, how to increase social and economic participation and how to engage communities on social inclusion matters • report annually and provide advice on other specific matters referred to it by the Minister

11. Principles for social inclusion • To be socially included, people must be given the opportunity to: •  secure a job •  access services •  connect with family, friends, work, personal interests and local community •  deal with personal crisis •  have their voice heard • (Australian Social Inclusion Board 2008)

12. Aspirations • Reducing disadvantage - Making sure people in need benefit from access to good health, education and other services •  Increasing social, civic and economic participation - Helping everyone get the skills and support they need so they can work and connect with the community, even during hard times •  A greater voice, combined with greater responsibility - Governments and other organisations giving people a say in what services they need and how they work, and people taking responsibility to make the best use of the opportunities available. • (Australian Social Inclusion Board 2008)

13. Approaches • Building on individual and community strengths • Building partnerships with key stakeholders • Developing tailored services • Giving a high priority to early intervention and prevention • Building joined-up services and whole of government(s) solutions • Using evidence and integrated data to inform policy • Using locational approaches • Planning for sustainability • (Australian Social Inclusion Board 2008)

14. Social exclusion indicators • The Australian Social Inclusion Board uses the following combination of European Union (EU) and supplementary (S) indicators to measure social exclusion: • Poverty and low income • 1 At-risk‐of‐poverty rate after social transfers (EU) • 2 Depth (degree) of deficient income (EU) • 3 Income distribution (EU) • 4 Income inequality (EU) • 5 Persistent risk‐of‐poverty rate (EU) • 6 More stringent risk‐of‐poverty rate (EU) • 7 Income of people 65 years and over as a ratio of income of people under 65 years (EU) • 8 Housing affordability (S)

15. Lack of access to the job market • 9 Participation in the labour market (EU) • 10 Employment rates (EU) • 11 Employment of older workers (EU) • 12 Long‐term unemployment (EU) • 13 Persons living in jobless households (EU) • 14 People with a mild or moderate disability who are working (S) • Regional disparity in employment rates (EU) • Limited social supports and networks • 16 Assistance given and received (S) • Influencing decision makers (S) • Effect of the local neighbourhood • 18 Fear, and actual experience of violence (S) • 19 Neighbouring, community involvement and communal relations (S)

16. Exclusion from services • 20 Early school leavers not in education or training (EU) • 21 Persons (adults) with low educational attainment (EU) • 22 Adult literacy (S) • 23 Academic progress of Year 3 and Year 7 students in Australia (S) • 24 Access to the Internet and information technology (S) • 25 Homelessness (S) • 26 Access to services (S) • Teenage mothers (S) • Health • 28 Life expectancy at birth (EU) • 29 Healthy life expectancy at birth (EU) • 30 Self‐defined health status (EU) • Risk of mental illness (S) • Contextual • 32 Total health expenditure per capita (EU) • 33 Total social expenditure per capita (EU)

17. Social capital orientation • This orientation focuses on connection to society through: • informal networks of family and friends • community networks of people in the broader community • institutional networks which include schools and government agencies • Increasing the quality and extent of these networks is seen as important because: • they contribute to economic and social well-being • it appears that quality community and institutional networks can counteract the effects of social disadvantage

18. Human capital orientation • Human capital • This approach focuses on developing those skills that contribute to the productivity of the nation. It has become the dominant orientation of government policy and funding. • This approach focuses on: • attributes, skills and abilities which increase an individual’s value in the labour market • formal educational attainments aligned to the skills development agenda • the private return to the individual which comes from training and employment

19. The role of ACE • Current policies position ACE as part of the social inclusion strategy for the national workforce productivity and participation agenda. The focus is on community-based and supported learning to develop core literacy skills and employability skills and pathways provision to further formal education and training or direct to work. • Pathways provision to further formal education and training could be through the VET arm of the ACE provider and/or referral to other VET providers. Pathways-to-work require partnerships with potential employers and employment service providers. ACE sector social inclusion initiatives should aim to contribute to the target of the working-age population having a VET Certificate III or above. • (Bowman 2010 Framework for the development of an ACE social inclusion strategy)

20. Discussion questions • Should we commit to working with social inclusion clients? • What social inclusion groups are there in our area? • What are the characteristics of these groups? • What services do these groups need? • What pathways exist for these groups? • How would we recruit these clients?

21. Discussion questions • Do we have the necessary staff and resources? • What organisations could we partner with to deliver effective courses? • How would we work with these organisations? • How would we secure all the funding necessary to meet the diverse needs and provide the required resources?

22. References • Australian Social Inclusion Board. 2008. Social inclusion principles explained. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia • Buckmaster, L. and M. Thomas. 2009. Social inclusion and social citizenship – towards a truly inclusive society – Research paper No. 08 2009–10. Canberra: Social Policy Section – Parliamentary Library • Daly, M. and H. Silver. 2008. Social exclusion and social capital: a comparison and critique in Theory and Society, Vol. 37 • Saunders, P., Y. Naidoo and M. Griffiths. 2008. Towards new indicators of disadvantage: deprivation and social exclusion in Australia in Australian Journal of Social Issues, vol. 43, no. 2, Winter 2008. • Silver, H. Social exclusion and social solidarity: three paradigms in International Labour Review, Vol. 133, 1994/5–6.