Document Library

Key Text Resolving the Theoretical Ambiguities of Social Exclusion with Reference to Polarisation and Conflict

Author: Andrew M. Fischer
Date: 2008
Size: 31 pages (287 KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

Is social exclusion a redundant concept? This paper from the London School of Economics and Political Science aims to resolve conceptual ambiguities by redefining social exclusion as processes of obstruction and repulsion. This definition brings attention to closely related processes of disadvantage while differentiating social exclusion from poverty. Exclusion occurs at all levels of a social hierarchy, and exclusions that do not necessarily lead to poverty may still have very powerful effects on social processes such as conflict.

Ambiguities arise because social exclusion is generally not differentiated from multidimensional approaches to poverty. This leads to the charge that it is a redundant concept. Ambiguities also arise when social exclusion is considered as a state or an outcome, rather than a process. In fact, processes of exclusion lead to a variety of states or outcomes, one of which may be poverty.

Social exclusion is an important concern in its own right. It is valuable for understanding marginalisation, disadvantage, discrimination and conflict, all of which can occur in the absence of poverty. Poverty can explain the dynamics of exclusion at the bottom of a social hierarchy, but not at the top, although the latter is often vital for understanding conflict.

To resolve existing ambiguities, social exclusion can be redefined as structural, institutional or agentive (carried out by one actor against another) processes of repulsion or obstruction. This definition:

Brings attention to closely related processes of disadvantage. These occur across a social hierarchy regardless of social position. In contrast, states of deprivation occur at the bottom of a hierarchy.
Highlights social exclusion as a process. It does not refer to a condition of being excluded, but to exclusionary processes that affect a person’s condition. Unlike poverty, all individuals or groups, rich and poor, can experience exclusion from any social position.
Means that the social exclusion approach can provide a different, value-added perspective to existing approaches to poverty.

Social exclusion that does not lead to poverty may still have a powerful effect on social processes such as conflict. Exclusions at the middle and upper end of a social hierarchy are especially powerful. Further implications include the following:

Polarisation can have many different dimensions: spatial, remunerative, institutional, and social. Polarisation produces exclusions across a social hierarchy, which can catalyse or reinforce conflict.
Elites are usually substantially involved in many forms of social conflict, particularly those involving contestation of the state, or other elites.
An understanding of exclusion that is not anchored in poverty clarifies why the non-poor and elites are pressured by increasing inequality.
The pressures which affect elites are not captured by standard poverty or inequality measures. Thus understanding exclusion as a process can help to avoid the tendency to blame inequality-induced conflict on the poor.

Andrew M. Fischer is a Lecturer in Population and Social Policy, Institute of Social Studies, The Hague: http://www.iss.nl/fischer

Access full text: available online

Source: Fischer A.M., 2008, 'Resolving the Theoretical Ambiguities of Social Exclusion with Reference to Polarisation and Conflict', DESTIN Working Paper no.90, Development Studies Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom
Author: Andrew M Fischer , fischer[at]iss.nl
Organisation: Development Studies Institute (DESTIN), http:\\www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/destin